Overseas Voting Bill Moves Forward

This is really bad. Either ballot chain of custody or ballot secrecy will be violated. Can’t have it both ways. How is it that Sam Reed and non-technical legislators would know more than the DOD regarding internet reality?

This is really bad. Either ballot chain of custody or ballot secrecy will be violated. Can’t have it both ways. How is it that Sam Reed and non-technical legislators would know more than the DOD regarding internet reality?

This is really bad. Either ballot chain of custody or ballot secrecy will be violated. Can’t have it both ways. How is it that Sam Reed and non-technical legislators would know more than the DOD regarding internet reality?

Absent uniform voting laws and methods I suppose it is the state’s right to make a giant mistake.

Absent uniform voting laws and methods I suppose it is the state’s right to make a giant mistake.

Absent uniform voting laws and methods I suppose it is the state’s right to make a giant mistake.

I’m an overseas voter from King County and I get my ballot in plenty of time to vote and return it via snail mail.

I understand allowing the military to get blank ballots electronically, but returning voted ballots by email is so unsafe.

The DoD has been working to find a safe, effective way to email ballots for nearly a decade without success. I’m afraid that Washington state is making a huge mistake.

I will continue to request an absentee paper ballot and I’ll return it by mail in the same way.

I’m an overseas voter from King County and I get my ballot in plenty of time to vote and return it via snail mail.

I understand allowing the military to get blank ballots electronically, but returning voted ballots by email is so unsafe.

The DoD has been working to find a safe, effective way to email ballots for nearly a decade without success. I’m afraid that Washington state is making a huge mistake.

I will continue to request an absentee paper ballot and I’ll return it by mail in the same way.

I’m an overseas voter from King County and I get my ballot in plenty of time to vote and return it via snail mail.

I understand allowing the military to get blank ballots electronically, but returning voted ballots by email is so unsafe.

The DoD has been working to find a safe, effective way to email ballots for nearly a decade without success. I’m afraid that Washington state is making a huge mistake.

I will continue to request an absentee paper ballot and I’ll return it by mail in the same way.

Seriously Legislators – what’s the hurry? All the evidence says this is a mistake, security experts everywhere say it’s a no-go, why are we rushing this through?

Seriously Legislators – what’s the hurry? All the evidence says this is a mistake, security experts everywhere say it’s a no-go, why are we rushing this through?

Seriously Legislators – what’s the hurry? All the evidence says this is a mistake, security experts everywhere say it’s a no-go, why are we rushing this through?

This bill is a long time coming. I used to be an oversees voter for the best reason. I was serving in the military. In 1996 I filled out my ballot and mailed it in. The problem was I recieved it after the election. (Many people think I am lying including the current King County Executive Dow Constantine, Former KCE Ron Sims, and my own member of the Council Julia Patterson. Infact the only Dem. on the council who believed me was Bob Fergurson. All the Republicans believed me. But that is another issue for another day.) I did everything I was requiered to. However, my vote did not count. I have not missed an election or primary since I turned 18. Except 1996 and that was King Counties fault. Anything that makes military voting easier and faster I am for. After why should the most important protectors of our freedom and liberty be denied there right to vote because the powers that be cannot send them out on time.

This bill is a long time coming. I used to be an oversees voter for the best reason. I was serving in the military. In 1996 I filled out my ballot and mailed it in. The problem was I recieved it after the election. (Many people think I am lying including the current King County Executive Dow Constantine, Former KCE Ron Sims, and my own member of the Council Julia Patterson. Infact the only Dem. on the council who believed me was Bob Fergurson. All the Republicans believed me. But that is another issue for another day.) I did everything I was requiered to. However, my vote did not count. I have not missed an election or primary since I turned 18. Except 1996 and that was King Counties fault. Anything that makes military voting easier and faster I am for. After why should the most important protectors of our freedom and liberty be denied there right to vote because the powers that be cannot send them out on time.

This bill is a long time coming. I used to be an oversees voter for the best reason. I was serving in the military. In 1996 I filled out my ballot and mailed it in. The problem was I recieved it after the election. (Many people think I am lying including the current King County Executive Dow Constantine, Former KCE Ron Sims, and my own member of the Council Julia Patterson. Infact the only Dem. on the council who believed me was Bob Fergurson. All the Republicans believed me. But that is another issue for another day.) I did everything I was requiered to. However, my vote did not count. I have not missed an election or primary since I turned 18. Except 1996 and that was King Counties fault. Anything that makes military voting easier and faster I am for. After why should the most important protectors of our freedom and liberty be denied there right to vote because the powers that be cannot send them out on time.

