
Georgia election server wiped after lawsuit filed - wglb
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/26/georgia-election-server-wiped-after-lawsuit-filed/
======
ddoolin
How is this not immediately obstruction of justice? The article makes it seem
like they know who actually wiped it, so just ask them who ordered it and
follow the trail, no? It can't even be an accident since not one but two
backups were also wiped.

~~~
amigoingtodie
Because you have to pay to even read the state laws of Georgia, so nobody
knows the law?

~~~
googlryas
False. You don't need to pay to read the laws, but you do need to pay if you
want to read a private groups annotations to the laws, which include things
like judicial rulings. The annotations are a value add and not required to
understand or practice law in GA. You can also access the judicial rulings and
all other sources which the annotations are derived from for free, but you
would need to put the work in yourself to compile that data.

~~~
Retric
It's not quite that clear cut. Georgia places unusual weight to these specific
annotations so simply having access to the rulings will not result in the same
exact output.

~~~
rayiner
Yes it’s very unusual. The official version is the annotated one, and the
annotations have legal force.

------
marchenko
The lack of paper ballots or hardcopy proof of voter intent in the GA system
is unacceptable. Transparency and verifiability - using means comprehensible
to the average voter - are more important to free and fair elections than
efficiency.

~~~
blunte
Lack of paper ballots or other audit trails is the case for many voting
regions in the US.

Whether it's that way to make election fraud easier to hide or just because
officials are naive is up for debate...

------
matt_wulfeck
> _The server’s data was destroyed July 7 by technicians at the Center for
> Elections Systems at Kennesaw State University_

I'm willing to bet that there was a whispered conversation between somebody in
authority to a subordinate, promising to protect them if they'll take care of
it.

Let this be a warning to everybody: you need to cover your butts. The pressure
can be really great in situations like this, but if anything hits the fan you
better believe the manager will toss you under a boss.

~~~
metalliqaz
Most subordinates don't even require that assurance. They somehow actually
believe that they are doing the right thing.

------
ux4
Notice it was wiped on July 7th, over 3 months ago and this information is
barely being reported. It's also very peculiar the two backups were
subsequently wiped and degaussed in early August. To top it all off, the FBI
isn't sure if they still have the image or not? Isn't that highly confidential
data that's critical evidence for a federal case?

------
neuronexmachina
This is worrisome:

> It’s not clear who ordered the server’s data irretrievably erased. The
> Kennesaw election center answers to Georgia’s secretary of state, Brian
> Kemp, a Republican who is running for governor in 2018 and is the main
> defendant in the suit. ... The server data could have revealed whether
> Georgia’s most recent elections were compromised by malicious hackers. The
> plaintiffs contend that the results of both last November’s election and a
> special June 20 congressional runoff — won by Kemp’s predecessor, Karen
> Handel — cannot be trusted.

------
sambull
Without verifiable paper receipt and ballot electronic voting just can't be
trusted.

~~~
r3bl
That's not even the top problem with electronic voting in my book. Counting
is.

If there's one central machine crunching all the raw data, you can bet your
ass that every APT out there is going to be looking at the possibility of
completely changing the outcome of the elections.

The way this problem is tackled with ballots is rather simple: way too many
people to bribe to change the outcome.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _The way this problem is tackled with ballots is rather simple: way too many
> people to bribe to change the outcome_

I think we do this correctly in New York City, where I am an election worker
from time to time.

Voters mark a paper ballot that is electronically counted. Every counting
machine continuously shows two numbers: the number of ballots it has ever
received, and the number it has received in that day's election. Multiple
people at each poll site sign off on these numbers at the start and end of
each day. Lots of people, from parties, interested groups, _et cetera_ ,
personally verify these numbers throughout the day. (We call these people
"observers." Anyone can be one.)

At the end of the day, the poll numbers are printed directly from each machine
and posted for observation. They are also transmitted, electronically, to HQ.
Poll observers like to observe and independently record these numbers.

Finally, the NYPD carts away the paper ballots for archiving.

To corrupt this system, you'd have to overwhelm a majority of the poll
workers, poll observers, and NYPD officers transmitting the paper ballots at
every precinct in your jurisdiction. That's hard.

(The system isn't perfect. The sign offs we're supposed to do at day's end are
done at the beginning, because people want to get out early. This weakens, but
does not break, the chain of trust and custody I described above. TL; DR If
you care about this, please sign up as a poll worker.)

