[HN Gopher] DHS plans urgently needed to address identified chal...
___________________________________________________________________
DHS plans urgently needed to address identified challenges before
2020 elections [pdf]
Author : infodocket
Score : 52 points
Date : 2020-02-06 19:57 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.gao.gov)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.gao.gov)
| maximente wrote:
| when viewed from a sludge-money lens (a la the F35) electronic
| voting and election security seem largely working as intended:
|
| - we know paper works (Canada/UK) so there must be an ulterior
| motive for pushing on tech solution so hard
|
| - money gets sent to various entities under the guise of tech,
| security, freedom, etc. (contracts for voting machines, contracts
| for software, etc.). this basically gives some limited air cover
| for transfer of funds to entities
|
| - it nicely feeds into itself: defensive work always needs to
| keep up with (real or imagined) offensive threats so basically
| unlimited amounts can be spent without too much eye rolling
|
| - it is basically a get out of jail free card for both political
| parties in the future: "elections were hacked" is bipartisan and
| can be a useful tool to defeat/deny access to popular party
| outsiders on both parties, as opposed to a genuine candidate
| blowing up the system (Sanders?)
|
| - any foreign entity can be conveniently used if e.g. need to get
| a quick war going to distract the plebs from, say, medical
| parasitism or offshoring jobs
| ctoth wrote:
| Posiwid thinking. The purpose of a system is what it does.
| syshum wrote:
| >>- we know paper works (Canada/UK) so there must be an
| ulterior motive for pushing on tech solution so hard
|
| Works sure, efficient no, and largely one of the reason for low
| participation rates (though far from the only)
|
| That said none of the "tech" solutions that simply replace
| paper ballots at a polling place with a Touch Screen at a
| polling place would be what I desire from a "tech" solution to
| voting
|
| The rest of your points are largely true, though on the money
| never discount the power of incompetence when it comes to
| government, they way government contracts are "awarded"
| attracts the most incompetent people in any industry for if
| they were competent they would not need government contracts
|
| as the old saying goes...
|
| If you can... do
|
| If you cant.. Teach
|
| If you cant teach... Work for the government
| vkou wrote:
| > efficient no,
|
| How is it not efficient? Elections Canada figures out how to
| count ballots in a few hours. 95% of the work of putting on
| an election is setting up, and running the polling stations.
| Using an electronic system is not going to make that 95% any
| easier.
|
| The only thing that would make it easier, is purely mail-in
| ballots, like in Washington State.
|
| > and largely one of the reason for low participation rates
| (though far from the only)
|
| Canada has a 5-15% higher voter turnout rate.
| syshum wrote:
| >>How is it not efficient?
|
| It is not efficient for the people voting. More than 1
| election I simply skipped because I did not want to find my
| polling place, stand in line, and then vote
|
| I want a Polling Place free Voting system
| [deleted]
| Swenrekcah wrote:
| There are really easy solutions to this that other
| countries use, while keeping the safe and simple paper
| ballots.
|
| They have many polling places, enough that queues aren't
| more than a few minutes at the most.
|
| They don't make the polling places deliberately hard to
| get to.
|
| They hold elections on a weekend or a public holiday so
| the flow evens out over the course of the whole day.
| munk-a wrote:
| Take this up with your government - electronic voting
| systems isn't the solution for this... making a huge deal
| over states when they cut the number of polling places
| is. It is super depressing that AZ[1] wasn't rung through
| the wringer by public outrage over their polling place
| shenanigans in the last election - both winners and
| losers should care about the accessibility of voting.
|
| _Also_ it 's about time for election day to become a
| national holiday - as a former Vermonter I always enjoyed
| participating in Town Meeting Day, giving people a day
| off to participate in government is a strictly good
| thing.
|
| 1. https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/election
| s/2016...
