September 2017

You are browsing the archive for September 2017.

We need recounts for more than fair elections, for more than Russian risks.

CNN:  For fair elections … can we get a recount?

We should not ignore calls for audits, recounts, and paper ballots just because the motivator for those calls may be simplistic.  There are a multitude  of risks beyond Russians, beyond foreigners, beyond skullduggery. Its not just fairness, it is accuracy and democracy.

Nonscience Nonsense, insults our intelligence and the Granite State

Coverage by Alternet: The GOP Is Plowing Ahead with an Audacious Effort to Hijack the Vote and Rig Elections   <read>

“Plowing” is apt. They are really piling it on.  It could be worse.  They may hide their emails, yet their agenda is transparent.  Instead they could have a hidden agenda and succeed in reducing voting rights by a thousand cuts.

The Republican Party’s efforts to disrupt voting and thwart representative government was on full display this past week, when despite ridicule in the press, the GOP’s leading proponents of undermining voters and rigging elections were unbowed and forged ahead.

States (and foreign governments) moving half way toward verifiable election results

From Governing:  After 2016 Election Hacks, Some States Return to Paper Ballots

The Independent, via VerifiedVoting: Norway: Votes to be counted manually in fear of election hacking

We applaud these developments. Yet, what is needed beyond paper ballots are effective post-election audits, those that verify result and can lead to changing incorrect initial outcomes.  Audits that also verify the accumulation of results across jurisdictions;  Audits that check other aspects of the process as checkin, checkin to ballots counts, and ballot security.

Beware the vendor/technologist offering a panacea

The general public, legislators, business people, and many technologists – all of us – often miss-estimate the potential and applicability of technologies.  I remember in 2004, my congressman, told an audience we did not have to worry about electronic voting because of encryption.

The latest “new” technology is Blockchains, the technology that underlies BitCoin.  It has some valuable applicability, yet I suspect  not that much.

Using blockchains for voting has been considered by academics for decades, but only as a thought experiment. If you ask any cryptographer who knows the basics of cryptocurrencies (remember, blockchains were invented by cryptographers) if elections should be conducted using blockchains, they would laugh and say, “Hell no, that doesn’t even make sense!”

Beware of the Watchdog that does not bark any details

NYTimes story that justifies our skepticism on NC ePollbook story:  In Election Interference, Its What Reporters Didn’t Find That Matters

Among other things, we learned that intelligence agencies had intentionally worded their conclusions to specifically address “vote tallying,” not the back-end election systems—conclusions that were not even based on any in-depth investigation of the state election systems or the machines themselves, but on the accounts of American spies and digital intercepts of Russian communications, as well as on assessments by the Department of Homeland Security—which were largely superficial and not based on any in-depth investigation of the state electionsystems or machines themselves.

As we said in our earlier post: See No Evil, Find No Monkey Business, ePollbook Edition

the simple case is that we now have no reason to trust the claim that it was all a simple software error, that the Federal and State Governments were actually protecting us.