Hanusa, Mauro Accept Secret Vote Counting
Which is better—-a well understood way of counting votes or a proprietary, secret way of counting? Seems like an easy choice to me. But our candidates for Chief Vote Counter are willing to accept secrecy, as we learn from their answers to part 5 of the Iowans for Voting Integrity survey:
5. Currently, voting machine software is a proprietary secret, and cannot be examined—even by elections officials. The only examination of software is by the Independent Testing Authorities, which are selected and paid for by the vendors and therefore may have a conflict of interest. Leading computer science experts and voting integrity groups are calling for public disclosure of voting machine software, which would still preserve patent and copyright protection. Where do you stand on this issue?
Hanusa:
-The public disclosure of software, while still preserving patent and copyright protection, is not always possible, and may not be desirable. Making software used in electronic voting systems available to the public would make it easier for hackers to write harmful viruses and other malicious programs. Careful review and continued discussion of this issue is necessary. The sort of checking processes called for in HR550 may help here.
Mauro:
This is another reason why paper trail is imperative.
Both answers indicate acceptance of secret vote counting software. Both will try to compensate for it, but neither wants to end it.
Hanusa falls for the fallacy known as “security thru obscurity”, which is discredited by computer security professionals. Secret programming is more likely to contain mistakes than publicly available programming. And why would she want the SoS to know less about how votes are counted than some temp worker at the vendor’s programming sub-contractor?
Open source works. It works for Firefox browsers. It works for Linux. (Who hacks Linux?) I can no more alter an open source program than I can alter the morning newspaper after it is printed and made public. But I can sure see the errors! (Thanks to Justin Moore for the comparison)
More than one voting machine company has already told California that they will reveal their software IF it becomes state law that they do so. I don’t think they fear giving any help to hackers by making their wares public.
So this is the biggest disappointment in the questionaire.
Let’s wrap it up with the last two questions:
6. The DRE touchscreens were advanced by HAVA in the interest of making the voting process accessible to citizens with impaired physical or visual abilities. Given the existence of alternative equipment for accessible voting that is based on a paper ballot (such as Ballot Marking Devices or the Vote-PAD system) do you see any need to abandon paper-based voting to accommodate the disabled?
Hanusa:
No.
Mauro:
No I do not. Currently in Polk County people with disabilities us the automark machine, which still provides a paper trail. The abandonment of a paper trail does not need to occur to accommodate the disabled. The integrity of the system should be maintained for every voter and requiring a paper trail is the only method to do this.
7. Iowa recently announced a program for email voting for overseas military personnel. In this plan, voters sacrifice the secrecy of their ballot. In 2004, a similar Pentagon plan was roundly criticized by voting security experts[2]. What is your view of email voting?
Hanusa:
E-mail voting sacrifices the secrecy of the ballot(s), and also has the potential for misuse, manipulation, and other types of fraudulent activities. The current technology is not yet sufficient to supply the level of confidence and security that voters need for elections, but as technology changes, further review and consideration should be given to this matter.
Mauro:
The implementation of this process is an additional option for overseas military personnel who are burdened by location and military duty and may not have adequate access to normal absentee processes. As Secretary of State I will continue to encourage every Iowan overseas to use normal absentee methods to ensure ballot secrecy, however when service men and women located in combat zones lack the ability to request the normal process, these individuals deserve additional access to the fundamental right of voting.
There you have it, folks: The best coverage of the Iowa Secretary of State’s race you will find anywhere. You have two weeks to ponder your choice. Vote by November 7th.