Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Smart Voting

13567…12

Comments

  • #62
    cython
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,834 ✭✭✭cython


    P_1 wrote: »
    No witnessing needed. You request a form be sent to your address, you fill it in and send it back

    This is the relevant form. Section 10 (a) requires completion by a Garda, and 10 (b) is to be filled out if for some reason you can't complete 10 (a) - I'd be quite sceptical that "it seemed like too much effort" would fly there, so under normal circumstances, then while it is not a case of witnessing exactly, a Garda does have to complete the form. And reading it again, I think you're trading a Garda signing it for someone else. Then 10 (c) allows for your doctor to complete it on medical grounds. So there are definitely hoops to jump through to change address beyond get form, complete it and post it.


  • #63
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    P_1 wrote: »
    No witnessing needed. You request a form be sent to your address, you fill it in and send it back

    The Garda witness is only required for the supplementary register


  • #64
    prinzeugen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,882 ✭✭✭prinzeugen


    Mr.S wrote: »
    I think everyone jumps to the 'less secure / prone to hacking' scenario, which is fair enough.

    Estonia has been allowing internet based voting it for years - and they've never had an issue. Online voters authenticate via their e-ID card, which every resident has. You can obviously still vote in person too.

    Why can't we do something similar?

    Because we would need to introduce ID cards and thats not going to happen.


  • #65
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Mr.S wrote: »
    We can’t have nice things :(

    We can have nice things if we need them. Why would we need ID cards?


  • #66
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    cython wrote: »
    This is the relevant form. Section 10 (a) requires completion by a Garda, and 10 (b) is to be filled out if for some reason you can't complete 10 (a) - I'd be quite sceptical that "it seemed like too much effort" would fly there, so under normal circumstances, then while it is not a case of witnessing exactly, a Garda does have to complete the form. And reading it again, I think you're trading a Garda signing it for someone else. Then 10 (c) allows for your doctor to complete it on medical grounds. So there are definitely hoops to jump through to change address beyond get form, complete it and post it.

    That's for the supplementary register, the last minute changes to the register.

    Normal address changes don't require Garda witness


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Grayson wrote: »
    To be fair, I worked for a huge multinational running an incident when it was hacked and millions of people had their info stolen. And it's one you've mentioned. That doesn't mean that I'm against your idea. It's just that you have to remember that any system such as this is vulnerable.

    That doesn't mean that it can't be done. It just means that you have to have really high grade encryption so that if it does get hacked the information is useless.

    I don't know if it could be done now, but we'll see it in the future.

    For now though, early voting for referendums etc would help turnout a lot more.

    It's not an encryption problem.

    The problem is the conflicting requirements of anonymity and auditibility of the count.


  • #68
    Atoms for Peace
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,887 ✭✭✭Atoms for Peace


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    You're right - you can't be trusting those Microsoft lads or those Google lads or those AMD lads to choose the next Government.

    Just as long as the Apple fascists don't win.


  • #69
    dulpit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,087 ✭✭✭✭dulpit


    What we need is an easier to access postal vote. For the scenarios such as people caught away with work (my father in law missed vote because he was away with work, was due back before vote but something cropped up and it had to be extended), students and the like. If should also be possible to transfer vote easily for votes where location doesn't matter (referendums, presidential).


  • #70
    cython
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,834 ✭✭✭cython


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    That's for the supplementary register, the last minute changes to the register.

    Normal address changes don't require Garda witness

    If someone is changing address on a regular basis such as students in college, there's a reasonably high likelihood of them being on the supplementary register considering the form that doesn't require a Garda signature is only for use for about 3 weeks in the whole year, whereas the supplemental register will be incorporated into the following year's draft register.


  • #71
    GreeBo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,473 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    c.p.w.g.w wrote: »
    Its also open to people very easily selling their vote, by allowing third parties access to their smart device to cast a vote
    What stops that today?
    You sell your vote before you go in, take a photo as proof and job done?

    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    With e-voting you can either verify how you voted or you can't.


    If you can verify how you voted then votes can be bought and sold.

    if you can't verify how you voted, then the people in control of the evoting system can change your vote.

    You cant verify how you voted right now though, can you?
    If you can verify how you voted then the voting public can confirm that the vote wasnt rigged/tampered with.

    A soon as your ballot box is taken away, anything can happen to it.
    It can be lost, damaged, manipulated or just plain old replaced and I dont think anyone is going to know or have anyway to prove it.

    e-voting would also remove the ridiculous manual count and recount rubbish that we currently have.


    Does anyone actually care if someone else (through a huge deal of effort involving multiple breaches of security) can trace your vote to you?