RennDawg-

Counties may already issue ballots via email or fax. Overseas ballots will be counted if received before an election is certified.

Reed’s new scheme allows people to cast their ballots (and its votes) via email. Meaning via the Internet.

Reed’s latest effort to undermine election integrity is a solution looking for a problem. No one is asking for this. It’s a part of nationwide push towards Internet voting, financed by the vendors.

For those who think voters should present their ID to be issued a ballot:

How will a person’s identity be determined via email?

For those who think how we vote should be a secret:

How will these ballots be kept secret?

Cheers, Jason Osgood

(Answer to #1 and #2 is “you can’t”.)

RennDawg-

Counties may already issue ballots via email or fax. Overseas ballots will be counted if received before an election is certified.

Reed’s new scheme allows people to cast their ballots (and its votes) via email. Meaning via the Internet.

Reed’s latest effort to undermine election integrity is a solution looking for a problem. No one is asking for this. It’s a part of nationwide push towards Internet voting, financed by the vendors.

For those who think voters should present their ID to be issued a ballot:

How will a person’s identity be determined via email?

For those who think how we vote should be a secret:

How will these ballots be kept secret?

Cheers, Jason Osgood

(Answer to #1 and #2 is “you can’t”.)

RennDawg-

Counties may already issue ballots via email or fax. Overseas ballots will be counted if received before an election is certified.

Reed’s new scheme allows people to cast their ballots (and its votes) via email. Meaning via the Internet.

Reed’s latest effort to undermine election integrity is a solution looking for a problem. No one is asking for this. It’s a part of nationwide push towards Internet voting, financed by the vendors.

For those who think voters should present their ID to be issued a ballot:

How will a person’s identity be determined via email?

For those who think how we vote should be a secret:

How will these ballots be kept secret?

Cheers, Jason Osgood

(Answer to #1 and #2 is “you can’t”.)

Why wasn’t this included in the “federal mandate”?

Because you won’t find a single computer expert or cyber security specialist to stand by this concept of returning voted ballot electronically in any form – not by email, by fax, or by some other closed system.

The reason for this is that there is no way to guarantee a number of security issues – but the primary thing that we all care about as voters – is that the ballot not be tampered with, that the vote not be changed. It is always possible to change a vote that is online only and never have it detected. The feds know this – why do the states ignore it?

I’m sorry to see my state is twisting up the mandated legislation for their own personal political or power interests. This shouldn’t have happened. They could have at least tried what the law asked for and not rushed to this. I fail to see why they really had to do it. The insistence is suspicious in and of itself.

The first candidate to lose on a margin less than the overseas vote will cry foul and this whole this will be called out for what it is.

Why wasn’t this included in the “federal mandate”?

Because you won’t find a single computer expert or cyber security specialist to stand by this concept of returning voted ballot electronically in any form – not by email, by fax, or by some other closed system.

The reason for this is that there is no way to guarantee a number of security issues – but the primary thing that we all care about as voters – is that the ballot not be tampered with, that the vote not be changed. It is always possible to change a vote that is online only and never have it detected. The feds know this – why do the states ignore it?

I’m sorry to see my state is twisting up the mandated legislation for their own personal political or power interests. This shouldn’t have happened. They could have at least tried what the law asked for and not rushed to this. I fail to see why they really had to do it. The insistence is suspicious in and of itself.

The first candidate to lose on a margin less than the overseas vote will cry foul and this whole this will be called out for what it is.

Why wasn’t this included in the “federal mandate”?

Because you won’t find a single computer expert or cyber security specialist to stand by this concept of returning voted ballot electronically in any form – not by email, by fax, or by some other closed system.

The reason for this is that there is no way to guarantee a number of security issues – but the primary thing that we all care about as voters – is that the ballot not be tampered with, that the vote not be changed. It is always possible to change a vote that is online only and never have it detected. The feds know this – why do the states ignore it?

I’m sorry to see my state is twisting up the mandated legislation for their own personal political or power interests. This shouldn’t have happened. They could have at least tried what the law asked for and not rushed to this. I fail to see why they really had to do it. The insistence is suspicious in and of itself.

