Sunday, April 28, 2024

EVM Petitions - analysis of SCI Judgment of 26th April, 2024 - good part and the curious (bad) parts

 

SCI Judgment of 26th April’24 – Justices misunderstood EVM petitions; fortuitously the relief given, which petitioners never asked for, will reduce chances of hacking considerably

 

The two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India (SCI) delivered its much delayed judgment on ADR’s petition filed a year ago (other petitions were tagged with it), on the day of the second phase polling of General Elections 2024 which had started a week earlier. This was a contest between the citizens of India and ECI and not one between any political party and ECI or the Government – none of the political parties were petitioners. The bench missed this point and gave reliefs that petitioners never asked for. The SCI gave the right to 2nd and 3rd losing contestants to demand audit of devices - EVM (comprising Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail – VVPAT and Control Unit – CU and Ballot Unit - BU) and SLU (Symbol Loading Unit) with the help of BEL and ECIL engineers (para#75 page 37/38 of Order signed by both Justices – Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta; separate order was signed by only JDD).

So, the good part of the order is the directions issued to ECI which will CONSIDERABLY REDUCE the chances of hacking because of the fear of getting caught during the audit, if done honestly and competently. Unless the audit process, in the hands of ECI (BEL and ECIL engineers), is subverted, the risk for hackers getting caught will be great. The order has limited the audit to maximum of 5% of EVMs per constituency – had the losing contestants (number 2 and 3) been allowed to ask for audit of all EVMs, the hacking would have had no chance of escaping detection. The order makes it explicit that the burden of cost of audit will be on the challenger, but it does not speak about the consequences of discovery of malware in the suspected devices – will repoll be ordered around the booth where EVM was deployed, or the whole constituency, or the whole country? The order shows its magnanimity (a lofty sense of justice?) in refunding the cost defrayed by the challenger should any tampering be detected! It is strange that the order did not consider it justifiable to appoint independent auditors in resolving the audit challenge. Independent auditors could have compared the object code (access to source code is not necessary) in the suspected machines with healthy machines provided by ECI and given their verdict about the evidence of tampering, i.e. presence of illegitimate stuff (malware or any foreign software). The order unnecessarily elaborates that “microcontroller’s burnt memory” will be subject to audit – what about the flash memory of 4MB (see paragraph#22 in the order)? For the two types hacks which the Justices didn't understand, the problematic parts of the judgment and a semi-technical note on the EVM hackability read here.

Let’s now consider the curious (bad) part of the order which betrays the misunderstanding on part of the honorable Justices – and which is worthy of a challenge in a review petition. The main petitioner’s Sr advocate, Prashant Bhushan asked for sensible reliefs which would have served to FOIL hacking of EVM System completely. He did not allege that hacking has indeed happened. This does not mean that hacking cannot happen in future becasue of vulnerabilities in the EVM System. He also explained all the important vulnerabilities and tried to elaborate the possibility of malware infiltrating the “programmable memory” of VVPAT but JSK cut him off multiple times – as can be read from proceedings in the court – live updates from independent websites – read here.  

