Should we discontinue EVMs?

[Pranav]

For one thing you are talking as if independent audits are being allowed, which they are not.

For another thing, it is upto the vehement EVM supporters to get the EC to publish detailed specs and prove that whatever method they are proposing guarantees that the HW/SW adheres to those specs.

In any case, doing a checksum on code that is given out by a PROM will not guarantee anything about the entire system. Just as an example, there could be additional code secretly hardwired onto the processor itself.

Pranav, prove that the checksum proposal is inadequate. Specify the exact vulnerability.
YOU are the one who babbles.

[Rahul Mehta]

Dileep,

You claimed that CIA or someone can replace paper ballots stored in 700,000 boxes kept in 30,000 rooms 550 centers in India within 2-4 weeks. I am waiting for YOUR estimate on how many FIELD agents they would need, how many officers at various levels they would need to bribe to accomplish even 25% of this task. IOW, can you care to explain why/how you claim that rigging paper ballots in say 200 Constituency is EASIER than rigging EVMs in 200 Constituencies?

Because AFAIS, replacing EVMs needs LESS field agents and needs to purchase fewer people (at top) than replacing paper ballots between polling and counting.

[Aside : I do agree that number of days between polling and counting should be reduced to mere two days. For this, increase the number of policemen in India from 15L to 45L , make a law that all polling day crimes will be tried in fast track courts only, increase number of cameras in and around booths etc etc. But have polling in entire country on one day and counting on next day. ]

============

Can EVM-lovers tell us how much money, paper is saved by using EVMs? One EVM costs Rs 10,000 (EC paid Rs 100cr for 100,000 EVMs). One ballot paper of twice the A4 size would cost below 50 paise. So 1 EVM costs 20,000 ballots. Now one EVM serves some 500 voters. So it would take 8 elections for EVM cost to equate the paper costs. Is this savings you guys are talking about?

In case, I will let YOU give the estimates now. Pls tell us how much paper cost do you save by per EVM per election?.

[Raju]

till now there is no concrete information whether totalizer is being used or not used (as per Ajay KK's article), it has been ignored specifically for a few BJP ruled states. Then another article says in Chandigarh/Haryana which is part of the list of 6 suspect states where vote rigging has been speculated.

I suggest members to stop making this issue personal as a lot of facts regarding this case are yet to be excavated. And also please desist from suggestions of thread lock etc if you have nothing positive to contribute here. My humble suggestion.

As I suggested Shiv Sena candidate getting 5 votes from a hardcore Shiv Sena stronghold is laughable to say the least. It is entirely justified that people suspect some kind of rigging in presence of such anomalies.

[AjayKK]

You are both good guys on forum. Please chill.

+ 1 to that.

We are just following the issue as it happens. There are some PILs in various HCs and ofcourse the Shiv Sena's MP has submitted the petition in the SC.
Let this issue reach its logical conclusion. Please desist from attacks.

HC notice to MLAs

16 Jul 2009 11:16:46 AM IST

http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/stor ... kuKw=&SEO=


CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court today issued notices in the election petition filed by Alok Jena, the Congress candidate from Bhubaneswar (Central) Assembly constituency, under the Representation of The Peoples Act, 1951.

Jena had filed the petition alleging gross irregularities in the conduct of polls and prayed for declaring the election of BJD candidate Bijay Kumar Mohanty from the seat void.

The single-judge bench of Justice I Mohanty issued notices to Bijay Kumar and nine other contestants from various parties as well as Independents.

Challenging the election of Bijay Kumar, the petitioner alleged that the result of the election held in April this year was not the outcome of free and fair conduct of the process but obtained through tampering and manipulation of the electronic voting machines (EVMs).

The trustworthiness and genuineness of the EVMs procured for the elections were never tested to be tamper-proof neither was it demonstrated before the candidates that appropriate measures had been taken to secure them from manipulation. This clearly violated the directions of the Supreme Court and the Election Commission of India.

Another mandatory requirement on the part of the polling officers of the polling stations to hold mock polls before commencement of actual voting and getting endorsements from the polling agents and other persons was blatantly violated, he alleged.

