623
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2026
623 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
89039 readers
3082 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't really understand why voting machines are complicated enough that there are feasible vulnerabilities. They have one job, and it's to count. It really shouldn't be too tough for a crack team of competent devs to write the software required to make them work securely. No network access, a memory safe language, and strict business rules should be relatively trivial to setup. Double that will external audits and you've got yourself a stew.
How do you know the software running on the voting machine you're about to vote on is the software that was audited?
You go get all the machines together, make sure all the software runs on the newest version and it's correct and it's configured properly with the candidates. When you've got to distribute them to the polling stations, they've got to be kept securely between audit and polling day. Your adversaries are foreign state actors who want to manipulate your elections.
And then at the end of the day you have to get the results off the machines. You have to trust that the machine gave you the correct numbers and then you have to get those numbers all together without anyone having the opportunity to manipulate them.
Usually at this point someone comes up with the idea of a paper backup so the machine prints like a receipt of who you voted for that you can put in a ballot box.
If you're doing that and then count all of the paper ballots to verify the machine count, why even bother with the machines? Just have people vote on a paper ballot with a pencil and count them by hand. The ways to attack paper ballot just don't scale. You might be able to manipulate a few votes in one polling station, but you'd need a massive operation to do it across the whole country.
Problem is we buy these things from the lowest bidder
China
Or, just use a pencil and paper. This a solution in search of a problem with the additional issue (or feature, depending on who you're talking to) of being able to undermine elections in a number of ways.
(Time taken to count is a shit rationale)
Answer: confidentiality of the vote
In theory you are right.
In practice you need an OS, visual software, and a way to read from it.
OS is probably Windows XP or whatever because reasons nobody can explain.
Software is shit because they take the cheapest one.
And to read it from you just put in a usb stick and can hack it with know window xp burn abilities.....
When the shareholders are casting votes on things in the company I work for they use an iPad. I'm reasonably confident that the side loaded iPad app they use is more secure than the US voting systems.
I’m glad my polling place lets us fill in bubbles on paper and scans them and that’s it.