Why Electronic Voting Is Still A Bad Idea

Summary

In this insightful video, the speaker argues against electronic voting, highlighting its inherent issues with trust and anonymity. They explain that while traditional paper voting isn't perfect, it has proven resilient against fraud due to its transparent processes. Electronic voting, on the other hand, introduces risks such as software vulnerabilities, insecure vote transmission, and the potential for manipulation. Even countries like Estonia, which adopted internet voting, face significant security challenges. Ultimately, the speaker concludes that while electronic voting may offer some benefits, it remains unsuitable for high-stakes elections, emphasizing the importance of preserving voter trust.

Takeaways

• 😀 Voting requires two key features: anonymity and trust. Anonymity ensures votes can't be traced back to individuals, while trust ensures the integrity of the counting process.
• 😀 Physical voting systems, like paper ballots, are centuries old and harder to manipulate. They may have flaws, but attacks against them are costly and harder to scale.
• 😀 Electronic voting machines (EVMs) have trust issues. Software is often closed-source, and voters can't verify the software running on machines or its integrity.
• 😀 Electronic voting faces challenges in securely transferring votes. Whether via USB or internet, votes are vulnerable to tampering or man-in-the-middle attacks.
• 😀 The central counting server is a weak point in electronic voting. Few people have access, and its integrity is hard to monitor, which makes it susceptible to manipulation.
• 😀 Using personal devices (phones, computers) for voting poses security risks. Malware, outdated software, and potential attacks make online voting particularly dangerous.
• 😀 Estonia's internet voting system, while advanced, faces cybersecurity threats and has been found to be outdated and vulnerable to attacks by foreign powers.
• 😀 Blockchain technology doesn't solve the core issues of electronic voting, such as trust in software and hardware, or ensuring voter anonymity and integrity.
• 😀 In large-scale elections, physical voting is harder to compromise because the more people involved, the more difficult it becomes to manipulate results without getting caught.
• 😀 While electronic voting might be convenient, it raises doubts about security, transparency, and public trust, making it a poor choice for high-stakes elections.

Q & A

Why is electronic voting considered a bad idea?

Electronic voting is viewed as problematic due to issues of anonymity and trust. Votes must be completely anonymous to prevent coercion, and there needs to be transparent trust in the system that ensures accurate counting.

What are the two key features required for a voting system?

The two key features required for a voting system are anonymity, ensuring that no one can identify how a person voted, and absolute, transparent trust in the system's integrity and accuracy.

What are the challenges associated with trusting electronic voting machines?

The challenges include the potential for closed-source software that is difficult to verify, reliance on possibly compromised hardware, and the inability for voters to confirm the correct software is running on the machines.

What does the term 'granny farming' refer to?

'Granny farming' refers to a practice where shady operatives approach vulnerable elderly individuals in retirement homes to obtain proxy votes, allowing someone else to vote on their behalf.

How does electronic voting differ from traditional paper voting in terms of security?

Traditional paper voting is more secure because it relies on physical processes and has established defenses against fraud, while electronic voting systems are more vulnerable to manipulation and require trust in technology that may be easily compromised.

What concerns arise from the transmission of votes from electronic machines to central servers?

Concerns include the risk of tampering during the transfer of vote data, whether it's via USB sticks or over the internet, and the potential for man-in-the-middle attacks that could alter the results.

What incident highlighted the potential for error in electronic vote counting?

In one Scottish election trialing electronic voting, a result was corrected because an observer noticed an inconsistency, revealing that someone had simply failed to scroll through an Excel spreadsheet properly.

What are the risks associated with allowing voting from personal devices?

Allowing voting from personal devices poses significant risks, as many devices may be infected with malware or running outdated operating systems, making them vulnerable to exploitation by malicious actors.

How does the Estonian voting system serve as a counterexample to electronic voting concerns?

Estonia implemented internet voting and saw significant participation; however, independent reports highlighted vulnerabilities in its security architecture, raising concerns about its long-term viability against cyber threats.

Why does the speaker dismiss blockchain as a solution for electronic voting?

The speaker argues that blockchain does not resolve the fundamental issues of trusting the software and hardware used in voting machines, and it may complicate the voter interface without providing meaningful assurance.