Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

GOP admits to racist voter suppression.

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: GOP admits to racist voter suppression.
Post by The E   » Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:08 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

Dilandu wrote:
Isolated network & quantum-based encryption. Each voter has his own tangled particles encryption pattern. No possible way to break without having access to one of two particles.


Congratulations on making a system that might be secure, but is impossible to audit by a lay person without a strong background in computer science, cryptography and information security.

The main security feature of paper ballots is that there are so few moving parts, and the movement is so simple, that you can secure an election using relatively trivial methods. To undermine a traditional election, you need to subvert dozens, probably hundreds and possibly thousands of people who all need to act in concert and who all need to know how to keep their mouths shut.
To undermine electronic voting systems, you only need to subvert a handful of people (to wit, anyone who's holding the encryption keys to the firmware or people with write access to the relevant source code repositories). One is a massive conspiracy. The other isn't. I, for one, think that small conspiracies have a much greater chance of success than large ones; therefore, making huge and unwieldy (and insecure) conspiracies necessary is a feature.
Top
Re: GOP admits to racist voter suppression.
Post by Dilandu   » Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:47 am

Dilandu
Admiral

Posts: 2536
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 1:44 pm
Location: Russia

The E wrote:Congratulations on making a system that might be secure, but is impossible to audit by a lay person without a strong background in computer science, cryptography and information security.


Since the system could not be tampered with from outside (even if someone stole the module, he would stole access to exactly ONE vote. Clearly not worth it) I fail to see any reason to audit it.
------------------------------

Oh well, if shortening the front is what the Germans crave,
Let's shorten it to very end - the length of Fuhrer's grave.

(Red Army lyrics from 1945)
Top
Re: GOP admits to racist voter suppression.
Post by Joat42   » Tue Nov 13, 2018 1:20 pm

Joat42
Admiral

Posts: 2142
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 7:01 am
Location: Sweden

Dilandu wrote:
The E wrote:Congratulations on making a system that might be secure, but is impossible to audit by a lay person without a strong background in computer science, cryptography and information security.


Since the system could not be tampered with from outside (even if someone stole the module, he would stole access to exactly ONE vote. Clearly not worth it) I fail to see any reason to audit it.

The thing is, nobody goes after one voter if they are going to perpetrate voter fraud - they go after the system or process. And there are many opportunities to do that when you go electronic. Quantum entanglement isn't a panacea, it's just a way to sign a vote from the example you gave. But how certain can you be that the vote cast is the vote being "signed"?

As long as there is no physical audit trail you can't guarantee that a cast vote is the same as the one being counted. And even with a physical audit trail you can't really be certain, but it's much harder to change those votes.

---
Jack of all trades and destructive tinkerer.


Anyone who have simple solutions for complex problems is a fool.
Top
Re: GOP admits to racist voter suppression.
Post by Dilandu   » Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:31 pm

Dilandu
Admiral

Posts: 2536
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 1:44 pm
Location: Russia

Joat42 wrote:The thing is, nobody goes after one voter if they are going to perpetrate voter fraud - they go after the system or process. And there are many opportunities to do that when you go electronic. Quantum entanglement isn't a panacea, it's just a way to sign a vote from the example you gave. But how certain can you be that the vote cast is the vote being "signed"?


Well, as Stalin once said "in capitalist countries is not important, how peoples vote; it's important, how they count the votes" (rephrasing Napoleon III, if I'm not mistaken)... Basically, there are no guarantee that ANY system could not be rigged. But, reducing the scale of human involvement by implementing technology, we could also reduce the number of potential human weak spots.
------------------------------

Oh well, if shortening the front is what the Germans crave,
Let's shorten it to very end - the length of Fuhrer's grave.

(Red Army lyrics from 1945)
Top
Re: GOP admits to racist voter suppression.
Post by Michael Everett   » Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:52 pm

Michael Everett
Admiral

Posts: 2612
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:54 am
Location: Bristol, England

Dilandu wrote:Basically, there are no guarantee that ANY system could not be rigged. But, reducing the scale of human involvement by implementing technology, we could also reduce the number of potential human weak spots.

Correct... as far as it goes.
The issue is that while this reduces the number of weak spots, it makes the remaining weak spots far more devastating if utilized.
To use a metaphor, think of it as the difference between the Great Pyramid of Giza and the Citigroup Center.
To topple the Great Pyramid, you need to dig into it, excavating literal tons of stone, just in order to put in the device that may cause it to collapse but will most likely simply leave a huge crater in the side, one that can (with enough time and effort) be repaired. The process would take ages and require a large number of people, making it very difficult to conceal.
Conversely, the same device as applied to one of the stilts supporting the Citigroup Center would cause an incredible amount of damage which would render it structurally unsound to the point where a collapse would be a very valid outcome, causing significant damage to multiple buildings as it toppled (depending on the wind direction).

Using technology for voting makes it far, far easier for someone who knows what they are doing to twist or break the system as they wish. Paper is low tech and time-consuming, but it is easier to keep secure, even if it's mostly because stealing tons of paper is harder than flipping a few bits in a copyrighted program...

To (mis)quote from Star Trek, the more complex the plumbing, the easier it is to break it.
~~~~~~

I can't write anywhere near as well as Weber
But I try nonetheless, And even do my own artwork.

(Now on Twitter)and mentioned by RFC!
ACNH Dreams at DA-6594-0940-7995
Top
Re: GOP admits to racist voter suppression.
Post by The E   » Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:11 pm

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

Dilandu wrote:Since the system could not be tampered with from outside (even if someone stole the module, he would stole access to exactly ONE vote. Clearly not worth it) I fail to see any reason to audit it.


Can you absolutely, positively prove that this system is:
- secure by design
- secure by implementation
- secure by deployment?

What does this mean?
Secure by design: You need to prove that every component of this system is, by itself, tamper proof. In addition, you need to prove that the combination of all components is tamper proof.
Secure by implementation: You need to prove that every component as actually built and installed is tamper proof and secure (and bug free!).
Secure by deployment: You need to prove that these systems are kept with strict chain of custody and absolute guarantees that no tampering can occur during the time when they're not actually in use.

You stopped at "security by design". You failed to account for the other two factors, meaning that you just handed off your election security to the people doing the implementation and deployment of your magical voting machines. Can you trust these people and the companies they work for?

You see, paper ballots have a lot of security issues. But since everyone can see what those issues are or would be, it's easy to find procedures that raise the effort required to actually "steal" an election into areas where it's just much easier and cheaper to run a successful election campaign.
By contrast, finding a couple corruptible people in positions where they can affect not just a single election district but every single district using your machines is probably much easier.
Top

Return to Politics