The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

French politicians vote non to voting machines

Not popular

What you need to know about cloud backup

Voting machines are not going down well with the political classes in France. The machines were involved in widespread problems on Sunday's ballot and, according to reports, several of the country's political parties have demanded that the technology be withdrawn.

This election was the first Presidential race in which voting machines have been used. Around 1.5 million of the 44.5 million registered voters had to vote on the machines, but according to Agence France-Presse problems with the technology meant people had to queue for up to two hours to cast their electronic ballots.

Many voters simply gave up in the face of such a long wait. Others said they did not trust the machines to protect the anonymity of their vote.

Following the difficulties, the Greens, Communists, and Socialists issued a joint statement describing the machines as "a catastrophe" and calling for them to be scrapped.

France's interior ministry says there have been no problems with the machines since they were first used in 2003, while local authorities blamed the queues on the high voter turn-out. ®

Agentless Backup is Not a Myth

Latest Comments

Even Simpler Solution

Jason,

What you're missing is that a person who does not understand computers -- and that means the majority of the population -- has no hope of being able to check out fully the system you propose.

Laurent is correct; universal comprehensibility is vitally important. What you can't understand, you can't trust.

Even if the full schematic diagrams, firmware listings and mechanical blueprints for the voting machines are published -- and democracy demands no less -- most of the population will still be unable to understand them, let alone trust them.

For the sake of saving a few hours every few years (as Regadpellagru points out), it's just not worth it.

0
0

Simple solution? Non

The PC sounds ideal, cheap, commoditised hardware and OS. The problem is that despite the rather dubious reputation of a certain manufacturer of these dodgy pieces of bespoke hardware in a certain rather large 'democracy' the systems are at least 'certified' to a standard. Most of the cost isn't the hardware, after all it isn't exactly a VLSI 200m transistor processor at the centre - the security OS 'should' be sitting on a relatively simple, relatively cheap to fab chip.

The cost is in the certification of the hardware and software, and with the best will in the world none of the major OSes qualify, let alone the buffer overflow ridden hardware of cheap PCs, and removing the connectivity doesn't work - you still need to certify the USB drives, and then ensure no tampering with something specifically designed to be slipped into a pocket easily and conveniently. Not to mention the potential leaks or corruption from em radiation - deliberate or otherwise.

You might be able to make a case for something like qnx, or possibly secure BSD, but something mainstream - no hope. Can you really imagine security auditing windows source code, or even linux, with it's open source advantage. Let's face it even MS don't deliberately make their OS uselessly open to hackers, and they have the best view and huge resources to ensure it doesn't happen. But it does. Often for no good reason than 'because it's there'

I guess someone could build a truly secure linux by taking out huge gobs of unnecessary functionality - the open source nature would make the bug hunting fun. But it would take a while, and the closed source additions would still require auditing. All possible, BUT what do you reckon the end price would be. I'm guessing around 6k Euro.

0
0

Simple solution?

How about using standalone (with the ethernet port ripped off) windows/linux/unix machine, locked in a safe, and a simple HTML form linked to a database taking the votes? Multiple choice, you can only choose option, so no one can mess it up. Then when the votes are in, you get a brand new formatted pen drive, take the database to another standalone windows/linux/unix machine, merge the databases, and voila!

Or am I really missing something here?

0
0

More from The Register

 breaking news
Number of cops abusing Police National Computer access on the rise
Only a telegram from the Queen can get you off it
 breaking news
NSA whistleblower to tech firms, Obama: 'Grow a pair!'
Ed Snowden: Email tracking grabs 'IPs, raw data, content, headers, attachments, everything'
Google flings another £1m at online child sex abuse vid CRACKDOWN
See, see, we're trying, ad giant tells Daily Mail UK.gov
 breaking news
NSA PRISM-gate: Relax, GCHQ spooks 'keep us safe', says Cameron
Whatever they are up to, it's all above board, we're told
PRISM snitch claims NSA hacked Chinese targets since 2009
Snowden suddenly looks safer in Hong Kong after revelations
SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
 breaking news
US chief spook: Look, we only want to spy on 6.66 BEELLLION of you
Americans assured they are not in the NSA's sights
NSA: We COULD track you by your phone ... if we WANTED to
Honestly, too much work, can't be bothered