Sunday, 7 September 2003

Electronic Voting

A recent article in MIT's Technology Review states some uncomfortable truths about non-electronic voting. How it's inherently very insecure and open to abuse.

For all the problems inherent in electronic voting (e-Voting), the reason it's got a deservedly bad press is simply because of some woeful implementations. "Secret Sauce" might be a good recipe for a Fast-Food chain, but "Secret Source" code for an e-Voting machine is a disaster. And proprietary, trade-secret hardware... requires a degree of trust verging on gullibility.

Here in the ACT (Australian Capital Territory), e-Voting was used on a trial basis in the 2001 elections. Anyone who cared to could read the source code used in the machines. Anyone who cared to could also read the source code of the Operating System that resided on the machines, and even the source code of the compiler used to make the binary images. Not many did want to, but it's available, free, for those who want it.

Is the system perfectly secure? No way.

Is the system vastly more secure than any paper voting system? Certainly, and provably.

Is it more secure than the electronic voting machines currently in use in the USA? I don't know - because the software and hardware for those are all trade secrets, I'm not allowed to find out, and neither are you. We just have to trust them.

Documents detailing the performance and history of the eVACS® system used in the ACT are freely available on the web, along with the source.

One thing you won't find freely is the cost of the system. But as I work for Software Improvements, the makers, I can tell you. (I had nothing to do with the project myself, I was too busy making spaceflight avionics software at the time). The cost to develop the software was well under $150,000 US, (at least, that's what we got paid for it - that fact's available on the web too) and it runs on machines that cost about $1,500 US each. (All figures in the below quote are in Australian Dollars, about 65c US)
The cost of the project in total was $406,000.
Of this amount, the re-usable EVACS software accounted for $200,000. The cost of providing hardware in polling places amounted to $125,000 with $25,000 of this amount invested in hardware that can be re-used at future elections. Other costs
included venues, security, auditing, printing of barcodes and professional and technical assistance.
- ACT Elections Report (pdf)

So contrary to Glen Reynolds, e-Voting isn't neccessarily a bad thing. Better than paper, if implemented properly anyway. And if it's not implemented in a totally open manner, how come the US voter is standing for it, especially when there's a cheaper, better alternative? If us Aussies can develop a system like this, surely US developers can for only a few million, and have the satisfaction of it being "Made in the USA"? And if not, you could always buy one of ours for a tenth of that price.

Remember, I'm an employee of the developers - so don't take my word for it, read some of the reports I've quoted above. Do a Google search on "eVACS". Check for yourself.

No comments: