🚀 go-pugleaf

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9119080

Secret e-voting booth video: 'I'm seeing some strange things'
Software tester takes camera into Virginia booth, comes up with
'failed' (see video below)
By Patrick Thibodeau

November 4, 2008 (Computerworld) Virginia's e-voting system problems
prompted one person, who identified himself as a former software
quality-assurance tester, to take his video camera into the belly of
the beast: the voting booth.

In a Fairfax County polling place, this anonymous individual ran the
touch-screen voting system through a seemingly methodical drill as he
filmed. Repeatedly tapping on the interface, he tested various
election options, such as changing votes and moving through screens.
He kept this up for eight and a half minutes and then uploaded the
finished product to YouTube. There's no indication that anyone noticed
or bothered him during the filming.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl2TjX4PpL8


The only thing he says, with a mixture of surprise and astonishment,
comes about seven minutes and 40 seconds into the filming: "I'm seeing
some strange things."

Did he?

Let the viewer be the judge, but curious things did show up during his
testing. One of the oddest seemed to illustrate how a firm click for
president could activate a senate choice as well, at least some of the
time. The voting machine also seemed responsive at some times and
unresponsive at others. He summarized his findings in the title of his
video: "WINvote Electronic Voting Machine Quality Assurance Tests?
FAILED!"

Virginia is a good place to test an e-voting system. The state was
cited today by voting watchdog groups as one of the leading states for
voting problems. That assessment may be helped along by Election Day's
hyper-news cycle, fueled by Twitter and blogging, and a constant
stream of reports of glitches, jams and long lines. The anonymous
polling booth blogger is a more extreme version of a citizen watchdog
in action, but probably not a unique example of citizen media at work.
But Virginia was a good place to catch up on interesting things. In
Henrico County, south of Fairfax, five voting machines broke down,
forcing delays.

David Thomas, a retired Veterans Administration social worker, voted
today in Henrico County, near Richmond, using an e-voting machine for
the first time. In his polling place, one of the machines was
inoperable. He said he overheard poll workers talking about it, with
one suggesting that "if you pull this lever, that might get rid of the
results that are in it so far."

Thomas believes the poll worker was joking around, but he has little
confidence in e-voting. "Anybody who has a computer knows how easy it
is to screw things up," he told Computerworld by phone. Thomas also
wrote about his experience on his blog, Virginia Breeze.

The usability and design of the voting-screen interface was a problem,
said Thomas. On the right-hand side of the screen, local and state
candidates were listed. He made his choices, hit "next" and was taken
to a screen where he was asked to confirm and finish voting. But
Thomas hadn't yet voted for president.

Thomas returned to the initial screen and then realized why he missed
the presidential candidate listings. The right-hand-side check boxes,
at least on the screen he used, were much larger than those for the
candidates for president. "I almost voted without actually voting for
president," he said.

Robert Guess, an assistant professor who teaches computer security at
Tidewater Community College in Norfolk, Va., also voted electronically
but gave the machine he used credit for usability. In one contest,
when he voted for only one of two possible choices, the system flagged
that in a red color, Guess said. It also presented him with a summary
of his vote.

But today in Virginia Beach, Guess said he had "absolutely zero faith"
in the security of the e-voting system at his polling place and would
rather see optical scanners.

The electronic system that Guess used didn't make any noise, and
neither did the one shown in the video. But in New Jersey, the systems
are supposed to be configured to make a chirping sound after the voter
presses a vote button.

"Configuring the machines in this way is not a good idea," Princeton
University professor Andrew Appel wrote on the blog Freedom to Tinker.
"It makes the voters more uncertain about whether their vote was cast,
and it makes it easier to inadvertently or deliberately cast extra
votes." Appel has been an expert witness in the ongoing lawsuit about
the e-voting systems in that state. In an update, he wrote that other
voting machines also were making sounds.

A lack of tech support may have caused voting delays at many polling
places. In South Norfolk, Va., voters weren't allowed to cast ballots
for one hour after the polls opened because of problems with the
electronic systems used to look up voter names and addresses, Freedom
to Tinker reported. The systems weren't set up properly but were fixed
after technicians arrived, it added.