Despite standing rules, EVMs were indiscriminately changed in various booths at the time of polling without any intimation to him nor his election agents. Thus, there was sufficient ground for him to suspect foul-play and pre-arranged votes, he further stated.

[Tanaji]

totalizers may not have been used in Maharashtra also. Because Shiv Sena candidate Mohan Rawle was seen mentioning that he got only 5 votes from Shivaji Park booth EVM. And info is not possible if totalizers were used to mix up EVM results and count them together.

And Shiv Sena considers Shivaji Park as its base.

1. Go to Sena Bhavan stand facing to it
2. Next to it is a lane
3. Next to that lane is a big office. Notice the board on that office
4. See what it says
5. See how many boards are there in the surrounding area related to that office
6. Investigate where a certain Mr. Raj Thackrey lives
7. Now investigate where Uddhav, Bal Thackrey live and in which constituency
8. Talk to people who live in that area, and who they support.

There is a good reason why Sena has lost 5 seats in Mumbai, and EVM rigging is not one of them. Rawle just does not want to accept the writing on the wall.

[Rahul Mehta]

Sanku,

The hardware itself can be sufficiently tested in the method that Dileep has outlined. Yes there are paranoid methods of checking the hardware (such as under electron microscope and structural testing) however they are manufacturing tests for manufacturing flaws. Quite different from testing the functional correctness of the chip as per a pre defined spec.

It is one thing to say that "it can be tested" and nother to say that EC did let candidates test the EVMs after counting was over. eg EC could have asked any candidates to take 10-20 EVMs they like for Rs 10000 each, and let candidates rip them apart and do testing. But EVM is some closely guarded secret and not give to any private person.

Also, you test the EVMs. But how do you know that 14,00,000 EVMs sent in the booths have same SW as the one you tested in your lab? EC cannot and will not allow you to test the EVMs after dispatch from warehouse to District Collector.

So my point is : EVMs are riggable with few field agents and with co-operation of few people at the top, while paper ballots can be rigged only with lakhs of field agents and only with co-operation of 1000s of policemen etc at all levels. So paper is far more secure, though EVM looks more high tech.

This is the simple argument we anti-EVM people have been making since beginning.

------------

Admins,

Pls let the thread stay. The EVM-lovers have resorted to name calling because they could not show that rigging paper is LESS difficult than rigging EVMs. So to kill the thread, they have started throwing abuses so that one can make case to kill the thread. Pls let the thread stay. Eventually, EVM-lovers will run out insults and thread "EVM vs paper" debate will resume.

[Tanaji]

Can EVM-lovers tell us how much money, paper is saved by using EVMs? One EVM costs Rs 10,000 (EC paid Rs 100cr for 100,000 EVMs). One ballot paper of twice the A4 size would cost below 50 paise. So 1 EVM costs 20,000 ballots. Now one EVM serves some 500 voters. So it would take 8 elections for EVM cost to equate the paper costs. Is this savings you guys are talking about?

http://eci.nic.in/faq/evm.asp

As usual Rahul Mehta is MISLEADING the COMMONs or he is lying.

A EVM costs Rs. 5500 not Rs. 10000. Just because you say they paid Rs. 100cr doesnt mean its automatically true. I believe the EC rather than Rahul Mehta
A EVM can store a maximum of 3840 votes not 500. More lies by you.

Will you now apologize for your blatant lying on this topic?

[Raju]

From pg # 79 of this handbook:

http://eci.nic.in/ElectoralLaws/HandBoo ... idates.pdf

The Electronics Corporation of India Limited and the Bharat Electronics
Limited who have produced these machines have published separate
Manuals explaining in full the details of operation of the machines produced
by them. The Commission has classified the machines based on the year of
production and these are as follows:-
i. ECIL (New) Machines made in 1999 to 2005
ii. ECIL(New improved) Machines made in 2007 and
later
iii BEL (New) Machines made in 1999 to 2005
iv. BEL (New improved) Machines made in 2007 and
later

What are improvements in this 'New Improved' EVMs introduced in 2007 ?
Do all of them require maintenance to be outsourced ?
Or do just the old ones.