~~~
pdx6
TIL, sounds like a good system. Voting is not only selecting a leader or
measure, but it also needs to be validated so that the people believe that the
citizenry collectively made the decision. Observers, audit trails, multi-party
sign off, etc make the electron results more believable.

If a single server can be wiped, on the other hand, there's no point in
holding the election at all -- there's just too much room to quibble over the
result.

------
PatientTrades
Wiping a server while under investigation or at the threat of a potential
investigation should automatically be obstruction of justice. This happens far
too often in politics and white collar crimes. Disgraceful

------
ajhurliman
I hate to be that guy that brings blockchains into things, but isn't this like
the one blockchains are really good at? Why haven't we switched technologies
already?

Honest question, I'm all ears if there's a good rebuttal.

~~~
matt4077
It's not enough for elections to be verifiable. They need to be easily
verifiable by anybody.

Blockchains may be theoretically secure. But almost nobody is in a position to
understand this thoroughly. The debacle around the DAO and frequent hacks of
online wallets, even if those events are only tangentially related to
blockchain technology, also undermine any potential trust.

It's also unnecessary: I just witnessed the federal election in Germany. In
large cities, there's a polling place on every second block or so, each
serving maybe 500 voters. The polling place is open to the public. Meaning you
can see that the ballot box is empty in the morning, you can watch all day,
and after polls close, you are free to watch the poll workers sort and count
the ballots, as close as you want. You can then compare the count you
witnessed to the official numbers posted online.

The whole process is end-to-end verifiable by anybody, and it requires no
special skills other than counting.

~~~
cornedor
A Dutch blog (geenstijl.nl) has used this to organise a initiative to count
the votes for the 2014 European parlement elections, because the results only
were to be announced days later. They had 1378 people sending in the results
they got by waiting for the results in polling stations. And with those
results they were able to make a very accurate exit poll.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeenPeil#First_initiative_2014](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeenPeil#First_initiative_2014)

------
scarface74
As a resident of Georgia, I really wish we had two states - metro Atlanta and
the rest of GA. I lived in south GA from the time I was born until graduating
from college and then moved to Atlanta. When I go back home it's like another
world.

~~~
crusso
I live in Georgia too, so I'm trying to understand the point of your comment
in the context of this server wipe.

Kennesaw is not far outside the Perimeter. I'd guess it counts as "Atlanta".

Why do you wish we had two states? Can diverse cultural elements in a state
not come together to act in concert? What does that say about the whole notion
of trying to increase "diversity"?

City vs rural, liberal vs conservative... I find that those aren't the
important dichotomies that you use to judge the health of a culture or
society. It's integrity vs corruption.

~~~
scarface74
The state government is still very conservative because it represent rural
Georgia far more than the population would call for. That’s partially because
of gerrymandering and partially because of the way that most state governments
and the federal government was designed.

Can diverse cultural elements come together and act in concert? Probably not.
Why would a former factory worker in south Ga that has seen factories shut
down left and right and go overseas and be taken over by automation ever see
things the same way as someone in tech in Atlanta who hasn’t been affected? I
think the whole 12 years of going to school, I never went to class with a non
native English speaker. If your only exposure to any other culture is what you
see on TV and never work side by side with people of different cultures, it
probably is easier to believe that all Mexicans are rapists, and all Muslims
are sitting around at home thinking about how they can kill infidels.

