1 / 9

Security Flaws in Current Voting Systems: An Analysis of DRE Vulnerabilities

This article examines the significant security flaws present in current Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting systems. It discusses federal funding (HAVA) and issues with prominent DRE vendors like Diebold and ES&S. Case studies highlight severe voting discrepancies, including missing votes and malfunctioning machines. Key vulnerabilities such as hardcoded keys and lack of secure authentication are detailed, underscoring the need for improved voting technology and stringent certification processes. Ultimately, the analysis suggests that some inherent issues may necessitate exploring alternative voting methods.

apria
Télécharger la présentation

Security Flaws in Current Voting Systems: An Analysis of DRE Vulnerabilities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Security flaws in existing voting systems by Slavik Krassovsky

  2. Introduction • HAVA • $3.9 billion appropriated in states aid • DRE Vendors: • Diebold • ES&S • MicroVote • WINvote • Sequoia • Hart InterCivic

  3. DRE Machine Architecture

  4. Certification process • Is done per FEC guidelines • ITAs • Ciber • Wyle • SysTest • Off-the-shelf hardware and software is exempt

  5. Media reported problems • 01/04, Broward County, Florida: • 134 out of 10,844 votes are missing • 11/03, Boone County, Indiana: • 144,000 votes were cast but Boone County contains fewer than 19,000 • 01/04, Hinds County, Mississippi: • Machines stayed down all day

  6. Diebold • Analyzed by researches: • Hardcoded DES key • No Smart card authentication • Unsecure smart card deactivation • Hardcoded PIN • Etc...

  7. Attacks on the machine Undetectable rigging Attacks

  8. Other problems • No way to verify that their votes were recorded correctly • No way to publicly count the votes • No meaningful recounts are possible

  9. Conclusion • Some problems can be solved by strict certification • But some problems are inherent • It’s best to look for alternatives

More Related