[Sanku]

As usual Rahul Mehta is MISLEADING the COMMONs or he is lying.

Will you now apologize for your blatant lying on this topic?

There is nothing special about RM and this thread. This is RM everywhere. I have long ago started ignoring him, but as long as all the forumites dont collectively boycott him and his brand of time and space definitions we will keep getting into rather absurd discussions on the forum.

We need satyagraha against shri mehta

[Dileep]

In any case, doing a checksum on code that is given out by a PROM will not guarantee anything about the entire system. Just as an example, there could be additional code secretly hardwired onto the processor itself.

This proves that you have absolutely no idea how the system works. Still, you maintain that the check is inadequate.

Of course, the almighty CIA can design a custom processor that seamlessly executes the code for the original design, plus do the additional stuff from a separate, secretly embedded memory, fabricate the processors, and swap them with the BEL ordered processors.

Quite plausible onlee.

See, folks, where we started with, and where we ended up? We started with the notion that someone could have hacked into the EVM (like someone hacks into a PC). When that is proven impossible, we moved into binary code replacement. When that is proven impossible, we went to field activation. When that is proven wrong, RM took the route of mass EVM replacement, and Pranav took the Massive chip replacement.

When you reach such outrageous propositions, you know that your system is foolproof.

You can only do things only upto certain level. Sita did agni pariksha, and the issue stopped there. There is no way you can satisfy obsessive skeptics.

The asymptotic curve has approached the straight line within a femtounit. I am done. No more discussion on the EVM hardware. They are reliable enough for the purpose.

[Tanaji]

As I suggested Shiv Sena candidate getting 5 votes from a hardcore Shiv Sena stronghold is laughable to say the least. It is entirely justified that people suspect some kind of rigging in presence of such anomalies.

Raju, its not as crazy as it thinks. The Dadar (N) area was a hard core Sena stronghold, right until the split with MNS happened. You are under estimating how much of a body blow to the Sena Raj Thackrey's defection was. The core Marathi supporter switched alliances to Raj en masse due to his agenda and more importantly because he reminds people of Bal Thackrey 20 years ago. Politics aside, one polling booth on an average holds 1500 voters. With a huge swing that has occurred, the Sena has been wiped out... I intimately know that area, people really were fed up this time. Additionally, the MNS workers were better organized in that area and a lot of them were actually Sena workers last time. The Sena was left scrambling to rebuild its entire grassroots organization due to the split and never had the momentum that it liked. True to their style of functioning they never let BJP have a say in that area either, so couldnt use their resources either. Sadly for them, Congress made merry.

BTW, since Rawle has statistics at booth level, doesn't this prove totalizers were not used?

[Rahul Mehta]

Can EVM-lovers tell us how much money, paper is saved by using EVMs? One EVM costs Rs 10,000 (EC paid Rs 100cr for 100,000 EVMs). One ballot paper of twice the A4 size would cost below 50 paise. So 1 EVM costs 20,000 ballots. Now one EVM serves some 500 voters. So it would take 8 elections for EVM cost to equate the paper costs. Is this savings you guys are talking about?

http://eci.nic.in/faq/evm.asp

As usual Rahul Mehta is MISLEADING the COMMONs or he is lying.

A EVM costs Rs. 5500 not Rs. 10000. Just because you say they paid Rs. 100cr doesnt mean its automatically true. I believe the EC rather than Rahul Mehta
A EVM can store a maximum of 3840 votes not 500. More lies by you.

Will you now apologize for your blatant lying on this topic?

Tanaji,

Your calling me liar is now going too far. I am NOT complaining, but you should really google before you make such claim.

http://sify.com/finance/equity/fullstor ... d=14769291

Bangalore: The Election Commission, which has just placed a Rs 100-crore-plus order for 1.02 lakh electronic voting machines with Bharat Electronics Ltd, is looking at innovations in it such as fingerprint recognition, ‘Totaliser’ or counting from many networked machines and perhaps Internet voting, according to the Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami.

Tell me how much is Rs 100 cr divided by 102,000? It is Rs 10,000 approx. And while EVM may store upto 5500 votes, we used 1400,000 EVMs for 71 cr voters. So one EVM on an average served only 500 voters. So check the FACTS before you add labels on others.