First relief sought was that the voter should be able to verify the correctness of the vote slip printed by the VVPAT AND assure himself/herself that it is cut and dispensed into the ballot box. Prashant Bhushan explained (or tried to) that the existing arrangement is deficient and he offered three alternatives – i) revert to paper ballot, ii) hand over the vote slip to the voter who can verify its correctness and dispense it into a ballot box and iii) keep the light inside the VVPAT behind a dark glass (why on earth this glass should not be transparent is NOT explained satisfactorily by ECI – the secrecy argument is totally specious as the voter compartment is always placed in a corner of the room) illuminated all the time so that the voter would leave the voter compartment only after full satisfaction: the correct slip is printed, cut and dispensed into the ballot box – it is not sufficient to light up the lamp for a mere seven seconds to show the slip to the voter. Amazingly, the order has explicitly denied this right to the voter – JDD elaborates in his separate order – in para#15 & 16 page#48 & 49 - that under Rule 49M(3), it is sufficient to merely show the slip to the voter! Obviously, the Judge never understood the method of hack – in which consecutive votes are stolen and cast in favour of hacker’s party WHEN THE LAMP IS SWITCHED OFF. In this method of hacking, the vote count in CU and VVPAT printed slips would match; watch one of many explanatory demos, using representative machines, how this consecutive votes are stolen demo of 13 min. The Justices elaborate naively in their order that never in the past have discrepancies been reported between the CU count and manual count of VVPAT printed slips, therefore, no hacking could have ever taken place! That hack can happen even when the counts are consistent was not understood at all. The order quite unnecessarily derides the demand for paper ballot (Godi media had also amplified the “retrograde demand of paper ballot”) and the demand for voter slip being handed over to the voter WITHOUT MENTIONING ALL THE THREE ALTERNATIVES. Based the third alternative Prashant Bhushan offered, the Justices should have quizzed the ECI to articulate methods of satisfying the voter that the vote is correctly printed, cut and dispensed into the ballot box – ECI should have specifically answered why it has designed the complicated system of switching light on off and generating an audio beep signal – ECI should have been asked to explain why the simple method of illuminating the cutting operation and dispensing of the slip in the ballot box was not preferred. ECI had revealed in the court that there is a sensor which detects the falling slip and it sends out an audio beep. What if the audio beep signal is generated falsely by a hacked VVPAT? Therefore, the relief of voter verification should have been granted to foil this smart method of hacking. Post-results-audit can also detect this hack, however, the cost of foiling the hack is much smaller than the cost of recovering from the consequences of a hack after it has been allowed to happen.

 

Second relief the petitioners asked for was manual count of 100% vote slips and comparing the same with CU count (the comparison would diminish the errors of manual count – the order shows the wisdom of comparison escaped their comprehension completely). This comparison would serve to foil the simpler, though a dumber, hack of voter pressing the button of one candidate and the vote in the CU being written of another party. In this hack the vote slip of the correct candidate in a manual count would not match with CU count. This hack is easy to catch, therefore, it is not likely to be preferred by a sophisticated hacker. It is a no-brainer that the hacker is not likely to be a run-of-the-mill type; the subversion of Indian elections can entangle trillions of rupees (the General Election 2024 is projected to cost 14 Billion USD) and national security. The order allows only 5% of EVMs to be tallied manually in a constituency. However, it has directed ECI to evaluate bar code printing on the vote slips for possible machine counting in future elections. The denial of this relief was not logical and pennywise pound foolish. According to SY Quraishi the 100% manual count of vote slips cannot be compared with the paper ballot era when the ballot papers could be the size of a newspaper. With small VVPAT printed vote slips, it is feasible to finish counting within one day – watch here. By capping the manual count to 5% of EVMs per constituency, the chances of the second type of hack still remain, however, this is not as much a serious compromise as is the denial of the aforementioned relief of verification by the voter because that allows the smarter hack to still take place. In a review petition, the first relief ought to be demanded and perhaps with a bigger bench, the chances of convincing the judges will be better!

The judgment has many other technical bloopers (for e.g. para#22 the candidate data file is a bit map file – it cannot be so as the candidate name and ID apart from the symbol needs to the transferred). The language used in the SCI order, in many places, seems to be that of BEL or ECIL engineers, as pointed out by Kannan Gopinathan in a recent interview to Poonam Agarwal who had helped unravel the Electoral Bond scam.

     

 

Friday, April 26, 2024

EVM VVPAT curious Judgment of SCI - good thing - it will deter hackers as they could get caught

 

The SCI judgment, of the morning of 26-Apr-24, on the EVM VVPAT petitions delivered zero justice to citizens of India and a partial consolation to political contestants in the Indian elections. No thanks to Political Parties, which never took a consistent or firm stand against the EVM usage, the heroic efforts of Jagdeep Chhokar of ADR represented by Prashant Bhushan and many other petitioners deserve a salute. This is a fight between citizens and ECI, and not between a political contestant and ECI, as the two-judge bench’s order unfortunately seems to project.

