Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
What led you to investigate the reliability of Diebold DRE voting machines?
I was a computer security researcher, and in the late 1990s I became interested in electronic voting
because it is a hard and interesting problem. When the source code for the Diebold voting machine
was found on the Internet, I viewed it as an opportunity to study a real system that was actually used
for voting.
In your paper “Analysis of an Electronic Voting System,” you concluded that the public
should have access to the source code used in electronic voting machines, yet this code
represents a valuable intellectual property to the companies that write it. Why should a
company commit time and money to develop innovative, high-quality software that will
be revealed to everybody, including potential competitors?
I think that the transparency requirement for something like voting trumps any intellectual property
protection that a vendor might want. Furthermore, we have a patent system in this country that can
protect intellectual property and that also requires full disclosure. I find this whole argument pretty
silly because the primary functionality of a voting machine is very simple. Finally, many companies
have shown that they can make plenty of money with open-source systems.
You've expressed concern that in a close election “paperless DREs [direct recording elec-
tronic voting machines] will produce a cloud of uncertainty over the election.” What do
you propose, and how would it increase the accuracy of electronic voting systems?
I propose paper ballots with optical scanners at the precinct, which can detect voter error. For acces-
sibility, I propose that voters be given the option of using a ballot-marking machine, as I described
above.
Would you say that federal funding of ACCURATE is proof that there is widespread
understanding of the problems associated with DRE voting machines and support for
guaranteeing fair elections?
ACCURATE was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The process for funding NSF
centers involves rigorous peer review by many top computer scientists. The computer science commu-
nity understands the risks associated with DREs and also the need to find an alternative system that is
transparent, accurate, and correct, and can justifiably hold the public confidence.
How is ACCURATE going to improve the voting process in the United States?
Our center is developing technology to aid in the voting process. Our investigators are intimately
involved in the elections process, working with officials at all levels and volunteering in running
elections. It is our hope that some of the technology developed by our center will be utilized in the
design and implementation of future systems, to avoid the possibility of an errant software bug or a
malicious attacker being able to corrupt an election.