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Harry Palmr wrote: »
    Australia uses phone voting for the blind, presumably they've worked out how to make it work.


    They've used telephone voting in one state - NSW, not for national elections. And it's just a call centre - you call out your vote, and the agent fills out the ballot paper on your behalf. Well, hopefully they do, unless the agent happens to be related to one of the candidates. It also raises a raft of questions about authentication - how do you know that the person on the phone is the person entitled to vote.



    https://www.visionaustralia.org/community/news/ivote-blind-voting


  • #73
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,365 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    GreeBo wrote: »
    What stops that today?
    You sell your vote before you go in, take a photo

    You're not meant to take photos in the polling station. So it'll be a problem if someone is also asking you to do so and send it to them.


  • #74
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    GreeBo wrote: »
    What stops that today?
    You sell your vote before you go in, take a photo as proof and job done?
    A photo doesn't confirm what went into the ballot box. You could take a photo, then change your vote, then put the changed vote into the ballot box.

    GreeBo wrote: »
    You cant verify how you voted right now though, can you?
    If you can verify how you voted then the voting public can confirm that the vote wasnt rigged/tampered with.

    A soon as your ballot box is taken away, anything can happen to it.
    It can be lost, damaged, manipulated or just plain old replaced and I dont think anyone is going to know or have anyway to prove it.
    Ballot boxes are sealed in public view in the polling station, stored under Garda supervision overnight, and opened in public view in the count centre. It is pretty foolproof, and Ireland has an excellent record of electoral integrity.

    GreeBo wrote: »
    e-voting would also remove the ridiculous manual count and recount rubbish that we currently have.
    The previous eVoting solution we bought actually required MORE manpower to operate than the manpower required for the counts. Each machine required a dedicated operator to enable voting for each voter. So it didn't save manpower at all.


    GreeBo wrote: »


    Does anyone actually care if someone else (through a huge deal of effort involving multiple breaches of security) can trace your vote to you?


    Yes, I do. Would you like to be living in Trump's America, knowing that the authorities had access to your voting record and could see you opposed them? Same question for the President in the Philippines who boasts about having killed people? Same question for the incoming far-right President in Brazil?


  • #75
    kneemos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,331 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    You're not meant to take photos in the polling station. So it'll be a problem if someone is also asking you to do so and send it to them.


    Can't see anybody paying for votes. If they did certainly can't see them not being caught.


  • #76
    kneemos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,331 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    What's wrong with any registered voter that opts for it being sent a link to a separate voting site?


  • #77
    Smiles35
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,749 ✭✭✭Smiles35


    Facinating subject. A few years back I had considerd e-voting as a possible, but I don't remember the arguments against being as robust or as informative as they are on this thread.


  • #78
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    vectorvictor wrote: »
    10 day voting window.

    Login to evoting using Mygovid

    Postal confirmation of registered vote issued with a confirmation pin number , 2FA / mobile confirmation

    Exact same process as mywelfare or Ros.

    The wish to remain anonymous crowd can keep doing it the 70s way

    Everything is doable it just takes the want.


    A significant number of weaknesses in your proposal:


    • If I sent up a DNS attack to flood the target servers for 10 days by buying time on a few armies of bots, keeping them moving over the 10 days to avoid simple blocking, I get to disrupt the whole election
    • So now my vote is on my MyGovID record. Who gets to see my vote? How long is it retained? Can a future Government pass legislation to see/use my historical votes?
    • How do I know that my vote as entered is the vote that gets counted? What's to stop a software hack from changing the vote in between being entered and being counted?


    Anonymity and the secret ballot is not some quaint anachronism. It is a fundamental basis of our electoral system, and of pretty much every electoral system in the world. It was learnt through hard lessons over centuries - lessons that showed that in the absence of secret ballots, votes were abused by domineering family members or by unscrupulous employers or by politicians who would buy votes.



    There is a good reason why we cast our votes in the privacy of a polling booth.



    You'd want a very good reason to move away from this, along with very strong mitigations to protect the voters.


  • #79
    bloodless_coup
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭bloodless_coup


    Use the phone camera for identification. Hold up passport, driving license or Public Services Card alongside your face and someone at the other end verifies. They mark you off the register and generate a random unique token which identifies your individual vote. Token is only valid for a minute or two.

    Easy peasy. The human element could be replaced by facial recognition but let's keep the human involved for now.


  • #80
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,483 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    kneemos wrote: »
    What's wrong with any registered voter that opts for it being sent a link to a separate voting site?

    As in those who choose to do so can vote online and those who don't continue as we are?

    Probably just doubling the workload. Manual counters and techie people for the online vote.

