Australia Post details plan to use blockchain for voting (Stop Electronic Vote Fraud)

ZDNet ^ | August 22, 2016 | Chris Duckett

[Hostage]

"Postal service wants to begin with small corporate and civic elections before ramping up to handle a full parliamentary election."

Australia Post is looking to move into the business of running elections, and plans to use the blockchain as a central pillar of its plan.

In a submission to the Victorian Electoral Matters Committee, the government-owned postal service said community expectations were driving the push towards digital voting, and it would be looking to put its prior work with blockchain to use.

"The emergence of crypto currencies on the technology known as blockchain have highlighted opportunities to repurpose that technology to capture various digital transactions in immutable, distributed and secure ways," Australia Post State Director, Victorian Government and Tasmania, Tim Adamson, said in the submission.

[discostu]

And there you just admitted that there IS a database and there IS a distribution of validation. And now you’ve admitted again that the system won’t solve the primary ways voter fraud happens.

Just like I said at the beginning. This is solving problems that don’t exist and not touching known problems that have been used to fix elections for as long as elections have existed.

[Hostage]

Why do you think that government mandated blockchain compliance won’t force key encrypted software with immediate transmission to the blockchain?

The machines that exist today will NOT be compliant.

You’ve been saying over and over again in reference to things that exist today TODAY.

Try thinking ‘design & development’ of a secure system which the Australians are implementing.

[Hostage]

There is no database, no need for one.

And the registration problems were never mentioned to be addressed by the blockchain. Those problems are addressed by Voter ID and voter roll cleanup. Those are separate issues.

Block-Chain Technology prohibits electronic fraud by securing a vote with a key encryption and transmitting immediately to a matched encryptor on the blockchain.

A voter can see their vote on the blockchain immediately.

One a vote is on the blockchain, it can’t be changed. Once a voter sees how they voted on the blockchain, they know their vote is secure.

[discostu]

Because you’re in apples and chickens land. Immediate transmission to the blockchain doesn’t force the data being transmitted to be valid. Blockchain does nothing other than keep the transmitted data from being messed with DURING transmission, it does nothing to validate the data it’s handed.

Actually I’m referencing basic software design and what the specs actually mean. I am thinking design and development, which is why I understand that blockchain does NOTHING to prevent data tampering BEFORE the chain.

Problem here is you’ve got an EPA solution. For years and years and years the EPA has been saying the 90% of vehicular pollution is caused by 10% of cars that never pass emissions testing, and yet their solution to reduce vehicular pollution is to increase emissions standards making the tests harder to pass. Voter fraud mostly does not happen during data transmission. It happens in data CREATION, both through fraudulent voters on the rolls, and fraudulent votes being cast. And blockchain does not fix any of those problems. It can’t it’s not in the right point of the process. Australia is putting in smoke alarms and hoping they prevent fires.

If you want to end voter fraud step 1 is to fix the damn voter roles. Well really step 1 is to break the dem-GOP monopoly because in this they are united, they like voter fraud, they both engage in it to ensure their base. Which is why neither of them ever allows the voter roles to get cleaned up. Blockchain’s not going to solve any of that.

[discostu]

There HAS to be a database. How else do you know who the legitimate voters are?

But voter ID keeps getting over turned by the courts and neither party wants the rolls cleaned up. The aren’t separate issues, they’re THE issue. That’s the primary way fraud happens.

BCT doesn’t prohibit electronic fraud because the vote you’re securing with encryption could already be fraudulent before BCT gets hold of it.

Doesn’t matter if it can’t be changed once it’s on the chain, the fraud already happened.

[palmer]

And there you just admitted that there IS a database and there IS a distribution of validation.

I described the registration process in detail in many comments. I didn't describe it in every comment and then you jump on one comment and assume that it uses a database. It does not. It is incorrect to say it needs a database. It calculates a hash of information (name, physical address, etc) and looks that hash up in the blockchain to make sure the person is not already registered. Of course there can be fraud at that point by the registrar, the voter or both. The blockchain cannot stop that or solve that.

