
New election systems use vulnerable software, Windows 7 - JumpCrisscross
https://www.apnews.com/e5e070c31f3c497fa9e6875f426ccde1
======
deogeo
I don't like how the article implies that if these systems passed some
"cybersecurity verification", they'd be safe against a nation-state attacker,
or internal sabotage.

~~~
nine_k
Frankly, low-tech systems with more human involvement and cross-checks are
much safer in this regard, because if the sheer amount of natural intelligence
involved (and the amount of corruption required to interfere). This is why
they are also slow and expensive.

~~~
deogeo
> This is why they are also slow and expensive.

They're not all that expensive - data is inconclusive, but looks like they're
anywhere from twice as expensive as e-voting [1] to cheaper [2].

And they're not all that slow either - only takes about two days to get
results, about a week to make them official. Which is much, _much_ faster than
necessary, since the time it takes to form a coalition, or take over
governing, is longer.

So it's entirely unclear what problem e-voting is meant to solve, other than
enriching voting machine vendors.

[1]
[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327977453_How_Much_...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327977453_How_Much_Does_an_e-
Vote_Cost_Cost_Comparison_per_Vote_in_Multichannel_Elections_in_Estonia)

[2] [https://www.wired.com/2008/04/the-cost-of-
e-v/](https://www.wired.com/2008/04/the-cost-of-e-v/)

~~~
tmm84
The problem, at least what I remember, was that each state had a different
voting style. Some had punches, some had squares you filled in by hand. The
chance to make mistakes and the like was there (crossing out a square or
double punching) and some voting booths/voting locations only allow straight
votes (all x or y party only). Voting machines were designed to make those
mistakes/situations less likely.

------
carlhjerpe
In Sweden all votes are done manually, on papers. To me It's the only thing
that makes sense.

There's a lot of people involved in doing this though, as everything is
counted several times until all numbers add up. And the numbers are public
information so anyone could verify.

------
Fej
Per usual, here's the video from Computerphile on why digital election systems
are a terrible, terrible idea:

[https://youtu.be/w3_0x6oaDmI](https://youtu.be/w3_0x6oaDmI)