| munk-a wrote:
| There are some pretty hard, potentially unsolvable, problems
| around electronic voting around guaranteeing the ability to
| vote and guaranteeing the accurate record of voting - these
| problems aren't unique to electronics but paper & person
| systems have pretty good ways to protecting against system
| abuse by being incredibly inconveniently distributed, having
| known actors that can face legal pressure, relying on our
| existing social systems to increase the difficulty in
| compromising the system and, lastly, having thinking
| components that can act in isolation to solve problems
| independently including those we can't anticipate.
|
| "Tech" exacerbates those issues while not offering a lot in
| exchange, the big two I can think of is accessibility (which,
| honestly, look at Washington state's system for a
| counterpoint there - though it is limited in how many states
| are that good) and quick vote tallying.
|
| I just don't see the point - have automatic counting
| machines, allow tech to help inform voters (provide a blurb
| on the candidates or dedicate a gov't organization to
| providing some structured data around political stances),
| allow easy confirmation of registration and auto-enroll
| eligible voters... just... keep the ballots dead simple.
| mzs wrote:
| UK and Canada are parliamentary systems so most ballots are one
| page. Most of those are just a single question with one
| selection permitted.
|
| In the US the ballot I get in my polling place depends on where
| I live and sometimes what party I am registered with. My ballot
| will likely be different than the next person in line. That
| ballot is many pages with numerous questions per page. And for
| about half of the questions I am permitted more than one
| selection.
|
| Machines are a good aid here for this system. Verifiable paper
| tallies are good for election security though.
| claudeganon wrote:
| Judging from Iowa, I imagine that some primary Sanders wins
| will claim to have been hacked by Russians. Democratic Party
| operatives were already doing false flag "Kremlin" stuff during
| the Doug Jones race in Alabama:
|
| https://thegrayzone.com/2019/01/23/how-new-york-times-scott-...
| [deleted]
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| > ...so there must be an ulterior motive for pushing on tech
| solution so hard
|
| I know someone in the industry who thinks software voting will
| solve the issues. It's not ulterior motives; People actually
| believe it will help.
| ngold wrote:
| Nothing beats the relaxation of voting by mail. Secure?
| Better then most.
| morio wrote:
| Agreed, I see a lot of "if Estonia can do online voting, why
| can't we?" When I talk to some of these people, who work in
| the SV as software engineers, I realize not everyone has a
| wide ranging context on security and privacy. Not everyone
| religiously attends or watches DEFCON presentations...
|
| There is also a continuous push to make results available
| faster, basically instantly. The media is as guilty as
| everyone else here. Like we can't wait for a few days for
| results.
|
| Lastly reducing the amount of total paid workers and
| volunteers in the field to reduce costs likely looks like a
| shiny object in many managers eyes.
| throwaway2048 wrote:
| At this point, its pretty obvious that the inaction on the part
| of the senate on election security is 100% intentional.
| DiffEq wrote:
| From Obama himself:
|
| https://youtu.be/cruh2p_Wh_4?t=5
|
| https://youtu.be/qLe9CW_jSw4
|
| https://youtu.be/mRZS-w36IvQ
| MeltySmelty wrote:
| yea, because you can trust the guy who raided dispensaries
| and drone striked 24/7
| corporate_shi11 wrote:
| That's a naive conspiracy theory. More likely culprit is the
| fact that Congress is in general unable to act on complex
| issues.
| throwaway2048 wrote:
| Not congress in plural, the republican held senate, and
| specifically Mitch McConnell blocking almost every bill.
| howmayiannoyyou wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYVLH1tLIDY
|
| They should start with Rand Waltzman's presentation at DEFCON
| (link above). In sum, USGOV is still totally unprepared for
| information warfare ops ongoing and intended.
|
| About 1/2 through this video the content is the best I've ever
| watched from DEFCON, period.
| lflux wrote:
| Holy shit, that's my college prof from KTH who taught us Intro
| CS
| alwaysanagenda wrote:
| It's pretty easy to "secure" the election.
|
| 1. Voter ID 2. Paper ballot electronically counted, paper stored
| as backup for any disputes or recounts. 3. No digital /
| computerized voting machines.
| minikites wrote:
| Voter ID laws aren't about protecting elections, they're about
| disenfranchising voters:
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/some-republicans-ackno...
