Macrosoft VoteOnline 1.0 Developer Preview Release

CNET Review

Rating:  1 2 3 4 5 6  7 8 9 10  best The good:  Simple, easy to use, instant updates on nationwide voting The bad:  Security threats, stability The bottom line:  If you feel that you can trust the fate of the western world to the "good will" of hackers, use this product to tally the votes for your nation. By Warren Christopher (12/10/00) Could we have avoided all the controversy with the Florida elections if the voting process was moved online? That's what VoteOnline 1.0 attempts to do. Using simple, easy to navigate webpages, voters are able to login, vote for their candidate, and then log off. It's quick, easy, and painless to the voter. With VoteOnline 1.0, the votes are instantly tallied and reported. It requires less work for the personnel at the voting booths, and the polling headquarters and news agencies can rely on up-to-the-minute official tallies, not exit polls, to predict the winner in an election. The only flaw this program has is its potential security holes. VoteOnline 1.0 claims to be 'bulletproof' and 'immune to Trojans' and other viruses, but can anyone really be sure? Security is important for something as big as a national election. As the makers of VoteOnline 1.0 come out with later versions, one can only assume that all the security flaws fill be fixed. It is usable and useful, and therefore scored a '7' on our CNET scale. After all, we already use the Internet to facilitate research, shopping, news reports, and even sex. Why not vote also?   Screen Shot   (Please note: This is a Developers Preview Release. Some bugs still need to be worked out.)

CNET User Opinions 61%   59%    (6569 votes; Margin of Error: +/- 20%, awaiting pending recount)  Would you recommend this product?   Yes   No   Joe Mohen - Chief Executive of Election.com, jmohen@election.com "The Proof is in Arizona" We can secure elections over the Internet; we should do it. My company, Election.com, safely conducted the Arizona primary for the Democratic Party back on March 11th. The primary was a resplendent success. The election database was not hacked, no votes were changed. Security was superb. M1n10n, m1n10n@2600.org "If one hack succeeds..." Once again, the corporate fools at c-net have released an positive review that threatens the free world. The last four years have taught us that there is no such thing as an uncompromisable system. We've beaten CSS, RC5/32, and Microsoft by simple voluntary effort. When the presidency of the most powerful country int he world is up for grabs, you can bet that cash will be available for those willing to take a crack at it. THe scary thing is that while physical ballots are succeptable to fraud, the most you'll ever be able to do as an individual is throw the count off by a couple. A hacked online system could be used to throw the vote off by hundreds of thousands or millions at a single shot. If one online hack succeeds, the vote is toast. There's nothing to recount...the election is screwed... David Jefferson - Chairman of the Technical Committee at the California Task Force on Internet Voting, jefferson@ivote.state.cal.us "Mohen -- You are a MORON!" The Arizona primary proved little about the security of online voting. Your basic argument is, 'Look, we left all the doors and windows to the house open, went on vacation and came back, and it wasn't burglarized.' Bill Kimberling - Deputy Director of the Federal Election Commission, deputy@fec.gov "NO." Internet voting is a breeding ground for FRAUD. Moonflower, moonflower@greenpeace.org "I support Ralph Nader" Ok, like, I'm kind of nervous posting to the Internet and all, but I just wanted to express my support for Internet voting. I support Ralph Nader, you see, because I want to protect the environment from those corporate bastards trying to buy my vote. If I could vote online, I wouldn't have to waste the gas in the VW to actually go to the voting booth and punch out one of those pieces of murdered trees. Also, I'm trying to design the new Greenpeace website, so any time away I'm not either at my computer or becoming one with nature is definitely wasted time. Kim Alexander - President of California Voter Foundation, kima@calvote.org "It's a mirage. I used to support Internet voting, but no more." You think about it for five minutes, and it sounds like a good idea. You study it for 10 months, and you find a lot of reasons that it may not be such a good idea: Authentication, fraud, potential compromise of secret ballot, employers' ability to influence voting in the workplace, etc. Richard M. Hasselburger, icollectstamps191282328@aol.com "Huh?" I think i voted for Gore. Who do I ask?

Quick Facts
Platform(s):	Macrosoft Windows 2000 Galaxy Class Server Edition
Communication(s):	TCP/IP, Fibre-SAN, Firewire, Token Ring, ISA, Hayes Compatible Modem (xmodem)
Client Platforms:	Macrosoft Windows 2000 Terminal Client Edition, Macrosoft Windows RLDE (Really Little Device Edition)
Server Requirements:	13 TB RAM, 340 TB Storage
Mfr.-claimed votes/sec:	342,492.0392
Backup Capability?:	Available in separate product add-in as Macrosoft VoteOnline Total Backup Solution
Included in Box:	Shoehorn, Demo of Macrosoft eChad 1.0
Price:	Single User License: $149.99 With an estimated 103,814,206 users, total price: $15,571,092,757.94

Note: The specs shown here are for the base configuration of this product. The features of the base model may not match the reviewed model, and vendor configurations may vary due to changing product specifications and availability.