Like minded people tend to cluster together and self segregate.

~~~
crusso
_The state government is still very conservative because it represent rural
Georgia far more than the population would call for_

You say that like it's a bad thing. Georgia is 47th in the nation in terms of
per-capita debt. It boasts the busiest airport in the world, a thriving
economy, a thriving tech community, a robust media culture, arguably the best
bargain engineering degree in the world at Georgia Tech, a huge influx of
outside influences over the past few decades - yielding a great deal of
diversity and cosmopolitan attitudes.

Despite some cultural divides between Atlanta downtown and rural Georgia, the
state seems to function really well. The state shows that you can have a mix
of cultures without perpetual racial clashes, like you see in Missouri,
Maryland, etc.

 _Why would a former factory worker in south Ga that has seen factories shut
down left and right and go overseas and be taken over by automation ever see
things the same way as someone in tech in Atlanta who hasn’t been affected?_

They don't have to see things the exact same way. They certainly don't need a
one-size-fits-all heavy-handed government solution to their diverse problem
sets. The rural guy in Georgia whose job disappeared needs to find some new
work and think about his future. I've moved multiple times across the country
for jobs.... he can too, if necessary. Maybe he needs to further his
education. Georgia has a fairly good university system. If his kids need
education, there's the lottery-funded Hope Scholarship. With just a modest
amount of work to keep your grades up, the Hope Scholarship funds 75% to 100%
of your tuition!

 _Like minded people tend to cluster together and self segregate._

And that's a good thing?

Societies that balkanize rip themselves apart. History is replete with
examples. Why would we want the same thing here where we have a success story
to tell the world about?

~~~
scarface74
_Societies that balkanize rip themselves apart. History is replete with
examples. Why would we want the same thing here where we have a success story
to tell the world about?_

I'm not saying it's a good thing. I'm saying it's a thing. As far as "success
story". Things aren't too "successful" in places like Albany Ga - where
factories have left, was once rated the murder capital of the US, and is
consistently rated as one of the poorest cities in the US.

GA has both one of the poorest cities in America (Albany) and one of the
wealthiest cities (Johns Creek) and one of the wealthiest counties (Forsyth
County). Everything that you tout about GA isn't benefiting areas outside of
metro Atlanta.

I've spent half my life in South Ga and the other half in metro Atlanta. It's
two completely different worlds as far as opportunity, outlook, and world
view.

But if you were gay, Muslim, etc. where would you rather live, Tyty Ga or
Atlanta?

------
wyc
I feel that voting data should be made public record after de-identifying
individuals. This is one area where stronger standards and norms may be
helpful. If there was a market for third-party voter archival services at low
costs, this would be far less likely.

The storage and technology should be very cheap, especially with the
blockchain hype floating around. As skeptical as I am of new regulation, the
requirement that de-identified voting data is made broadly available, and for
all intents and purposes, immutable, sounds like a reasonable one worthy of
further investigation.

Some governments already use similar services to archive emergency responses
from social media, as is required by law in many jurisdictions[1]. That voter
data, the foundations of the democratic US society, doesn't receive the same
treatment is truly awful.

[1] [https://archivesocial.com/](https://archivesocial.com/)

~~~
caf
As an example of this, see here for the 2016 Australian Senate election
results:

[http://results.aec.gov.au/20499/website/SenateDownloadsMenu-...](http://results.aec.gov.au/20499/website/SenateDownloadsMenu-20499-Csv.htm)

The large ZIP files under "Formal preferences" contain every vote.

------
osteele
For a framework for thinking about election technology infrastructure and its
risks, I recommend reading:

[1] OSET Institute web site,
[http://www.osetfoundation.org/](http://www.osetfoundation.org/)

[2] “Critical Technology Infrastructure: Protecting American Elections in the
Digital Age”, OSET Institute. PDF
[https://static1.squarespace.com/static/528d46a2e4b059766439f...](https://static1.squarespace.com/static/528d46a2e4b059766439fa8b/t/59b6d51abe42d62214611741/1505154333505/2017_oset-
cdi_briefing1.pdf)

I’m not affiliated with OSET; just co-teaching a college co-curricular on
election technology, that includes this material.

~~~
wyc
Thank you for the links, I had no idea about OSET, but find them really
interesting. It's always good to look at prior work before rushing in with the
new shiny technologies of the month.