------

And pls do tell me now how much would paper ballot with 9 candidates (average) would cost? And pls tell me how many ballots equal one EVM and how much is the saving, assuming EVM will last for only 10 years.

----------

Sanku,

Before you call me liar along with Tanaji, pls do read the link that Tanaji gave. His link says

The cost per EVM (One Control Unit, one Balloting Unit and one battery) was Rs.5,500/- at the time the machines were purchased in 1989-90. Even though the initial investment is somewhat heavy, this is more than neutralised by the savings in the matter of printing of ballot papers in lakhs, their transportation, storage etc., and the substantial reduction in the counting staff and the remuneration paid to them.

The information I gave that EVMs are costing Rs 10000 a piece came from SIFY website and gives today's costs. To contradict me, Tanaji gives costs of 1990, almost 20 years back. That is utter nonsense. We have to go by costs of TODAY.

[Tanaji]

As usual Rahul Mehta is MISLEADING the COMMONs or he is lying.

Will you now apologize for your blatant lying on this topic?

There is nothing special about RM and this thread. This is RM everywhere. I have long ago started ignoring him, but as long as all the forumites dont collectively boycott him and his brand of time and space definitions we will keep getting into rather absurd discussions on the forum.

We need satyagraha against shri mehta

You are right. He used to be open to reason earlier but lately its getting worse. I am seriously contemplating marking him as a foe so I dont get to see his posts.

The only plus points he has is he is unfailingly civil even when provoked, and misguided as his beliefs may be, he actually did something about it when he formed his party and contested. A futile attempt, but he did something which is more than what I have done that is mainly whine.

[Tanaji]

Tell me how much is Rs 100 cr divided by 102,000? It is Rs 10,000 aprox.

And while EVM may store upto 5500 votes, we used 1400,000 EVMs for 71 cr voters. So one EVM on an average served only 500 voters.

So check the FACTS before you add labels on others.

So now you don't believe EC itself but believe the sify paper? Current EVMs cost R.s 5,500 which is what we were discussing. Also the EVM can count up to 3840 votes, why is that so hard to understand?

You are a liar because you are well aware that the statistic includes the spare EVMs as well. If someone has a 10 liter can and uses it only to store 500 ml of water, whose fault is it? Your fault or is the can's fault? Also have you ever considered that this thing has potential for future growth in population that inevitably happens?

You are also aware of our age pyramid that has a large number of young people that will increasingly result in a large number of eligible voters. As this happens the paper ballot system is simply untenable to work with and EVM is the only viable option.

A smart person like you knows all of the above, yet you persist in making inane arguments in spite of proof from EC itself. Which leads me to believe that you are either lying or misleading deliberately to further your agenda.

[Rahul Mehta]

Sanku, Tanaji, ALL anti-RM elements,

I asked some pointed questions to you.

1. How much paper costs are saved per EVM per election

2. How many field agents would you need to replace real ballot boxes filled with real ballots with fake ballots and fake ballots.

3. How many policemen , Tahasildars etc would you need to bribe to get above tasks done.

And your answers so far are

1. As usual Rahul Mehta is MISLEADING the COMMONs or he is lying.

2. There is nothing special about RM and this thread. This is RM everywhere. I have long ago started ignoring him, but as long as all the forumites dont collectively boycott him and his brand of time and space definitions we will keep getting into rather absurd discussions on the forum.

3. We need satyagraha against shri mehta

4. [RM] used to be open to reason earlier but lately its getting worse. I am seriously contemplating marking him as a foe so I dont get to see his posts.

[Tanaji]

Before you call me liar along with Tanaji, pls do read the link that Tanaji gave. His link says

Quote:
The cost per EVM (One Control Unit, one Balloting Unit and one battery) was Rs.5,500/- at the time the machines were purchased in 1989-90. Even though the initial investment is somewhat heavy, this is more than neutralised by the savings in the matter of printing of ballot papers in lakhs, their transportation, storage etc., and the substantial reduction in the counting staff and the remuneration paid to them.