Saving grace of SCI order: 

ECI has been ordered to seal the SLU (Symbol Loading Unit – a fancy name of a pen drive which is used to transfer candidate data file into VVPAT) and EVMs after close of polling for a possible audit by engineers of BEL and ECIL. A losing contestant, either 2nd or 3rd, will be allowed to ask for audit of the memory of microcontroller of VVPAT (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail) and CU (Control Unit) within 7 days of results. Bench does not seem to have realized that there is memory outside microcontroller too and the device can be compromised by malware sitting in that memory! Unfortunately, the order has capped the audit as well as manual count of vote slips to previously set limit of 5% per constituency. Regardless of these oddities, this order will deter a hacker as he will fear getting caught during the audit, unless the hacker and the auditors from BEL and ECIL, already accused of being under influence of BJP affiliated directors, are co-conspirators. SCI should have allowed independent auditors to have access to source code to enable them to do audits. However, the bench had refused to divulge the source code earlier. Finally, SCI should have asked ECI to seal the devices effective today instead of 1.5.2024, why allow hackers, if any exist, a free pass?  

The order, with directions to ECI, passed by the two-judge bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta is deficient on many counts and it is very likely that ADR, the lead petitioner, will file for a review by a larger bench. Indian democracy cannot be exposed to the slightest risk. The existing EVM System is easy to hack and many IIT Professors, other than those on Technical Experts Committee of ECI have confirmed this view. 7,000 eminent citizens had filed a petition before ECI but it did not even acknowledge it. General Elections of 2024 are projected to cost 14 Billion Dollars. Hackers, not the run-of-the-mill type, can entangle not only huge money but also national security. SCI must be tested to see if it pays heed to the voice of India’s citizens.

After this Judgment, the possibility of hacking could reduce considerably due to the possibility of the hacker getting caught. If the audit is done honestly and competently, the hacking would be caught surely if the right EVMs (out of 5% per constituency) are picked by the challenging contestant, otherwise he may still escape detection



RELATED

EVM petitions - proceedings in the SCI

Also read previous blogs - the two methods of hacks and the two reliefs petitioners had asked for.

To reduce the hacking chances to zero, the two reliefs necessary are: 1. Voter must be able to verfify her vote is correct, it is cut and it is dispensed into the ballot box before she walks out of the compartment of voting at the polling booth and 2. 100% of VVPAT printed vote slips must be manually counted and compared with the CU count - in whichever EVM there is discrepancy, recount should be automatically trigerred and in case of persistent difference, the manual count should prevail (this is the existing ECI rule anyway).

  Link

Saturday, April 20, 2024

EVM VVPAT Petitions and the SCI - Voter verification even more important than 100% manual vote count (updated 27th April'24)

 The spectacular bluff of two "silos" of data of Electoral Bonds (EB) that State Bank of India (SBI), represented by top lawyers, tried to pull off was live streamed to the whole country from the Supreme Court no.1 in the month of March 2024. The two "silos" were actually two tables of data. Such data of EB buyer and EB recipient in two tables of a Database (or even Excel worksheets) would require not even three minutes to match but the lawyers of SBI, FICCI and GOI asked the five-judge bench to grant them three months. Had SBI used the word tables instead of "silos", any computer literate person could have pointed out that the matching is a trivial exercise of writing one join query in a database or "vlookup" command in an Excel worksheet.


Another more spectacular drama of EVM System hackability has been unfolding in the two-judge bench of the Supreme Court but this time it is not live streamed; as only constitutional bench proceedings are live-streamed at present. This time ECI is the culprit for obfusctions or outright lies which have left everyone confused. What could have been argued and concluded in two hours went on for three days without any order by the bench. As a result the General Elections of 2024 which have commenced from 19th April with status quo on the EVM System which people of India rightly suspect can be gamed.

The petitioners have laboured to convince the court that EVM System has deficiencies and the possible hacks can be easily foiled by making two changes in processes: i) allow voter to verify the correctness of the printed vote slip and ii) manually count all the printed vote slips and compare with the EVM count (in case of discrepancy, as per existing ECI rules, the manual count prevails). ECI's lawyers and experts argued that there is no deficiency; ECI representatives actually lied and made self-contradictory statements (such contradictory statements also exist on ECI's website).

Firstly ECI has claimed that EVM machines are a standalone system - standalone in IT industry means, "not ever connected to Internet or any network (WAN or LAN)". Secondly, ECI claimed that EVM has only "firmware" as opposed to "software". ECI claimed that the VVPAT (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail) into which Symbol Loading Unit (SLU is a "red herring" name for a pen drive, like silo was the fancy name for a data table) has only OTP (One-time-programmable) memory and that no software (or malware) can be transferred into it through the SLU or by any other means. Both these claims are contradicted by ECI's own admission - as visible on its website pages. 

Search for "standalone" and "OTP" in the linked note here and here - you will find multiple occurrences of "standalone", "laptop" and "OTP" - you can read in five minutes in context what ECI has mentioned. EVM machines (BU, CU and VVPAT) are not the whole picture - EVM System is the whole picture - it comprises of a Central Server to be accessed via Internet, Laptop (in the custody of DEO/RO) and SLU. EVM System by no means is a standalone system and VVPAT has programmable memory too. This being the case, malware (software written by a hacker) can enter the system: via the central server or via the Internet into the Laptop, via the Laptop into the SLU, and finally via the SLU into the VVPAT's programmable memory. This infiltration of malware can occur with or without the knowledge of District Election Officer/Returning Officer or field engineers deployed in the over 1.2 million booths to commission the EVM during the 15 days prior to poll commencement. The malware can make the VVPAT misbehave as per multiple parameters set by the hacker, for e.g. date, time slots, constituency, the party to favour, the party to steal votes from, preceding rate of voting (i.e. misbehave only when there is rush) etc. Prashant Bhushan, ADR's Sr advocate, did try to explain some of these characteristics but the Justices cut him off frequently. 

The petitioners have made very sensible and feasible demands. Will the bench grant these reliefs? Without these reliefs, the 2024 Election's system will be highly fraught and its results untrustworthy. The public, at least a large section, will lose complete faith in the ECI's and GOI's democratic credentials.

Reliefs sought:

RELIEF # 1 to defeat 1st method of "steal the same successive votes - hack": The voter should be able to pick up the VVPAT printed slip for verification and physically insert it into the ballot box; else the voter should be able to see the vote slip printed is correct and it is actually cut and dispensed into the ballot box - it is not sufficient for the voter to just see the vote slip (because it could be the previous voter's slip which has not been cut and dispensed due to a hack) - this means the light should remain on and not merely for seven seconds, as is presently the case. This is a clever hack because it cannot be caught - the stolen consecutive 2nd or 3rd or successive votes (as parameterised) - cast in favour of the hacker's party - will not be seen because their printing, cutting, dispensing into ballot box and writing into the CU will all occur only when the light is in the switched off state and in few seconds after the button for a different party's candidate is pressed by a subsequent voter or when the stealing parameter count is reached. In this hack, the vote count in CU and the manual count of VVPAT printed votes will match. Therefore, even a 100% manual vote count cannot foil this hack. This delayed printing of consecutive vote will likely be the preferred method of hack.
 
RELIEF # 2 to defeat the 2nd method of "print correct vote slip but write vote in CU for hacker's party candidate - hack": The election results should be based on a manual count of 100% slips. In case of discrepancy between the manual count and the CU count, recounts may be ordered. Ultimately, the manual count would prevail and not the CU Count. This change in process is required to foil the second method of possible hack of VVPAT printing a vote slip for one party and writing into the CU a vote of another party. Compared to the above method of hack, this one is laible to be caught and, therefore, less likely to be preferred by the hacker.
 
RELIEF # 3 for safe transport: After the Polling finishes, the CU and the Ballot Box pairs are transported to the counting station. During the journey, oversight of contestants' representatives should be allowed.
 
