E-voting Fraud Manipulated Voters, not Machines
Editor's Note: The user interface is such an incredibly important part of any design, especially when the device created is for a secure task. The other side of the coin involves helping people understand the devices they operate. the designer of the voting machines involved could have placed alerts in the next-to-last screen alerting voters that there was a confirmation screen coming up, for example. Ambiguous design leaves room for improper operation.
(From ars technica) - This past Friday brought news of a handful of indictments of elections officials in Kentucky who are alleged to have rigged elections in 2002, 2004, and 2006 by changing votes in electronic voting machines. The group of five officials (plus one non-official) is charged with a list of crimes including manipulating the vote totals in electronic voting machines, certifying elections that they knew to be rigged, and arranging for votes to be sold. Remarkably, the vote manipulation technique here was essentially an exploit of a simple UI design flaw, and involved no computer skills at all on the part of the alleged perpetrators.
Click Here for the rest of the article.
Most Popular on ECNmag.com: