His allegations are easily disprovable or provable.<p>Every eletronic ballot in Brazil prints the vote count for each candidate before leaving the voting room. Several copies of this report are printed, every citizen may ask for each and political parties often do it. I do it for the ballot I vote.<p>However, he claims to tamper the results after that, during the data consolidation process, when data from every ballot is summed. So, to prove him right, it is only a matter of checking if the ends meet.<p>Apparently, they meet. No political party has ever contested the results based on this difference.<p>Not to say Brazilian voting system is infallible - there are many problem with it. But this is not one.
Hey - I had an idea for how electronic voting could work.<p>Voters would enter their vote into a computer. The computer would print out a card for you, and show it to you from behind a perspex card. You would then say "OK" to verify that it was correct and it would drop into a box.<p>Now there'd be a physical copy of the cards. These could be counted and checked by scrutineers as the current electoral process works. They would need to do a manual count independent of the electronic count, and the judiciary could oversee a wrap-up ceremony where the two were compared for correctness.<p>In order to rig a vote and get away with it, you'd need to hack both the computer system and the manual count. Chavez could do it, but joe random hacker definitely couldn't.<p>But you'd get a fast, clear result for television purposes. Voting cards would not be ambiguously filled in the way they are now. And if you had a compulsory preferential system, as in some jurisdictions now, you could cause the software to enforce that in a way that isn't possible with manual entry at the moment.
This is old - and unverified - news.<p>This has been posted verbatim in several places already.<p><a href="http://www.lucaspeperaio.com.br/blog/hacker-de-19-anos-conta-como-fraudou-as-eleicoes-municipais-de-2012-no-rio-de-janeiro" rel="nofollow">http://www.lucaspeperaio.com.br/blog/hacker-de-19-anos-conta...</a>
<a href="http://www.pragmatismopolitico.com.br/2012/12/hacker-fraude-urna-eletronica-brasil-eleicao-2012.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.pragmatismopolitico.com.br/2012/12/hacker-fraude-...</a>
<a href="http://www.tecmundo.com.br/brasil/34010-em-evento-no-rj-hacker-conta-como-fraudou-apuracao-de-votos-de-uma-urna-eletronica.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.tecmundo.com.br/brasil/34010-em-evento-no-rj-hack...</a>
<a href="http://jornalistaflavioazevedo.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/hacker-de-19-anos-revela-no-rio-como.html" rel="nofollow">http://jornalistaflavioazevedo.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/hacke...</a><p>All from blogs. Not a single major news source.<p>This is, most likely, complete bullshit.
The real issue here is not if voting machines are the perfect solution, it is about what is the better solution. And if anyone knows voter fraud in Brazil, these machines are a lot better than the manual system. At least it demands the people committing the fraud to be a lot smarter than they used to be in manual counting.
Secureness of Brazilian voting system has been contested many times.<p>There are "The Alagoas case" which the candidate Joao Lyra requested a recount because he found out 1/3 of the ballots contained incorrect data and then asked for an audit, the court demanded 2 million for this audition, Joao Lyra then asked the the court itself to pay for it, since it would be in its interest to demonstrate the fairness of the process, the court refused to pay and even condemned the candidate for "bad faith litigation" for asking for an investigation and not paying for it(despite showing inconsistent ballot data).<p>It's true, our eletronic ballot prints the report but there is no way to check if the sum of digital records are the same as the printed reports. We have no way to tell if our votes has been correctly collected nor the political parties that the votes were correctly summed, thus impossible to make a recount. In a voting system where you are not sure on whom your vote was recorded and the Election Court goes against political parties that accuse it, IMHO thats a true threat to democracy.<p>For a safer election it must include a voter-verified paper audit trail, a VVPAT allows voters the possibility to verify that their votes are cast as intended and can serve as an additional barrier to changing or destroying votes.<p>German and Holland Court already banned this first generation eletronic ballot box for not being secure enough, and Brazil is the only country on the world who still uses it.
I think this is bull*, where are the logs? How did he manipulate the results? Did he use a API Call? From a packet interception? If then how? at what time?.. Did he call the application or the database? What's the server call in? Is it Webservice? You know.. It's a lot more questions than answers.. I think we need real proof of what the heck is going on before we assume this is real, he needs to be the ultimate master of manipulation in order for noone to have seen this since there are so many people comparing the printed results versus the final one...
There <i>used</i> to be a separate printer attached to the voting machines, which would print each individual vote, in the presence of the voter, and would automatically go into a ballot, and it would be used in case there was an allegation of fraud. They of course did the dumb thing and did away with the printer, now they only have printouts of the total votes after the session is done and the machines are about to leave the place.
From Wikipedia:
"The 2002 version had a printer module that printed each vote, but the printed vote was abandond after Law 10.740/2003 and should only be reintroduced in 2014, according to Article 5 of Law 12.034/2009"