RELIEF #4 for enabling genuine complaints: Presently a voter who complains to the Presiding Officer (PO) in the Polling Booth that his/her vote is not properly generated, i.e. the VVPAT has printed the wrong vote - is required to prove the allegation is correct through a retest. If the error is repeated well and good but if it is not repeatable, the voter can face a fine of up to Rs.1,000 and imprisonment of up to 3 months or both. It is a matter of common knowledge that programs can be written to work with random parameters or based on parameters such that without the knowledge of source code, no one can predict if the error will repeat nor when it will repeat. The punishment under rule 49MA - Section 177, should be totally removed as it is illogical, and it works as a deterrent for genuine voter complaints - unless source code is made public, and its auditability allowed before and during elections.  
   
The RELIEF#1 and 2 are essential but the 1st one is more important. Without these changes, the results of 2024 General Elections will always be suspect.

Both ECI and SCI have treated the challenges to the EVM usage in elections with contempt and derision. Requests for a meeting of political parties, citizens councils and lawyers to ECI have been ignored, not even acknowledged.

The petitions principally focused on EVM vulnerabilities have been pending with the SCI for many months or even years. In March'24, when Kapil Sibal and Prashant Bhushan, on behalf of ADR (Association of Democratic Reforms) requested SCI for an urgent hearing since the General Elections 2024 were set to start from 19-Apr-24, they were told that there are many pending matters and their pleas will be heard and decided before the polling starts.

The bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta finally heard the petitioners on 16th April, 18th April and 24th April for about 2.5 days and finally reserved the order. On 24th April the bench had asked ECI to provide answers to six questions. One question was about the repgrammability of microcontroller program in the EVM - in the VVPAT or the CU? This is a wrong question to ask. Even if the program is unalterable because it sits in the OTP memory, the device can be hacked - by malware being loaded into the programmable memory (VVPAT has both OTP and programmable memory) and intercepting the commands going into or out of the program. So the elections have started with status quo being maintained, no one knows when and what the bench will rule on the two main demands of the petitioners.

RELATED



Search for "laptop" in the proceedings - live updates from Bar & Bench here
There is a crucial fact of use of a laptop in every election cycle in every constituency, possibly every booth, where "EVM" must be commissioned within two weeks prior to polling date - this has always been obfuscated by ECI. Judge asks an incoherent but a leading and somewhat meaningless question, "software by ECI has a lock mechanism". Firstly, the software according to ECI does not exist in VVPAT - only firmware exists in VVPAT, secondly ECI itself does not have software which is kept secret by BEL and ECIL; no one knows what is meant by "lock in mechanism", ECI does not provide an answer either.
  
Excerpts (copied from Bar & Bench updates):

12:03 pm, 18 Apr 2024
  •   
  •  
Supreme Court: The SLUs are not stored to ensure that there is no tampering. etc.? Of course, very difficult.. SLU is done from the computers.. laptop etc used by returning officer.. The software by ECI has a lock in mechanism.

ECI: Yes, it is a secured software.

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

21-Apr-24 The Leaflet this article reproduces portions of the proceedings and highlights the relevant issues here


Terminology primer for non-IT readers:

Any computer system or an intelligent device (e.g. VVPAT, Smartphone) works with the following components:

Hardware
Firmware - this sits in OTP (one-time-programmable) memory
Operating System - OS (or Control Program) - this sits in programmable memory
Application Program
Data (input from keypad or sensors or attached devices like pen drive)

Hacker corrupts the Operating System or the Control Program - if someone has the source code (or even the object code - from the set of stolen EVM machines - object code could be retrieved and reverse compiled - this is surely within the reach of a sophisticated hacker) then malware can be written into the programmable memory - in context of VVPAT, this can be done at the time SLU is inserted for copying the candidate data file; the SLU would likely be infected via the DEO/RO's laptop. 

Any laptop requires an OS and the OS can be infiltrated by malware knowingly or unknowingly by the user. Everyone knows when a computer is connected to Internet, virus can enter the computer - even if anti-virus program is installed on the device - this happens unknowingly - user can also download a malware knowingly, if he wants to. Everyone knows Windows OS is easy to hack, that's why antivirus programs are necessary to instal. Most of the computers today run under Windows OS. We donot know which OS runs on the laptops the DEO/RO use in commissioning the EVM. ECI representative at some point mentioned in the court that PO's (Polling Officer) laptop is used in commissioning of EVM, whereas on ECI website, it says, DEO/RO's laptop is used. The SLU (pen drive) inserted into an infected laptop will carry the malware and transfer it into any other computer or intelligent device (like the VVPAT) into which it is inserted. This is not rocket science.