The information I gave that EVMs are costing Rs 10000 a piece came from SIFY website and gives today's costs. To contradict me, Tanaji gives costs of 1990, almost 20 years back. That is utter nonsense. We have to go by costs of TODAY.

It is convenient how you look at the first part of the paragraph that you quote but ignore the later part. And you complain when I say you are misleading people deliberately?

[Rahul Mehta]

So now you don't believe EC itself but believe the sify paper? Current EVMs cost R.s 5,500 which is what we were discussing. Also the EVM can count up to 3840 votes, why is that so hard to understand?

You are a liar because you are well aware that the statistic includes the spare EVMs as well. If someone has a 10 liter can and uses it only to store 500 ml of water, whose fault is it? Your fault or is the can's fault? Also have you ever considered that this thing has potential for future growth in population that inevitably happens?

You are also aware of our age pyramid that has a large number of young people that will increasingly result in a large number of eligible voters. As this happens the paper ballot system is simply untenable to work with and EVM is the only viable option.

A smart person like you knows all of the above, yet you persist in making inane arguments in spite of proof from EC itself. Which leads me to believe that you are either lying or misleading deliberately to further your agenda.

Tanaji,

Rs 5500 cost is the cost in 1990. Pls see the same link you gave. Pls also see the SIFY link I gave. It says that EC recently paid Rs 100 cr for 102,000 EVMs, which means that today's cost is Rs 10,000 per EVM.

One booth cannot have more than 1500 voters. Why? because it takes 30 seconds for a person to vote. So at most 120 persons per hour, 8 hours a day would mean 1000 voters at most. So even if EVM were to store 50,000 votes in its memory, you would still need at least 1 EVM per 1000 voters. And actual number of EVMs used were 1.4 million, which proves that in reality, one EVM served only 500 voters in general.

Why is it taking you so long to give how much money EVMs actually saved by replacing papers? Or did it save any money at all?

[AjayKK]

Just for clarity of those who are discussing the voter per booth stats.

In the elections -1 thread, it was posted that the number of voters in these elections will be less than last time. As per revised guidelines, the number was brought down. Due to more booths, more staff had to be on duty.

This had caused operational problems in WB as more number of staff were not being made available.

The last time, it were about 1500, now...

According to the guidelines, polling booths with more than 1,200 voters in rural areas and 1,350 voters in urban areas should be divided.

Link

[Sanku]

For one thing you are talking as if independent audits are being allowed, which they are not.

For another thing, it is upto the vehement EVM supporters to get the EC to publish detailed specs and prove that whatever method they are proposing guarantees that the HW/SW adheres to those specs.

This is a point I accede to, the question of "independent" verification is important. However going by the information quoted from EC, the chips, the boxes and the systems are indeed tested with clearly defined protocols by Govt agencies themselves.

At source rigging (i.e. introduction of hardware+software elements which are rigged) looks very very improbable to me.

I could have believed that rigging was possible if there were override systems which were simple (not a single agent punching buttons in an order) however clearly the discussion shows no such systems in the EVM.

In fact I would agree with Dileep that this is pretty much irrigable system at present in the way it appears. Some one who wants to do rigging would be much more easily served by trying other stunts like polling list manipulation and/or working with EO to caste false votes.

The ballot box stuffing is gone.

[AjayKK]

What are improvements in this 'New Improved' EVMs introduced in 2007 ?

Answering your query and posting without comment

EVMs now have timers to record your vote

They don't just record your votes anymore. In the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, electronic voting machines (EVMs) will also keep track of the time of your vote.

The clock is built into the control unit of an EVM, says Amol Newaskar, general manager, Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL), Bangalore, which is one of the two public sector companies authorized by the Election Commission to manufacture EVMs.

The clock records the time at which voting begins and also gives the hourly voting percentage without giving details about how many votes a candidate has polled.

"This can help prevent frauds. For example, if there is heavy polling during the opening or closing hours, officials can be on alert and investigate the reason. Or if someone disputes his vote, it will show the time at which he cast it,'' says Newaskar.

BEL director H S Badoria says clocks were also being installed by the Hyderabad-based Electronics Corporation of India (ECIL), the other PSU supplying EVMs. BEL and ECIL supply an equal number of EVMs to the election commission.