------
DoodleBuggy
Is there anyone who trusts electronic voting machines? Go back to paper voting
with a verifiable carbon copy record already.

~~~
colejohnson66
Governments aren’t too keen on tossing out stuff they spent millions on.
Especially if they bought it because “computers solve everything”

------
deltamidway
If there is "nothing to ever see" then there is no reason to verify....right
guys and girls? Right? So frustrating.

We should be having a large national initiative to improve voting nationwide.

------
alhart2015
Someone tell me why this is a silly thing to say:

It is naive to trust that US elections are valid demonstrations of democracy.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _It is naive to trust that US elections are valid demonstrations of
> democracy_

What do "trust", "valid" and "democracy" mean in this context?

Let me re-phrase your question in an attempt to answer it. Strong form: "Do
American elections reflect the will of the populace?" Semi-weak form: "Do
American elections reflect the votes of the voting populace?" Weak form: "Does
the American system of governance work better than others?"

On the strong form, I don't know. Measuring the "will of the populace" and
defining a nation's "populace" is a philosophical question.

On the semi-weak form, probably. For every Georgia there are 49 other states.
The American electoral system is distributed. Flattening distributions brings
buys resilience at the cost of moronic outliers (like this). The same factors
that make coördinating systemic changes tough thwart efforts at electoral
corruption.

On the weak form, very probably. We just don't have a multi century,
multigenerational society that has generated as much wealth for as many people
while confronting the number of difficult questions the American system has.
It's far from perfect. But its base assumptions about separation of powers,
peaceful change of guard and an independent judiciary appear correct. Notably,
no competitors to the Washington Consensus boast those three attributes.

~~~
wfo
On the strong form, certainly and provably not. Studies have been funded to
find any correlation between the will of the populace and policy that is
enacted. There is zero correlation.

On the semi-weak form, obviously not. Voter suppression is constant and
ubiquitous in most states. Gerrymandering has caused international
organizations to classify states in the US as non-democracies, and explicitly
suppresses the will of the voting population as its stated goal. It is
_extremely_ effective. The majority of the population of states vote for one
policy position, and the polar opposite party will receive a two-thirds
unbeatable veto-proof majority in the legislature. There is incontrovertible
evidence that even presidential elections were explicitly and intentionally
stolen (Gore) -- we know this happened. There is strong evidence to suggest
the subsequent election was stolen as well, with the election in Ohio raising
every red flag election monitors know to look for and some they hadn't yet
invented because they were so blatant as to be unthinkable (the owner of the
company that distributed all voting machines in the state explicitly, publicly
promised to deliver the election to the candidate who won). While the system
is in principle distributed, in reality it is anything but: a tiny number of
very easily hacked, bought, corrupted, and infiltrated swing state electoral
systems decide the fate of the entire nation, safe from the scrutiny and
security requirements that an actual federal election system would have to
undergo.

On the weak form, are you kidding? Nearly every electoral system in any modern
democratic state is far superior. Your statements about peaceful change of the
guard, separation of powers, and the judiciary (its independence is laughable;
judges are explicitly selected partisans who dictate partisan policy positions
from the bench instead of voting for it in congress) are all totally
irrelevant to the question as it should be formulated in it's weak form: does
the American electoral system work better than others? Nothing was asked or
stated about the system of governance. You only even answer the question you
asked by taking an extreme ideologically charged definition of "work better".
The question you implicitly asked (that you answered) is: is the American
system of governance effective at preserving a tradition of peaceful transfer
of power from oligarch to oligarch? Has the obvious answer, yes. As does the
system in North Korea.

>We just don't have a multi century, multigenerational society that has
generated as much wealth for as many people while confronting the number of
difficult questions the American system has.

We don't have such a society that has generated much wealth for the many;
rather, for the few.

The only thing that keeps Americans from publicly admitting these obvious
truths about the voting system is a need to believe that the system works; we
accept that obviously undemocratic results are democratic because to accept
the alternative (which happens to be true) is unthinkable and would cause
chaos. It is a group lie we tell ourselves to make society function.

~~~
jfnixon
"We don't have such a society that has generated much wealth for the many;
rather, for the few."

You really should get out more. Go visit some countries around the world.
Study history beyond the 4th grade level. Your claim is so bad, it isn't even
wrong.