But there is no database. No database to be hacked surreptitiously anyway, just the blockchain holding the data and that cannot be hacked.

[palmer]

There HAS to be a database. How else do you know who the legitimate voters are?

Legitimizing the voter is part of the registration. If the potential voter presents proof of citizenship then there is no need for any database. If they don't then they will need to look up their citizenship in some database that is out of scope for this discussion. A database of citizens (e.g. from the IRS) is subject to its own errors and fraud.

Another source of fraud is a citizen living in two locations and registering in both. That can't be stopped with the system I have described.

[palmer]

At least we all agree that a database of voters is a bad idea since it can be hacked.

[discostu]

There is a database. It has to tie to valid voters, that valid voter list is in a database.

[discostu]

You still need a database to say that person has already registered, or is even eligible to register, remember there’s more to it than citizenship.

You’re agreeing to all my point. Blockchain is not solving any of the actual in the field being used every election sources of fraud. It’s solving problems we don’t have and not fixing the problems we have. In and of itself it’s not necessarily a bad idea, except it’s not going to reduce voter fraud one bit.

[discostu]

But it’s also 100% necessary. Because without that list of who can and can’t vote you’re letting the election be decided by scriptkiddies spawning voter keys. You absolutely positively MUST validate that this person is who they say they are AND who they say they are is actually legally allowed to vote. That’s the whole voter fraud drives through and that’s the one that needs to close.

[palmer]

You still need a database to say that person has already registered, or is even eligible to register, remember there’s more to it than citizenship.

You might need a database of citizenship, perhaps database of other validity criteria like renters and homeowners. But those are not voter databases. The blockchain eliminates the voter database. The registrar uses those other databases which are maintained for other reasons, mainly tax collection, to look up legitimacy. Then the registrar places a hash of the voter's info into the blockchain. Note that blockchain is not a database.

Does this solve the problem of a voter registering twice under two different identities? Heck no. College students could register with their home address and do it again with their college address. The blockchain will make it easier to cheat and do that since it will be harder to check for potential dual registration.

Right now there are voter databases and they can be compared to see if a name comes up in both. Then that name can be investigated further since different people might have the same name and therefore could be legitimate. What would happen with blockchain? Well there are no databases of voters to compare, so we can't do that. Instead we would have to create hashes of possible student names and addresses and check every state or locality blockchain to check for matches. Very difficult even with canonicalized names and addresses.

These are hard but not impossible problems. The good part is that the blockchain is immutable so if we get lucky and find cheaters we can prove that they cheated.

[palmer]

you’re letting the election be decided by scriptkiddies spawning voter keys.

The allocation of voting rights could only be done by a registrar. A script kiddie can't do a thing, just like a script kiddie cannot create bitcoin out of nothing.

[discostu]

No you need a VOTER database. Remember to be eligible to vote there’s also age requirements, not having been convicted off a felony requirements, of course if you have been convicted you can sue to get your rights restored, residency requirements, still being alive requirements, and of course FINALLY you actually have register to vote. Registrars have a database right now, the job cannot be done without it.

And again you admit your system doesn’t work. It’s funny how much time you put in insisting your system while admitting it doesn’t.

I’m not saying it’s an impossible problem. I’m saying it’s a problem that blockchain does absolutely nothing to solve. It’s the wrong tool for the problem. We’re trying to drive across the country and you’re insisting the tool for the job is a shotgun. A shotgun could be helpful, there might be something that needs shooting, but we lack a car, and all the shotguns in the world ain’t fixing that.

[discostu]

Clever editing.

[Hostage]

> “Because you’re in apples and chickens land. Immediate transmission to the blockchain doesn’t force the data being transmitted to be valid. Blockchain does nothing other than keep the transmitted data from being messed with DURING transmission, it does nothing to validate the data it’s handed.”

You are talking about electronic voting machines that exist today, right?

Are you aware of how blockchain tech handles the transmission equipment it presently receives from?

What you are missing is the vote has to be wrapped in an encryption key and that key has to be matched on the block chain. A voter can view how they voted on the blockchain by using a temporary public pin or key, or view on a separate monitor inside the booth.