For the 2009 Lok Sabha polls, BEL delivered 1,02,000 EVMs with timers and an equal number of Braille EVMs six months back after they got orders from the Election Commission and state governments, says Badoria. ECIL has also delivered an equal number. Each EVM costs Rs 9,800, inclusive of tax and excise, and it takes BEL about three months to deliver the units.

[Raju]

Each EVM costs Rs 9,800, inclusive of tax and excise, and it takes BEL about three months to deliver the units.

So RM was right after all.

[Tanaji]

People here just dont look at it in the right perspective.

If I was the CIA and wanted to have certain candidates to win, what is more easier to me: manipulate the elections by painfully manipulating the EVM, totalizers, polling officials and doing all the defying of time and space laws that Rahul Mehta does, OR
simply bribe the winning candidate??

We all know the standards of the election candidates. Isnt it far easier for me to simply bribe the winner to go as per my agenda? After all, as per Rahul Mehta's definition , I am CIA and have infinite resources!

[Tanaji]

Each EVM costs Rs 9,800, inclusive of tax and excise, and it takes BEL about three months to deliver the units.

So RM was right after all.

Er, we were discussing the existing set, note that not all EVMs were replaced in the discussion. Obviously costs will have gone up if you want to buy now.

Rahul Mehta will then conveniently ignore the cost of the paper, ink , transportation and people costs for a paper ballot 20 years ago and its increase now. Why not compare salaries 20 years ago and now, if you are insisting on the Rs. 10000 number?

[Sanku]

Please also note that a lot of EVM development etc happened at a time when there was a non congress govt in Center and Congress was widely expected to hoof it and leave India in peace (which it unfortunately or fortunately resolutely refused to do)

All such rigging by design would then be taking place under a non congress govt -- and are now used by Congress for gains? Naahh... that alone tells me that at source rigging is next to impossible.

[Raju]

Sanku,

in 2007 the Congress was very much in power.

[Sanku]

Sanku,

in 2007 the Congress was very much in power.

The EVM were not all developed in 2007, the design in essentially from 90s. Most machines were manufactured eons ago.

I also dont subscribe to the theory that Congress could magically add stuff to basic design and everything without anyone in BEL knowing or talking.

[Tanaji]

Sanku,

in 2007 the Congress was very much in power.

Congress has been in power for most of India's history. The BJP was in power in 1999 onwards, curious why they didn't scrap the whole EVM thing if this was such a huge CIA - Congress conspiracy. IIRC this was the critical period for EVM deployment when all the procedures and checks were being carried out prior to deployment stage.

[amit]

People here just dont look at it in the right perspective.

If I was the CIA and wanted to have certain candidates to win, what is more easier to me: manipulate the elections by painfully manipulating the EVM, totalizers, polling officials and doing all the defying of time and space laws that Rahul Mehta does, OR
simply bribe the winning candidate??

We all know the standards of the election candidates. Isnt it far easier for me to simply bribe the winner to go as per my agenda? After all, as per Rahul Mehta's definition , I am CIA and have infinite resources!

Tanaji,

That's the point which folks here are missing as the thread goes on a downward spiral. I wrote this on the previous page of this thread:

Any entity (CIA?) which has the power and ability to control the thousands of variables which it would need to in order to rig the elections via EVMs would be powerful enough to control whichever party comes to power at the Centre. Then why go through all the effort, cost and trouble of rigging in the first place? And why go through such a torturous debate, we're doomed in any case?

The point that I think is being lost in all the anti-EVM shouting is that at the end of the day its the man (or men) behind the system which is important. If they are honest, EVM, paper ballots or even "yes" or "no" would suffice. If they are not then no amount of checks, balances and audits will do.

[Raju]

Now are not these statements mutually contradictory.