Saturday, March 23, 2024

Election Reforms for India - EVM and Political funding - immediate fixes required to save democracy

This blog is not a plea for junking the EVM System, rather about making two process changes and junking few rules that thwart legitimate challenges. This will make the EVM System safe to use - the citizens will be saved from hacking that any party or anyone (a hostile country) with resources can EASILY execute in the existing system. 

[Reference links given at the bottom. If you want to cut to chase, the link related to challenges to EVM copied here: Challenges to EVM and reaction of authorities ]

 

In a democracy, it is said, the people get the government they deserve. But what if the election process gets or can get compromised (hacked)? What if only one side gets all the resources to campaign and fight elections by tilting "the level playing field"? Both these problems have become manifest in India, and it is unlikely they can be resolved without the intervention of the Supreme Court of India. With what India has now begun to be called a "Electoral Autocracy", will very soon turn into a "Sham Democracy" or a "Total Dictatorship"; very far from "Mother of Democracy" boast of PM Modi.

Election Commission of India (ECI), an "independent constitutional authority", has announced India’s 18th Parliamentary Elections in seven phases 19th April through 1st June 2024 (a record duration of 44 days) with results scheduled to be announced three days later. ECI will setup 1.2 million polling booths across 543 Parliamentary Constituencies in which 960 million eligible voters could exercise their franchise. In the 2019 General Elections, 669 Political Parties and 3,469 independent candidates contested, and each one was allotted a unique symbol by the ECI.
ECI uses the Electronic Voting Machine System which has been hyped as the “Gold Standard”. Using the EVM System, the results can be announced within three days or else with manual counting, it may take about a week. The reality is that EVM System uses obsolete technology coupled with Internet and millions of staff to conduct the elections whereas India has the necessary Digital Public Infrastructure to conduct online elections in a fraction of the time and cost.
The 2019 General Elections involved an expense estimated at $ 8 Billion and the 2024 General Elections are projected to cost $ 14 Billion making them the costliest in the world. BJP (Bhartiya Janta Party) the ruling party, is estimated to have outspent ALL other parties put together in 2019. The skew will likely become greater in 2024. This is apparent from the partial disclosure of “white money” BJP mobilised through Electoral Bonds (white money is mobilised via banking channels and black money outside it). The black money every party mobilises and spends in elections is estimated to be 10x times the white money. There is little or no transparency in political funding – it was always fraught with quid pro quo but now it has emerged that extortion by the ruling party is routinely being used. SCI recently ruled EB to be illegal and forced State Bank of India and ECI to publish all details of bonds purchased and encashed by all political parties in the interest of transparency and curbing extortion and quid pro quo.    
With the above background information, let us consider the two problems and fixes one by one.

First, the EVM System which can upend the election results - what are the fixes:

After many curious results in 2019 elections, there have been multiple petitions filed in the Courts including, the Supreme Court of India (SCI) as ECI has either refused meetings sought by Opposition leaders or summarily dismissed all challenges. SCI has either turned down appeals for many of the reforms sought or dismissed them. However, in the past few months, particularly after statistical improbabilities of certain results were highlighted in a research paper, entitled “Democratic Backsliding in the World’s Largest Democracy” by Sabyasachi Das (who resigned afterwards from Ashoka University due to backlash) and also technical repudiations of claims ECI has made - (a) EVM is NOT a standalone system and (b) the VVPAT is NOT an One-Time-Programmable (OTP) device - by Kannan Gopinathan, who had work experience as an engineer with Motorola, as an ex-IAS Government officer and as an ex-Returning Officer (RO is in charge of conducting elections in a district) - the question of hackability has been closely examined and confirmed by many technical and industry experts. Furthermore, demos have shown how the EVM System can be gamed. The opposition to the manner of EVM usage has now picked up steam. ECI itself contradicts both its claims (those repudiated by Kannan Gopinathan) in its presentation and FAQ pages on its website. CCE (Citizens Commission on Elections) and ADR (Association of Democratic Reforms) and others have filed multiple petitions against use of EVMs and SCI has finally agreed to hear these before the end of March’24. Over 7K eminent citizens have signed petitions - these include retired Supreme Court Judges, retired Secretaries of GOI, Lawyers, Activists and Computer Science Professors.  
Just so that we are clear of the terminology, let’s understand what “EVM” is versus “EVM System” - the graphics below are copied from ECI website - red colour annotations are added. In the ECI website pages revised in Feb’24, the “EVM” consists of these three machines (CU, VVPAT and BU):
 



