Voting insecurities

UCSB researchers demonstrated how disturbingly easy it is to hack into Sequoia’s e-voting systems and delete or add votes with little more than a USB key. Given the fact that recent elections have been very close, and this upcoming national one looks also to be decided by a close margin, it’s absolutely inexcusable that our voting systems could be so easily rigged. Not only that, Sequoia has fought hard against having its equipment tested and verified independently. Can we really afford to be using such insecure machines in democratic elections, when the risk of abuse is so great?


  1. Chris says:

    Ahh so this explains all your DoS troubles! :D

  2. holy crap i think you’re right. i wonder what other companies would get that pissed about being exposed? what about posting the mythbusters episode about rfid? :P

  3. Jon Williams says:

    Did any one see “Man of the Year” with Robin Williams?

  4. David says:

    What the hell that is insane that is too easy.
    Thank god the democrats and republicans dont have access to loads of
    money and fanatical supporters or the american democracy would be in
    peril. Oh wait…..

  5. Big Josh says:

    I think this is just an example of failing to apply old
    concepts to new technologies. This is like having a
    ballot box without a lock on it. And I think the solution
    to this problem quite simple; put a lockable access door
    over the ports.

  6. andreas says:

    big josh, I think you’re missing the point: the system
    is infected by the operator himself.

  7. Johnny Ryall says:

    I think this exploit has already been used, how else do you think a retarded cowboy got two terms in office?

  8. pablo says:

    This should be a matter of public record. Voters beware!

  9. steve says:

    If EVERYTHING in the video is taken at face value, that’s pretty damming. However I don’t think many of those attacks are particularly feasible, as they require a lot of social engineering and a breakdown in several steps. You also have to take these “researchers” at their word about the contents of the USB, the firmware and the trojans. I don’t find the paper trail tests valid because of if the hack can register a vote different than the paper trail, then why does it ever show a difference from the voter’s on screen choice. I’m less concerned with the voting machine hacks as I am with the tabulator hacks. Its much easier to influence an election when you have access to all the votes ;p.

  10. Dave says:

    Let me get this straight: Someone with system level access modifies some code and this is suposed to show how easy it is to hack a voting machine? If you have someone with system level acess, they had better be trusted or this little bit of non-hacking is the least of the damage they could cause.

  11. erik says:

    Does anyone still think Obama has a chance in hell?

  12. Matthew says:

    Wow. They REALLY should use some form of security screw to hold together that tabulator cabinet.

    The electronic machine exploits are more concerning to me. One only needs to place an infected thumb drive in the election headquarters to have a good shot at infecting a LOT of machines. That’s the point, you don’t really need system level access. You just need to be able to get it in the room

  13. baron says:

    What was wrong with paper ballots?
    Oh yeah. They’re harder to rig the vote with. That was the problem.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 96,576 other followers