Q. 29. Earlier there was a system of mixing ballot papers so that the voting preference in a particular polling station is not known. Now the EVMs are counted one by one and the voting preference of a particular polling station become known to everybody – Can anything be done about it?
Ans. A device called ‘Totaliser” has been developed by the manufacturers of the EVMs which can, at a time, connected with several control units. It will then indicate the total number of votes polled in each polling station where these EVMs had been used as well as the grand total of votes polled in those polling stations. The number of votes polled by each candidate will, however, be shown for the whole group of polling stations to which the EVMs were used and not for any individual polling station making it impossible to know the pattern of voting in a particular polling station.

Q. 30. W What the world thinks of Indian EVMs?
Ans. The Indian EVM is a far simpler machine than its counterpart in the USA. Unlike in USA, our EVM is a stand alone machine which can not be connected to any network and controlled through network or remote. Its original programme contained in a burnt chip can not be altered , making it tamper proof

http://pibmumbai.gov.in/English/PDF/E2009_GE6.PDF
pg 184

[Tanaji]

amit:

You are right of course. In the end its the person that matters in the end. And we have been shafted by this many times over. The debate about EVMs is mainly academic in Indian context.#

Raju:

Not really, or rather it depends on the definition of "network". The Diebold EVMs have an IP interface and can talk to a central server and will upload its results to that central server using the Internet if you wish. The Indian EVMs have no such ability: the totalizer merely connects to it locally, not over any network. Imagine your PC that has 2 web cams connected to it. Is that a network? Yes and no, depends on your definition.

[Sanku]

Now are not these statements mutually contradictory.

which can, at a time, connected with several control units.

Unlike in USA, our EVM is a stand alone machine which can not be connected to any network

No the context in which the network word is used in very different. The machine itself is stand alone during operation. It would need to be counted and then The totalizer (as and when it comes into the picture) can be connected to many such machines for counting, but not their control per se.

[Raju]

what if there is a secret key for control, not usually disclosed to EC personnel or public but to be used by the maintenance personnel.

[Rahul Mehta]

Each EVM costs Rs 9,800, inclusive of tax and excise, and it takes BEL about three months to deliver the units.

So RM was right after all.

Waiting for Tanaji and Sanku to say that I lied and misguide people .

After all, EVM costs Rs 9800 while I said Rs 10,000.

.

[Sanku]

So RM was right after all.

Mehtaji; you are single handedly ruining the reputation of my alma mater (although to be fair I have known kooks while on campus too)

In your usual quest to have Quantum view of events on relativistic time scales, you have omitted to factor in that the price discussion that was being done was when EVM were introduced at a particular time level.

The discussion on price of EVM today can not be made with paper years back.

Please cease and desist on comparing items on time scales.

And please note that this has already been pointed out to you three times before this post.

[Tanaji]

Waiting for Tanaji and Sanku to say that I lied and misguide people .

After all, EVM costs Rs 9800 while I said Rs 10,000.

.

We were comparing existing costs werent we? Have all the EVMs been replaced? No.... So the cost is still Rs. 5,500

Did you not LIE about 500 votes per EVM when the EVM can go up to 3840 votes in a deliberate attempt to mislead people?

Tell me Rahulji, if you want to buy a 5 liter bucket, but will put only 500 mls in it, will the shopkeeper call it a 500 ml bucket or is it a 5 liter bucket?

[Sanku]

what if there is a secret key for control, not usually disclosed to EC personnel or public but to be used by the maintenance personnel.

Which will help how exactly?

[Rahul Mehta]

People here just dont look at it in the right perspective.

If I was the CIA and wanted to have certain candidates to win, what is more easier to me: manipulate the elections by painfully manipulating the EVM, totalizers, polling officials and doing all the defying of time and space laws that Rahul Mehta does, OR
simply bribe the winning candidate??

We all know the standards of the election candidates. Isnt it far easier for me to simply bribe the winner to go as per my agenda? After all, as per Rahul Mehta's definition , I am CIA and have infinite resources!

Tanaji,

Why do you bring "bending time and space"? When did I or any anti-EVM person even remotely mention bending time and space? And when did I call you CIA agent? I only asked you to give schemes and estimates if you were CIA chief in-charge of rigging ballot paper and ballot boxes. That is to show that paper rigging need 100 times more field agents than EVM rigging. I am not calling YOU a CIA agent.