The first candidate to lose on a margin less than the overseas vote will cry foul and this whole this will be called out for what it is.

The legislature should oppose HB 2483 and SB 6238, which would expose our elections to dangerous security and privacy threats by permitting voted ballots to be returned by fax or email. Both bills represent a misguided and unnecessary effort to meet the laudable goal of making voting easier for military and overseas voters. The bills should be revised to permit the electronic provision of voter registration applications, absentee ballot applications, and blank absentee ballots, but not the electronic return of voted ballots. Doing so would make voting easier while preserving the security and integrity of our elections.

Email and Fax Voting is Not Secure or Private, and May Violate MOVE

HB 2483 and SB 6238 are evidently being pursued to comply with the Military and Overseas Voting Empowerment Act (MOVE), which requires the provision of voter registration applications and absentee ballot applications, and the transmittal of blank absentee ballots, by mail and electronically. Consequently, HB 2483 and SB 6238 appropriately provide that an overseas or service voter may receive a blank ballot by fax, email, or other electronic means. Yet, SB 6238 goes too far by providing further that an overseas or service voter may return a voted ballot by fax or email. As detailed below, computer experts agree that even with a signature requirement, permitting the return of ballots via email and fax subjects those ballots to substantial security and privacy risks. Indeed, email occurs over the internet and is vulnerable to cyber-security threats from around the world.

Moreover, permitting the electronic return of voted ballots is entirely unnecessary. MOVE does not require that voted ballots be returned electronically, and providing blank ballots electronically gives overseas and service voters more than adequate time to return those ballots through the mail. On the other hand, MOVE does require that the security and integrity of the voter registration and absentee ballot processes be protected. Therefore, permitting the electronic return of voted ballots electronically would not only directly undermine the security and integrity of our elections, but it may thereby violate MOVE itself.

For these reasons, voters should urge their legislators to amend HB 2483 and SB 6238 to provide only for the provision of voter registration applications and absentee ballot applications, and the transmittal of blank absentee ballots, electronically. Permitting the return of voted ballots via fax or email would subject our elections to dangerous and unnecessary privacy and security risks, and ironically, may in turn violate MOVE.

Ryan P. Harkins

Appendix: Computer Experts Agree that Electronic Voting is Not Secure or Private

A plethora of respected computer experts agree that permitting the return of voted ballot by email or fax subjects elections to dangerous security risks. Indeed, read what some of them have to say:

• In January, 2009, the Pew Center on the States issued a report on overseas and military voters stating that “simply sending blank ballots out via fax or e-mail can give military citizens abroad enough time to complete the process [of voting in a timely fashion]” (No Time to Vote: Challenges Facing America’s Overseas Military Voters, Pew Center on the States, http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtr…, January, 2009). The report provides further that electronic return of ballots creates a risk of violating the privacy and security of those ballots.
• In December, 2008 the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued a report stating that “Technology that is widely deployed today is not able to mitigate many of the threats to casting ballots via the web” (A Threat Analysis on UOCAVA Voting Systems, Andrew Regenscheid and Nelson Hastings, National Institute of Standards and Technology, December 2008).
• In June, 2007 the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that email and Internet voting is “more vulnerable to privacy and security compromises than conventional methods now in use” (Action Plans Needed to Fully Address Challenges in Electronic Absentee Voting Initiatives for Military and Overseas Citizens, June 2007, p. 30. [GAO Report 07-774]) and that available safeguards may not adequately reduce the risks of compromise.”
• Both internet voting and transmitting marked ballots via fax or email jeopardizes voter privacy by assigning a traceable and identifiable unique user login or pin number to each voter. The security of these voting systems has been deemed insufficient by a 2004 study and subsequent report by the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment (SERVE) (A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment, Jefferson, et al., http://servesecurityreport.org/, January 2004) resulting in the closure of an internet voting pilot program implemented by the Pentagon.
• Recent evidence cited in the Wall Street Journal (Electricity Grid in the US Penetrated by Spies, The Wall Street Journal, Siobhan Gorman, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123914805204099…, April 8, 2009) regarding tampering with the United States electrical grid by hackers in both Russia and China and the increased security measures due to the highly sophisticated targeting of Google’s infrastructure (A New Approach to China, The Official Google Blog, David Drummond, http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-appr…, January 12, 2010) reveals the susceptibility of these programs to outside interference.

If the security's right, why not? Getting it right is of upmost importance though