Once a voter confirms how they voted on the blockchain, they know their vote can’t be changed. If they see it is not how they voted, they can challenge the voting machine at the voting booth.

You need to understand there are two separate transmissions. One is of totals and the other (blockchain) is of each individual vote.

With the current unsecure machines, there is an upload from the polling station to the state or county level. These totals can be tampered with.

With blockchain transmission, the vote is transmitted immediately and can be verified immediately on the blockchain by the voter. Further, the blockchain will tabulate totals separately and they should match whatever is being used presently.

Actually with blockchain equipment in place, there is no need for the current electronic voting machines. The current machines are not even secure, they are easily hacked.

[discostu]

It doesn’t matter how blockchain handles the transmission equipment because that’s not where the fraud happens. Doesn’t matter if the vote is wrapped in an encryption key, the vote is fraudulent before it gets encrypted. Doesn’t matter if the voter can view it, what are they going to do, complain that’s not their vote? That already happens every election with those touch screen, and people tsk in disgust and we move on. It’s all too late at that point. All your blockchain does is keep the fraudulent vote from being further modified. You’re not attacking vote fraud where it happens, you’re hypersecuring the barn door after the cows have already been eaten.

[Hostage]

No, there is no database of voters associated with the blockchain. There are only listings of transactions.

That has been pointed out several times already on this thread.

The voter registration table at the polling station still has the responsibility to admit only voters that are printed out in the polling book at the station.

Fraud can happen at the voter check-in table. But that is another subject.

What Block-Chain Tech can do is to eliminate electronic fraud.

The issues of Voter ID and fraud is a separate issue from electronic voting because one can be witnessed and the other is not able to be witnessed. Both can be managed separately. Block-Chain Tech applies to electronic, paper registration applies to paper.

As posted numerous times before, the voter can immediately verify their vote on the blockchain before leaving the booth. The blockchain transmission is separate from a transmission of totals by other machines.

You’re thinking the blockchain is downstream of the current unsecured electronic voting machines. The blockchain is not downstream, it has its own separate transmission device.

The current unsecured electronic voting machines record the votes to a memory card or they store the votes onboard the machines internal circuitry which is then uploaded later to the county or the state. These types of arrangements are unsecure and easily hacked as has been demonstrated repeatedly by institutions and private organization, including testimony before Congress. These machines need to go away. The MFGs of these machines need to design blockchain compliant equipment. There needs to be legislation and laws passed requiring blockchain compliance.

The blockchain device receives an encrypted vote and immediately transmits it to a matching encryption key on the blockchain, and the voter can see it on the blockchain immediately.

The voter’s vote can never be changed on the blockchain because the blockchain comprises many separate and independent nodes in the blockchain network. A hacker would have to hack into each node in the network and hack into each vote to change the vote. That’s impossible.

[Vermont Lt]

Admittedly, I am late to this discussion.

But I would feel much better with any kind of on line voting if it were tied to the block chain.

You are correct though: Every time there is a human decision point in the process there is a chance for error or trouble.

[palmer]

Remember to be eligible to vote there’s also age requirements, not having been convicted off a felony requirements, of course if you have been convicted you can sue to get your rights restored, residency requirements, still being alive requirement

Yep, the age database is probably the school records. The felony database is public here in Virginia. Even I can look up someone to make sure he is not a felon; so can the registrar. The resident database is harder, state tax databases might work.

No voter database, just a bunch of other databases.

And again you admit your system doesn’t work. It’s funny how much time you put in insisting your system while admitting it doesn’t.

No, it's a matter of explaining there is no need for a voter database that can be hacked and has almost as many problems as I described for blockchain. There are some solutions to both systems, specifically by improving registration. But there are no solutions to a hackable voter database. Th e blockchain is not hackable. If it were, then script kiddies and Russians would be getting rich off of bitcoin. But they are not.

I’m saying it’s a problem that blockchain does absolutely nothing to solve

Doesn't solve registration. If you are specific then I won't have to keep correcting you. The problem blockchain solves is on voting day making sure voters, whether real or fraudulently registered, get just one vote.