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/21/trump-advise...
| deadEndDave wrote:
| If this was the case, then why do 17 other countries require
| ID when voting? Are they too "disenfranchising voters"??
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_Identification_laws#Norw.
| ..
|
| I would make a note that a majority of the Nordic countries
| like Sweden, Norway, and Iceland ALL require some form of ID
| when voting.
| 1000units wrote:
| It's about keeping non-citizens who don't have the right to
| vote from voting. _Not_ implementing these laws diminishes
| the enfranchised.
| josefresco wrote:
| Nope, just another form of Poll tax: https://en.wikipedia.o
| rg/wiki/Poll_taxes_in_the_United_State...
| 1000units wrote:
| No, it isn't. However, let's assume it is. If you don't
| pay your (separate and presumably uncontroversial)
| federal taxes, you become a felon and legally
| disenfranchised. It becomes clear this is all a minor
| accounting detail.
| wbronitsky wrote:
| Do we have any evidence that non-citizens voting is an
| actual problem, or are you just spreading FUD?
|
| The GP has linked some well sourced articles about how
| voter ID laws have been used for primarily racist purposes
| in the US. Do you have any evidence that supports another
| narrative?
| 1000units wrote:
| Racist? Where the hell does that come from? Why would any
| particular race not be able to produce legal
| documentation confirming their identity at a poll booth?
| wbronitsky wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_ID_laws_in_the_United
| _St...
|
| This is not a difficult topic, nor is it a very nuanced
| one; voter ID laws in the United States are and have been
| overwhelmingly racist. The answers to your questions are
| very much easily at hand, and we don't need to argue in
| ignorance. I understand it can be frustrating to see
| evidence that you are unprepared for; yet in order to
| have substantive conversations, we must be ready for such
| evidence, and consider it when it is present.
| 1000units wrote:
| I'm willing to have an earnest, extended conversation
| with you. On the other hand, you are immediately
| unwilling to personally support the _basic premise_ of
| your proposed argument.
|
| This is very curious; perhaps you are a dishonest actor
| with a knowingly unsound argument. (This is my natural
| and rational suspicion, please take no offense!)
| [deleted]
| wbronitsky wrote:
| Yes, as my posting history clearly indicates, I'm a
| schill for voting rights and equal representation.
| chishaku wrote:
| _Voter ID laws disproportionately disenfranchise minority
| communities._
|
| https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-we-know-about-
| vote...
|
| _11% of U.S. citizens - or more than 21 million
| Americans - do not have government-issued photo
| identification._
|
| _These voters are disproportionately low-income, racial
| and ethnic minorities, the elderly, and people with
| disabilities. Such voters more frequently have difficulty
| obtaining ID, because they cannot afford or cannot obtain
| the underlying documents that are a prerequisite to
| obtaining government-issued photo ID card._
|
| https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-
| fact-...
|
| _Some Republicans Acknowledge Leveraging Voter ID Laws
| for Political Gain_
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/some-republicans-
| ackno...
| alwaysanagenda wrote:
| Yes, I've heard this bromide for a very long time -- my whole
| life, really.
|
| It's an outrageous lie.
|
| The only people it disenfranchises are those who would seek
| to stuff the ballot with illegal votes. Think of how many
| people it ENABLES by not having Voter ID.
|
| That issue is not discussed in these articles, it's just
| dismissed as there not being any evidence. Wow, great
| reporting! Zero zilch nada? Not a scrap?
|
| Do you think some of these journalists would do their job and
| look for some? It's not really hard to find. Look, I found
| one! I bet there's more, too.
|
| https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/18/project_v.
| ..
