Risk

8/13/2009
09:03 PM
George V. Hulme
George V. Hulme
Commentary
50%
50%

E-Voting Takes Another Hit

A group of computer scientists have shown how voting results, held in electronic voting machines, can be changed using a novel hacking technique. It's yet another reason why we need to have a verifiable, auditable, paper-trail for electronic voting machines.

A group of computer scientists have shown how voting results, held in electronic voting machines, can be changed using a novel hacking technique. It's yet another reason why we need to have a verifiable, auditable, paper-trail for electronic voting machines.The technique they used to change votes, dubbed return oriented programming, was first described by Hovav Shacham, a professor of computer science at UC San Diego's Jacobs School of Engineering. Shacham is also an author of a study that detailed the attack on voting systems presented earlier this week at the 2009 Electronic Voting Technology Workshop / Workshop on Trustworthy Elections (EVT/WOTE 2009).

From a statement:

To take over the voting machine, the computer scientists found a flaw in its software that could be exploited with return-oriented programming. But before they could find a flaw in the software, they had to reverse engineer the machine's software and its hardware-without the benefit of source code.

Essentially, return-oriented programming is a technique that uses pieces of existing system code to exploit the system. In this demonstration, the researchers successfully performed a buffer-overflow.

The team of scientists involved in the study included Shacham, as well as researchers from the University of Michigan and Princeton University. The hacked voting system was a Sequoia AVC Advantage electronic voting machine.

Shacham concluded that paper-based elections are the ay to go. I wouldn't go that far, but he did:

"Based on our understanding of security and computer technology, it looks like paper-based elections are the way to go. Probably the best approach would involve fast optical scanners reading paper ballots. These kinds of paper-based systems are amenable to statistical audits, which is something the election security research community is shifting to."

I'd settle for verifiable paper-based audit trail. Professor Edward Felten, a long-time observer of electronic voting systems also commented:

"This research shows that voting machines must be secure even against attacks that were not yet invented when the machines were designed and sold. Preventing not-yet-discovered attacks requires an extraordinary level of security engineering, or the use of safeguards such as voter-verified paper ballots," said Edward Felten, an author on the new study; Director of the Center for Information Technology Policy; and Professor of Computer Science and Public Affairs at Princeton University.

In February 2008, Felten demonstrated how he was able to access several electronic voting systems at multiple locations in New Jersey.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Four Faces of Fraud: Identity, 'Fake' Identity, Ransomware & Digital
David Shefter, Chief Technology Officer at Ziften Technologies,  6/14/2018
Meet 'Bro': The Best-Kept Secret of Network Security
Greg Bell, CEO, Corelight,  6/14/2018
Containerized Apps: An 8-Point Security Checklist
Jai Vijayan, Freelance writer,  6/14/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-9036
PUBLISHED: 2018-06-20
CheckSec Canopy 3.x before 3.0.7 has stored XSS via the Login Page Disclaimer, allowing attacks by low-privileged users against higher-privileged users.
CVE-2018-12327
PUBLISHED: 2018-06-20
Stack-based buffer overflow in ntpq and ntpdc of NTP version 4.2.8p11 allows an attacker to achieve code execution or escalate to higher privileges via a long string as the argument for an IPv4 or IPv6 command-line parameter. NOTE: It is unclear whether there are any common situations in which ntpq ...
CVE-2018-12558
PUBLISHED: 2018-06-20
The parse() method in the Email::Address module through 1.909 for Perl is vulnerable to Algorithmic complexity on specially prepared input, leading to Denial of Service. Prepared special input that caused this problem contained 30 form-field characters ("\f").
CVE-2018-6563
PUBLISHED: 2018-06-20
Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in totemomail Encryption Gateway before 6.0.0_Build_371 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of users for requests that (1) change user settings, (2) send emails, or (3) change contact information by leveraging lack of an anti...
CVE-2018-1120
PUBLISHED: 2018-06-20
A flaw was found affecting the Linux kernel before version 4.17. By mmap()ing a FUSE-backed file onto a process's memory containing command line arguments (or environment strings), an attacker can cause utilities from psutils or procps (such as ps, w) or any other program which makes a read() call t...