Re:Leaked voting machine BIOS passwords may implicate Q-frie...
by jcrawfordor on Wednesday August 11, 2021 @11:30PM
(#28151523)
Mail-in ballots must be separated from their envelopes. This is the only accepted way to achieve a secret ballot, which is required by constitution or law in most US elections. That is, losing the provenance of the ballot is the point of the voting process.
Re:Leaked voting machine BIOS passwords may implicate Q-frie...
by TechBro8615 on Wednesday August 11, 2021 @11:35PM
(#28151548)
If only there were some sort of academic discipline... a science of sorts... that spent time solving problems like this.
Alas, anonymous verifiable signatures must be impossible.
Re:Leaked voting machine BIOS passwords may implicate Q-frie...
by encryptluks2 on Thursday August 12, 2021 @12:34AM
(#28151973)
Zero-knowledge proofs and Monero have so far proven effective. It is odd how on a tech forum, when you bring up utilizing technology for voting that you are suddenly downvoted.
Re:Leaked voting machine BIOS passwords may implicate Q-frie...
by ttyprintk on Thursday August 12, 2021 @12:11AM
(#28151807)
Let’s say your state makes you vote in person. You’re handed a ballot and fraudulently vote multiple times, undetected by the busy poll workers. But, your multiple votes are detected later when the roll is scanned. The box containing your ballot is numbered, and workers need to manually find and remove your fraud.
Mail-in ballots are no different. A limited, known number are printed. The system prioritizes in-person ballots in case the mailed one is filled out under pressure. Some states forbid unique ballot tracking, using theoretically non-unique identifiers.
If you think this is evidence of a secure election, I have an unpickable lock to sell you. Anyone repeating the talking point that this was “the most secure election ever” sounds like a partisan hypocrite, especially when you can find videos of Democratic Congress members warning about the security of elections as recently as in 2017.
Or, maybe it’s a coincidence that polls asking questions about election security – an objectively non-partisan topic – find a distribution of opinions weirdly aligned with support for the red or blue team.