~~~
wfo
Indeed; I have seen the "you are dumb and I am smart, you are a fourth grader"
'argument' before, though it's never been applied towards me until this point
-- consider yourself a pioneer in that regard. I am honored; right wing idiots
who have access to the internet and little else to offer have found my post
and think that what I am saying threatens their worldview. There isn't a
better sign in the universe that I'm doing something right.

------
howard941
Spoliation

~~~
ajr0
(From wikipedia)[0] Spoliation has three possible consequences:

in jurisdictions where the (intentional) act is criminal by statute, it may
result in fines and incarceration (if convicted in a separate criminal
proceeding) for the parties who engaged in the spoliation;

in jurisdictions where relevant case law precedent has been established,
proceedings possibly altered by spoliation may be interpreted under a
spoliation inference, or by other corrective measures, depending on the
jurisdiction;

in some jurisdictions the act of spoliation can itself be an actionable tort

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoliation_of_evidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoliation_of_evidence)

------
idibidiart
Data Recovery tools can still get the data, no?

~~~
alsetmusic
Can anyone comment on viability of recovering a multiple degaussing?

> The new e-mails, which were sent by the Coalition for Good Governance to
> Ars, show that Chris Dehner, one of the Information Security staffers,
> e-mailed his boss, Stephen Gay, to say that the two backup servers had been
> "degaussed three times."

[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/days-after-
activ...](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/days-after-activists-
sued-georgias-election-server-was-wiped-clean/)

~~~
idibidiart
I think the email itself is evidence of crime. Why bother with recovering the
data when the absence of it allows the prosecution to portray the worst
imaginable criminal scenario. They actually shot themselves in the foot
because no matter how bad their crime is it cannot be as bad as erasing the
data and degaussing 3 times. The prosecution can claim the absolute worst has
happened. And they have no way to prove them wrong. And a murder weapon (the
email)

~~~
prebrov
Prosecution cannot claim anything without evidence. Now there’s only evidence
of obstruction of justice by some IT manager, but no evidence to support
charges of election fraud by executive branch of government.

~~~
askvictor
There should be laws that give the benefit of the doubt to the
prosecution/litigant in situations like this. Not holding my breath though.

~~~
colejohnson66
Giving the benefit of the doubt to the prosecutor goes against the “innocent
until proven guily” ideology. You’re basically saying, “he unknowingly deleted
evidence he didn’t know was evidence. That proves it’s a conspiracy because we
now don’t have evidence to prove our case”

It’s the reason cops are seen as immune to the law; The courts give them the
benefit of the doubt a lot.

~~~
idibidiart
Degaussing 3 times is not evidence of knowingly deleting evidence. I find that
laughable.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
It's clearly evidence of knowingly deleting _data_. It may not be evidence of
knowingly deleting _evidence_. The distinction matters, because deleting data
is not a crime.

~~~
idibidiart
Degaussing 3 times. Who does that when deleting data? Unless they don't want
investigators to find the data? And isn't the data in this case a public
record? Why delete a public record indelibly unless they had manipulated that
record and wanted to hide the fact..?

~~~
colejohnson66
> Degaussing 3 times. Who does that when deleting data?

The same kind of people who think they need 35 passes to wipe their hard
drive.

------
tobetobe
all the tech companies meet president one day before election on tv, next day
president supporter wins georgia election.

there is no connection at all.

why r we even voting? have we not realized that we are all jus being pranked
at a massive scale. r v that dumb to not see it.

is thr any option for alternate rule to be switched any time in the timeline.

i hope thr r still some good people with authority, it is time for u to come
out and i am sure u ll gain all the support u demand.

~~~
sandworm101
If that were actually true then we would see wild differentials between poles
and election results. I admit the possibility that results may be shifted a
few percent either way, enough to swing an election, but this will only ever
be at the margins. Should the population be truly set on one candidate or the
other (more than 5% difference) then rigging would differ from poling very
significantly and be detected.

~~~
kristopolous
You'd hope so but in practice, this gets reported as the polls being off and
there's speculation about ivory tower intellects not asking the right people
or using outdated methodologies ... the news media and mathematicians get
blamed for being wrong. This is what actually happens.