Now answering your question : For CIA, it is cheaper to make already bribed candidate win, because victory of BJP can cause regime change, and next regime may not be as docile as MMS. MMS has most US-loyal PM India ever had. There is possibility that LKA would have been as loyal as MMS, but not guaranteed. In addition, Missionaries too would prefer MMS, Rajmata rule any day compared to BJP rule. And in places like Orissa, they would prefer Patnaik to Congress to BJP. This elections were extremely important for missionaries. The Missionaries want regime to extend SC benefits to Christian SCs.If that happens, over 50% SCs would officially convert within decade. The BJP would never allow Christian SCs to have SC benefits. While Congress, CPM, Nitish, Sharad Yadav, Laloo and BJD have already sold out and agreed to this proposal. Forget Rs 500 cr, Missionaries would be happy to spend 100 times more to keep MMS in power.

IOW, CIA, Missionaries had real reason to see that BJP does worst, Congress does best and in some places BJD and Nitish do well. The question is : given the existing EVM scene, are CIA/Missionaries capable of replacing EVMs? And for me, the more important question is : are EVMs harder to rig or paper ballots harder to rig?

I request you and all to resume to paper vs EVM cost/security comparison.

So I will re-ask :

1. EVM costs Rs 10000 per EVM
2. We used one EVM per 500 voters in May-2009 election
3. How much would 500 paper ballot paper and box cost?

4. How many field agents do you need to at least increase the votes of a Party by 5% of polled voted by ballot stuffing? or replacing ballot boxes?

----

And yes, existing EVMs were never tested. And audits are useless. I know how good PwC auditors were when they "audited" Satya accounts. So I dont trust audits.

[Pranav]

This is a point I accede to, the question of "independent" verification is important. However going by the information quoted from EC, the chips, the boxes and the systems are indeed tested with clearly defined protocols by Govt agencies themselves.

At source rigging (i.e. introduction of hardware+software elements which are rigged) looks very very improbable to me.

I could have believed that rigging was possible if there were override systems which were simple (not a single agent punching buttons in an order) however clearly the discussion shows no such systems in the EVM.

In fact I would agree with Dileep that this is pretty much irrigable system at present in the way it appears. Some one who wants to do rigging would be much more easily served by trying other stunts like polling list manipulation and/or working with EO to caste false votes.

The ballot box stuffing is gone.

Sanku, we disagree as regards what is the level of danger is.

These are the points that have come up in the thread so far:

1. Refusal by EC to publish Hardware and software specs.
2. Refusal by EC to permit independent audits (candidates should be given the right to nominate experts to do the auditing).
3. PSUs outsourcing software development/hardware components
4. Maintenance contracts given to Congress companies.
5. Dileep's checksum method failing to detect trojan code hardwired into a processor cache. More generally, lack of any means to provably verify software and hardware.
6. Well known thuggish antecedents of CEC.
7. presence of elements within the country collaborating with external agencies to maintain control (look again at those articles by Rajinder Puri that I posted/linked to.)

So, the ballot-box stuffing may be gone, but IMHO there remains a clear and present danger of industrial scale rigging.

[Pranav]

Of course, the almighty CIA can design a custom processor that seamlessly executes the code for the original design, plus do the additional stuff from a separate, secretly embedded memory, fabricate the processors, and swap them with the BEL ordered processors.

Quite plausible onlee.

For defense contractors that manufacture billions of dollars worth of top secret equipment each year, would it be that difficult to hardwire a trojan into a controller's cache? Don't think so.

[Sanku]

So, the ballot-box stuffing may be gone, but IMHO there remains a clear and present danger of industrial scale rigging.

Pranav; the question is not whether something wrong can be inserted in step 1.

The question is can something wrong be inserted from steps 1 to N, in a systematic predictable manner to be used accurately.

The question then is can it be done in such an efficient manner that NO ONE knows or talks about it (when booths were stuffed -- EVERY ONE knew)

I dont think anyone has demonstrated a probable series of steps that can be carried out in total secrecy.

Then also the question is -- if you could really do that -- it would be much easier to rig the elections in many other ways and far more difficult to track off. (For example messing up electoral rolls -- which was done in Delhi )