 
To commission the above three machines, the following devices are also employed (not disclosed by ECI in any public document), and most importantly, it is nowhere mentioned by ECI that Laptop needs to be connected via Internet to a central server (presumably belonging to ECI) which has the data of contestants (candidate names, ID, and symbol):
 




It is important to note that within 15 days before polling commences, the “commissioning” must be done: Symbol Loading Unit (SLU) is connected to a laptop for downloading the symbols of candidates from the central server accessible via Internet, then it is inserted into the VVPAT for uploading the same – it is at this moment, a rogue program can infiltrate the VVPAT AND EVM SYSTEM COMPROMISED. The hacker needs to subvert only few field staff – only in those booths which matter to his side. The hackers’ planners undoubtedly have booth level voters’ list – available in public domain; they know which are “sensitive” booths – which can swing the results. As there are over a million EVM Systems to be commissioned, within 15 days, there is an army of field staff hired by ECIL and BEL. Electronic Corporation of India and Bharat Electronics are the two public sector units which supply EVM hardware, firmware, and software. News has emerged that BEL’s board includes 3-4 BJP officers. To say the least, the EVM commissioning process in million plus booths should be a security nightmare for any System Designer. Why ECI has not discussed – the process in which Internet access via a laptop becomes necessary - in either its FAQ or Presentation pages – is a question begging to be asked.
 
It is also ironical that none of the well-known IT tycoons of India has spoken out about the obsolete design and vulnerabilities of the "EVM System". In the meanwhile, ECI is flogging the “invincible EVM” assessments of few IIT Professors (all on Government's payroll) of whom 2 or 3 on their expert committee, hold patents over the VVPAT design. The conflict of interest, as well as the fact that none of these professors are security experts, does not bother the ECI; nor the fact that the software source code is not divulged by ECIL and BEL to ECI. The ECI presentations do not distinguish the "EVM" (three animals) and "EVM System" (six animals with Internet connectivity). One would wonder if ECI is innocent, or it is obfuscating terminologies and hiding the details of commissioning process, which makes the EVM System easily hackable, on purpose.
 
Just as the rewards or stakes of hacking India's elections bear no comparison with hacking of an organisation's or an individual's account, so also the calibre and organisational wherewithal of the former are expected to be many magnitudes higher than the latter. Motivation for subversion of India’s elections can entangle not just trillions of rupees but national security too.
 
 



 
 
 
In the existing process (graphic copied from ECI website), this is what happens (or can happen):
 
