the security, secrecy, and transparency requirements for online voting transactions are structurally very different from, and generally much stricter than, those for E-Commerce transactions. The security mechanisms that make ecommerce transactions relatively safe for (consumers at least) are not sufficient to guarantee the safety of online voting.
The first major distinction is that we can at least eventually detect E-Commerce errors and fraud, but we may never even know about online election fraud.
2019/04/01: Currently, I believe that online voting is not ready for any high-stakes elections (such as national elections). On the other hand, there are many elections that are not high stakes. Last December in France, for example, we had all our professional elections, where we voted for union representatives and so on. The stakes for that sort of election are not especially high, in the sense that there is not a high risk of coercion, so e-voting could be a viable alternative.
2019/02/10: Libertà di voto. Ciascun elettore è libero di votare senza condizionamenti e pressioni esterne. Tale principio viene rispettato più facilmente quando la procedura è soggetta a controlli, come avviene nei seggi elettorali. Ciò non può dirsi nel caso del voto online, quando la scelta si effettua con un click, seduti comodamente a casa. L'Estonia, tuttavia, consente ai suoi elettori di votare online più volte, fino al giorno ufficiale delle elezioni. Solo l'ultimo voto viene però considerato e va ad annullare quelli precedenti, eventualmente estorti con violenza. L'elettore ha quindi la possibilità di correggere il suo voto qualora non corrisponda alla propria volontà. Inoltre, il voto nei seggi elettorali viene preferito a quello online.
2016/06/03: Ultimately, is paper the gold standard we should stick to?
Yes. Paper has some fundamental properties as a technology that make it the right thing to use for voting. You have more-or-less indelible marks on the thing. You have physical objects you can control. And everyone understands it. If you’re in a polling place and somebody disappears with a ballot box into a locked room and emerges with a smirk, maybe you know that there is a problem. We’ve had a long time to work out the procedures with paper ballots and need to think twice before we try to throw a new technology at the problem. People take paper ballots for granted and don’t understand how carefully thought through they are.
2018/10/16: When security researchers report on the ghastly defects in voting machines, the officials who bought these machines say dismiss their concerns by saying that the tamper-evident seals they put around the machines prevent bad guys from gaining access to their internals.
But University of Michigan grad student Matt Bernhard has demonstrated that he can bypass the tamper-evident seals in seconds, using a shim made from a slice of a soda can. The bypass is undetectable and doesn't damage the seal, which can be resecured after an attacker gains access to the system.
Fred Woodhams from the Michigan Secretary of State's office dismissed Bernhard's warning: "the seal that is shown in the video was not affixed to anything, and the video does not represent a real-world scenario of how seals are used and affixed."
2018/08/16: The vision is a radical departure from the one-person, one-vote, once-every-year-or-two trip to the ballot box we are familiar with—and by which, in Siri’s view, we are so ill-served. Users of Democracy.Earth’s one-size-fits-all governance platform—code-named Sovereign—would have infinite flexibility to vote on any kind of topic or person, whenever they log on. In the Democracy.Earth future, every day will be election day, and the ballot will include anything that enough of us think should be there.
In this perfect world, Siri argues, the supposedly unhackable and absolutely transparent blockchain will ensure that no centralized election authority is required to tabulate a vote, and no corrupt politician or gridlocked legislature can interfere with the popular mandate. But coming up with a superior form of voting technology is just the beginning; the larger, far more revolutionary goal is to devise a decentralized decisionmaking process that eliminates the necessity for any kind of central government at all.
“We are not in the business of selling e-voting machines or helping modernize governments with internet voting,” Siri says. “We want to empower people down to the individual level without asking for the permission of governments.”
The proposition that new solutions are necessary for our strange new world is hard to argue against. The problem lies in proving that something as complex as Democracy.Earth fixes more than it breaks.
What Siri seemed to be saying is that Sovereign isn’t really intended as a replacement for how the United States elects a president or California passes an initiative. Instead, it's really an exercise in figuring out how to use the blockchain to make group decisions in the crypto-digital domain. Sovereign, in other words, represents government of the crypto-people, by the crypto-people, and for the crypto-people.
2009/04/11: on the Finnish municipal election in which 2% of the votes were lost by a defective e-voting system, and which the Helsinki Administrative Court had found acceptable. Now the Supreme Administrative Court of Finland has rejected the election results and ordered the election to be re-run. Apparently 98% of the votes isn't enough to determine how the remaining 2% voted, after all.
Innovazione ed efficienza del sistema di voto Introduzione L'attuale sistema di procedure connesso ad elezioni e referendum, basato su modalità interamente analogiche con carta, penne, timbri e fonogrammi può essere migliorato per aumentare l'efficienza complessiva, riducendo tempi, costi e aume...
2009/03/25: CIA, which has been monitoring foreign countries' use of electronic voting systems, has reported apparent vote-rigging schemes in Venezuela, Macedonia and Ukraine and a raft of concerns about the machines' vulnerability to tampering.
E-voting is sold to the public as a solution to the problem of democratic participation, especially 'the youth' turnout. Recent experience suggest that isn't the case. In fact, e-voting creates problems, not solutions, and these problems are unsolvable.
En ekoparty, Diego Aranha analiz195179 el estado de la seguridad del sistema de voto electr195179nico de Brasil y habl195179 de sus principales falencias.
200 il primo test in Italia di questo tipo. Il sistema digitale nei seggi pilota registrer224 le preferenze e dar224 i risultati. Sono 7, 7 i milioni di...
Representative democracy may have run its course. It's time for liquid democracy.
Chad Livengood, and Joel Kurth The Detroit News
We all need paper ballots, and votes we can verify.
They are old, buggy, and insecure. If someone wanted to mess with the US election, these machines would be an easy way in.
Reacting to concerns about the integrity of elections in the US, one Democratic lawmaker has put forward a measure to provide federal cybersecurity protections to all voting machines. Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) introduced the Election Infrastructure and Security Promotion Act on Wednesday. The bill would require the Department of Homeland Security to classify election systems around the country as "critical infrastructure." The department identifies 16 critical infrastructure sectors in the US that receive enhanced cybersecurity assistance from the federal government. They include water treatment facilities, energy
It's not safe to connect our voting infrastructure to the Internet, but some election boards are doing it anyway.