Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Electronic voting technology can include punched cards, optical scan voting systems and specialized voting kiosks (including self-contained direct-recording electronic voting systems, or DRE). It can also involve transmission of ballots and votes via telephones, private computer networks , or the Internet.
Free and open-source systems can be adapted and used by others without paying licensing fees, improving the odds they achieve the scale usually needed for long-term success. [2] The development of open-source voting technology has shown a small but steady trend towards increased adoption since the first system was put into practice in Choctaw ...
"top-to-bottom review" of security of all electronic voting systems in the state, including Diebold Election Systems, Hart InterCivic, Sequoia Voting Systems and Elections Systems and Software. [167] August 2 report by computer security experts from the University of California found flaws in voting system source code. On July 27 "red teams ...
In a DRE voting machine system, a touch screen displays choices to the voter, who selects choices, and can change their mind as often as needed, before casting the vote. Staff initialize each voter once on the machine, to avoid repeat voting. Voting data are recorded in memory components, and can be copied out at the end of the election.
One significant challenge in implementing e-democracy is ensuring the security of internet-voting systems. The potential interference from viruses and malware, which could alter or inhibit citizens' votes on critical issues, hinders the widespread adoption of e-democracy as long as such cybersecurity threats persist.
Romania first implemented electronic voting systems in 2003, [129] on a limited basis, to extend voting capabilities to soldiers and others serving in Iraq, and other theaters of war. Despite the publicly stated goal of fighting corruption, the equipment was procured and deployed in less than 30 days [ 130 ] after the government edict passed.
This method was discovered by Finnish computer security expert Harri Hursti and is known as "the Hursti Hack". In this hack, Harri Hursti rigged the Diebold optical scan voting system to make the wrong candidate win by adding negative (minus) votes to one race. This resulted in that race having votes literally subtracted from its vote total.
VotingWorks is a nonprofit organization that creates and sells open-source voting systems in the U.S. They currently have three products: one for casting and counting ballots, [1] another, named Arlo, for risk-limiting audits (RLAs), [2] and a third for accessible at-home voting.