    Also how would you confirm that the person in whose name the vote is being made is the actual person using the link?


  • #81
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    kneemos wrote: »
    Can't see anybody paying for votes. If they did certainly can't see them not being caught.


    Really? Imagine the potential gains from commercial operations from being able to pick and choose the Government that suits them. Imagine how privatised health providers and transport providers and education providers could benefit by choosing a Government that will outsource large amounts of public services to them? Imagine how the operators of private prisons and private nursing homes and private disability services could benefit by choosing a Government that will favour them.


    The only reason that people don't pay for votes today is because the electoral system stops it happening.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    doylefe wrote: »
    Use the phone camera for identification. Hold up passport, driving license or Public Services Card alongside your face and someone at the other end verifies. They mark you off the register and generate a random unique token which identifies your individual vote. Token is only valid for a minute or two.

    Easy peasy. The human element could be replaced by facial recognition but let's keep the human involved for now.
    And how do you easy-peasy ensure that the vote that you casted is the vote that is counted, now that your token is no longer valid? What's to stop the software or the polling staff from just wiping out your vote and my vote, and replacing them with votes that suit them?


  • #83
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 38,111 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    I work in IT security. There is no way we should ever consider introducing electronic voting.

    It may well be possible to develop an e-voting system immune to interference. But it will be impossible to prove that it is immune to interference - short of a paper trail to verify the electronic votes, which means we can't trust the result until the paper votes have been counted - ehh what are we gaining again?

    Our current system works. The register needs to be cleaned up, and people need to get off their holes and make the effort to register where they live not where their parents live, but these are comparatively minor problems compared to the silent manipulation of an electronic general election or referendum vote.

    E-voting has major, but not insoluble, problems regarding the security and secrecy of the votes cast.

    E-voting has insoluble problems regarding proving the accuracy of the counting of the votes.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra,

    I'm raptured by the joy of it all.



  • #84
    bloodless_coup
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭bloodless_coup


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    And how do you easy-peasy ensure that the vote that you casted is the vote that is counted, now that your token is no longer valid? What's to stop the software or the polling staff from just wiping out your vote and my vote, and replacing them with votes that suit them?

    What's to stop them doing it now?

    The software would be audited. The line of code that changes your vote would be commented out.


  • #85
    Curious78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9 ✭Curious78


    Voting via smartphones would create similar issues to the E Voting and raise more hacking and transparency issues. The issues with the distribution of surpluses which marred the E Voting plans would be back. If you were to have multiple methods the the operation of the PR STV system would be a complete mess.


  • #86
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    cython wrote: »
    If someone is changing address on a regular basis such as students in college, there's a reasonably high likelihood of them being on the supplementary register considering the form that doesn't require a Garda signature is only for use for about 3 weeks in the whole year, whereas the supplemental register will be incorporated into the following year's draft register.
    It's the other way round. The standard RFA form is the one in use for most of the year. It doesn't require a Garda witness.



    The RFA2 form is only used if an election has been called, so only for 3 weeks of the year. That is the one that requires a Garda signature.



    Changing your vote in normal circumstances involves filling in a simple one page form and posting it - no excuses.


  • #87
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,483 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    doylefe wrote: »
    Use the phone camera for identification. Hold up passport, driving license or Public Services Card alongside your face and someone at the other end verifies. They mark you off the register and generate a random unique token which identifies your individual vote. Token is only valid for a minute or two.

    Easy peasy. The human element could be replaced by facial recognition but let's keep the human involved for now.

    I'm not sure you meant to phrase the bit I've bolded that way? But that's pretty much my reason.


  • #88
    bloodless_coup
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭bloodless_coup


    Collie D wrote: »
    I'm not sure you meant to phrase the bit I've bolded that way? But that's pretty much my reason.

    It identifies a vote, not you individually.


  • #89
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,444 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    doylefe wrote: »
    What's to stop them doing it now?
    The physical controls around the ballot box, and the counting of votes in public view.

    doylefe wrote: »
    The software would be audited. The line of code that changes your vote would be commented out.
    How do you know that the audited version is the version that runs on election day?


  • #90
    GreeBo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,473 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    You're not meant to take photos in the polling station. So it'll be a problem if someone is also asking you to do so and send it to them.

    You are not meant to do a lot of things though.

    I'm pretty sure I could snap a photo of my ballot card without anyone noticing, considering I'm in a little box with a curtain behind me.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    bloodless_coup
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭bloodless_coup


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    The physical controls around the ballot box, and the counting of votes in public view.



    How do you know that the audited version is the version that runs on election day?

    How do you know exactly what happened to your individual piece of paper after you put it in the box and left the polling station?


Advertisement