Census time again

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roverlord off road spares

Just read about Michael McCormack MP, who has been defending the census has had his web site hacked today. Just read it on the ABC news site. He closes his web site down and put up a message close for maintenance. Nothing is safe on the web theses days. If they want the information they will find away to get it. Heather

---

Lots of things are safe on the web these days. However lots of websites are written by the lowest bidder who then tasks the work to semi-trained web developers who couldn't care less.

e.g. one of the most common hacking methods these days is SQL injection, which exploits poorly written online databases/websites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_injection

Of course there is the argument that as soon as you make something hacker proof you will just develop a better class of hacker...

However there are encryption systems around which have proven impenetrable to-date.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by isuzurover

https://followmyvote.com/online-voti...in-technology/

---

Yes, this allows reasonably secure on line voting at the database level, and could be implemented by having every voting place a node, with voting carried out on terminals at these nodes. This does present substantial challenges, however, as the capital expenditure to provide a node at every polling place would be significant - and then there is the problem that by no means all polling places have internet coverage. This would enable results as soon as voting closed, which is a plus.

But this is not what e-voting enthusiasts envisage - they envisage being able to vote on your usual device - and I suspect establishing every device held by a voter as a node could be challenging. And blockchain does not address the challenge of identifying voters and preventing multiple voting (whether by voters or malicious or faulty code).

John

Good on them for having a go......so they didn't get it quite write, whoopee doo. If the hackers did get info we would know about it by now....

I'm happy to wait till they get it right.....

There would be more info about you on way less secure sites than the ABS....

Yes, but that information was given voluntarily, not under threat of a $180 a day fine.
Big Brother has screwed up. Ironically, I had decided to bite my tongue and do the census anyway despite my reservations, but now I can't because the site is down. What a pity...
Would be fun to be a fly on the wall in the offices of the ABS today. Wonder how many times the words 'incompetent' and 'stuffup' have been used?


Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

Hmm, I would think IBM and the system tester would be severely embarrassed by this.

BUT I guess it depends on what the Request For Proposal says.

If the ABS really did only plan for 1 million per hour the the drovers' dog could have told them this was BS , and that is what IBM should have said.
Regards Philip A

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

......Wonder how many times the words 'incompetent' and 'stuffup' have been used? Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

---

Oh no, nobody can speak that way.
They would use terms like "performance shortfall" and "negative outcomes"
😇

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

Yes, this allows reasonably secure on line voting at the database level, and could be implemented by having every voting place a node, with voting carried out on terminals at these nodes. This does present substantial challenges, however, as the capital expenditure to provide a node at every polling place would be significant - and then there is the problem that by no means all polling places have internet coverage. This would enable results as soon as voting closed, which is a plus.

But this is not what e-voting enthusiasts envisage - they envisage being able to vote on your usual device - and I suspect establishing every device held by a voter as a node could be challenging. And blockchain does not address the challenge of identifying voters and preventing multiple voting (whether by voters or malicious or faulty code).

John

---

Yes, that's what I was thinking when I said earlier that it could be made to work if people were made to go to places with secure computer systems, such as libraries, council offices, Centrelink and maybe post offices, and use the machines there to log in and vote. That would be very different to letting everyone log on with their personal devices, which could be compromised.
Of course, that assumes the voting site could handle so many contacts. Apparently the abs one couldn't handle more than 1.4 million, which obviously wasn't enough.
I read that two million people did the census online, three million asked for paper copies and four million couldn't login to do it. So that means a total of about 9 million households, I assume, if those figures are right.
If there are 9 million households, and they were all supposed to login on Tuesday, and most tried on Tuesday evening after work then, even allowing for time differences, it's not hard to see how more than 1.4 million might have tried to log on at the same time. Add to that any denial of service attack and down she went.
So, what happens now? Options:

• Cancel the whole census and do a major rethink.
• Restore the site and tell people they still have until September 22, but their answers must be what was correct on Tuesday.
• Extend the period so instead of just being on Tuesday night it is over a longer period.

Whatever happens, the 2016 census is not going to have the data integrity of previous censuses. Questions must be asked about why. Changes must be made.
Some people will be so annoyed they will give false answers, when it is possible to do the census, or will just boycott the whole thing.
The reputation of the ABS has been severely dented, which is a big pity.
If this thread was in Current Affairs I could say why I think this has been such a stuffup, but that would mean being political, which isn't allowed here.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-1...ashing/7718584

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

.......
If this thread was in Current Affairs I could say why I think this has been such a stuffup, but that would mean being political, which isn't allowed here.

---

I personally do not think that it is political - I suspect that it was the almost inevitable result (Sportsbet had 90% of punters predicting this result!) of attempting an IT project that was very large and had to work first time, almost certainly with an entire management structure that was not technically competent to appreciate the risks - and the lower ranks who did appreciate them either not listened to or not game to speak.

A direct result of the management culture that is mostly used throughout both business and government, where if you are a manager you can manage anything, and cut costs while doing it.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

...

But this is not what e-voting enthusiasts envisage - they envisage being able to vote on your usual device ...

---

Have you surveyed a statistically significant number of them?

I think most voters would be happy if we had the result in hours rather than weeks.
Visiting polling places is not onerous for most Australians, and we could still retain postal votes or pre-poll voting for people who live more than 6 km from a polling place as we do now.

However - re voting on personal devices... Under the current system I could in theory delegate anyone to vote on my behalf, since ID is not required. Not to mention the pencils and "secure" cardboard boxes. An electronic system just needs to be better than that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by isuzurover

Have you surveyed a statistically significant number of them?

I think most voters would be happy if we had the result in hours rather than weeks.
Visiting polling places is not onerous for most Australians, and we could still retain postal votes or pre-poll voting for people who live more than 6 km from a polling place as we do now.

However - re voting on personal devices... Under the current system I could in theory delegate anyone to vote on my behalf, since ID is not required. Not to mention the pencils and "secure" cardboard boxes. An electronic system just needs to be better than that...

---

Pity the Census wasn't timed to coincide with the recent federal elections. Could have done two things at once, since polling booths already existed.


Compare the possible risks of online voting with the current dodgy system. There's a lot of potential for voter fraud under the current voting system.
1. Anyone can get an enrolment form from a post office, fill in a real or bogus name at a real or bogus address, and send it off. It's highly unlikely to ever be checked, particularly if done just before the cutoff before an election. Then you just front up and vote under the name given, real or false. No way the vote you cast could ever be identified afterwards.
2. Same person can vote repeatedly at different polling booths, just by giving a name on the roll and saying 'Yes' when asked if that is your address. Unlikely the rolls with names crossed off would ever be compared to realize the same name had been crossed off more than once at different booths. Even if it was checked, and you were questioned, you would just say you voted at a certain booth and have no idea about the other booths. How would they prove you had voted more than once?
So, while online voting might have issues, the current system is also wide open to voter fraud.