|
| If your argument is that Voter ID disproportionately affects
| "minorities and people of color" then I would say you should
| re-evaluate the way you think about these people.
|
| I spent many years in some of the harshest places in the
| Bronx and I can tell you that the issues people face in these
| communities are not issues about getting government IDs.
|
| Moreover, would not the voice of minorities and people of
| color be MOST at risk? Shouldn't we do everything we can to
| make sure their votes are not canceled by illegal voting?
|
| PS, here is a short list of other countries that have Voter
| ID.
|
| Mexico India Greece Argentina Canada Brazil
| corporate_shi11 wrote:
| That's just propaganda based on speculation about what the
| "other side" intends with voter ID laws. People want voter ID
| laws so that non citizens can't vote. This is the reason why
| many developed countries around the world have some form of
| voter ID.
| chishaku wrote:
| _Some Republicans Acknowledge Leveraging Voter ID Laws for
| Political Gain_
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/some-republicans-
| ackno...
| geogra4 wrote:
| Paper and pencils please.
| jcrawfordor wrote:
| The discussion over paper vs. electronic ballots tends to miss
| many of the largest issues in election security. DHS is correct
| in pointing out that we need a focus on the larger landscape of
| election support infrastructure. Notably, electronic pollbooks
| are a very important part of the voting system which cannot
| readily be replaced with a non-digital solution. Simply
| switching to paper ballots reduces the problem, but does not by
| any means eliminate it.
|
| Calls for paper ballots also tend to get muddled up in the
| realities of how ballots are counted. When paper ballots are
| used, they are virtually always still counted by computer using
| an OMR. A precinct tabulating solution, which is widely used in
| the US right now, simply moves the OMR from the central
| election office out into the polling place, and is broadly
| equivalent from a security perspective to what most people
| would call a "pure paper" solution except that the
| environmental exposure of the OMRs is higher because of their
| presence in field voting locations. However, security measures
| used to protect centralized OMR in jurisdictions without
| precinct tabulators are not necessarily any better than OMRs
| out in the field. In fact, precinct tabulators are generally
| built with significantly improved anti-tamper mechanisms
| compared to the older central tabulators. These measures aren't
| perfect of course, but it is a matter of tamper seals,
| cryptographic signatures, and audit tapes used by precinct
| tabulators as compared to absolutely no anti-tamper measures in
| many centralized tabulators used by jurisdictions with what
| many people would call "completely non-digital" voting.
|
| While it is possible to tally the ballots by hand without the
| assistance of OMR, and there are organizations which advocate
| for this, it is an extremely expensive proposal and it's
| actually fairly hard to argue that it is superior to a well
| operated OMR approach - even in the case of hand-tallying of
| ballots, audit recount should still be performed to ensure
| accuracy and integrity in the (recently recruited online,
| poorly paid, minimally trained, and very hurried) election
| officials.
| sp332 wrote:
| An audit recount is at least possible with paper ballots. If
| digital records are modified, how are you going to audit
| them?
| b1ur wrote:
| I'm more of a pen guy, if you want to change my paper vote you
| better have whiteout and a steady hand
| ixwt wrote:
| Or they hand you a pen with disappearing ink. You'd have to
| use your own pen to prevent that. But how can it be trusted
| by the government that your pen hasn't been replaced?
| [deleted]
| _Understated_ wrote:
| Here in the UK we still use paper and pencils and while you can
| still mess with individual votes it isn't something that
| scales... not like running a DB query:
|
| UPDATE tbl_Vote SET Candidate = [The one that paid us the most]
| WHERE State = [State Name]
| ZeroCool2u wrote:
| Interesting that the DHS response to all 3 points is that they
| concur, but for all 3 points the resolution the Department points
| to is a document called the #Protect2020 Strategic Plan, which
| will supposedly be released on Feb 14th.
|
| Is that actually enough time for the guidance within to be
| implemented?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-02-06 23:01 UTC)