  1. An elector (voter) walks into the Polling Station (PS) with an ID proof. S/he walks up to the row of Polling Agents of Political parties, and they tick off the name after verifying his/her name on the voters list. If name is not found, the voter is not allowed to vote. [It is alleged that many voter names are deleted by ECI due to system deficiencies or mala fide designs of the ruling party.]
  2. Indelible ink is smeared with a thin swab on one finger of the eligible voter. [ECI is not sure if the same voter is listed multiple times in different locations (booths) as there is no citizen ID in India at present.]
  3. The voter walks up to the Voting Compartment and waits to press a button on the BU to register his/her vote. The BU has the names of contestants and election symbols adjacent to buttons. Max 16 names per BU - they can be daisy-chained.
  4. The Polling Officer with the CU presses a key to enable the BU to register a vote.
  5. After hearing the audio beep that tells everyone in the room that BU is enabled to accept one vote, the voter pushes a button on the BU to register his/her vote.
  6. A tiny window with one way mirror glass on the VVPAT lights up for 7 seconds during which the voter can see the voting slip with the name of the candidate and symbol! Voter must assume that this slip is not of the previous voter - though there is no telling it could well be of the previous voter who voted for the same candidate - a hacked VVPAT could behave in this manner. If the visible slip is NOT as per the vote cast, then the Voter can complain to the Presiding Officer, and fill out a form to nullify the "wrong vote". There is an intimidating process to rectify the error - which includes actions to "prove" that the machines are misbehaving! Failure to prove the misbehaviour attracts a penalty of Rs.1,000 and imprisonment of three months! VVPAT is supposed to write a record of the vote in the CU; a hacked VVPAT could well write a vote in favour of a candidate of hacker's choice.
  7. The voter having cast his/her vote, walks out trusting the vote is recorded correctly in the CU and that the slip s/he saw in the VVPAT has been indeed dispensed in ballot box. It could well be that the slip has NOT been dispensed in the ballot box nor recorded in the CU. A hacked VVPAT could behave like this - hold all consecutive votes of an adversary party (adversary of the hacker's party) until a vote is cast of a different party - upon that happening, the hacked VVPAT could print and dispense all the votes it had held back, in favour of the hacker's party candidate, and record the votes in the CU consistent with the printed slips!     
CJI recently said, "The great stabilizing force in the country is the purity of the election process". As ECI is clearly aligned with the Government, it is only the SCI that can provide a solution.
What exactly is the fix for the EVM System that will foil the above hacks and is feasible to implement before the polling starts on 19th April 2024? It is really a very easy fix that SCI can order:  
 
CHANGE # 1 The voter should be able to pick up the VVPAT printed slip for verification and physically insert it into the ballot box.
 
CHANGE # 2 The election results should be based on a manual count of 100% slips. In case of discrepancy between the manual count and the CU count, up to two recounts may be ordered. Ultimately, the manual count would prevail and not the CU Count. 
 
CHANGE # 3 After the Polling finishes, the CU and the Ballot Box pairs are transported to the counting station. During the journey:
i) CU and Ballot Box pairs should NOT be transported and stored together and
ii) Oversight of contestants' representatives should be allowed.
 
CHANGE #4 Presently a voter who complains to the Presiding Officer (PO) in the Polling Booth that his/her vote is not properly generated, i.e. the VVPAT has printed the wrong vote - is required to prove the allegation is correct through a retest. If the error is repeated well and good but if it is not repeatable, the voter can face a fine of up to Rs.1,000 and imprisonment of up to 3 months or both. It is a matter of common knowledge that programs can be written to work with random parameters or based on parameters such that without the knowledge of source code, no one can predict if the error will repeat nor when it will repeat. The punishment under rule 49MA - Section 177, should be totally removed as it is illogical, and it works as a deterrent for genuine voter complaints - unless source code is made public, and its auditability allowed before and during elections.  
 
Anything more than above demands in petitions pending in the SCI, may not be feasible to implement in the short time available before the elections. Anything less will not eliminate the threat of the election results getting hijacked.
Manual count in 100% of polling stations may take one week at most for counting which is trivial considering the current schedule which is of 47 days: 44 days for polling + 3 days for counting.

Summary:
Remember the VVPAT hack can be of two types -

  • The vote slip dispensed, and the vote recorded in CU are consistent but NOT according to the vote cast on the BU, therefore, Change # 1 of verification by voter is required
  • The vote slip dispensed is consistent with the actual vote cast, but the vote recorded in CU is NOT, therefore, Change # 2 of rule of manual count compared with CU count and manual count to prevail, is required
  • The possibility of a fraud of replacing the CU and Ballot Box pairs is non-trivial because a RTI based PIL had revealed that whereabouts of many EVM Systems are not known to ECI. Therefore, Change # 3 of rule of transportation is required
  • The punishment should be totally removed as it is based on an illogical premise of predictability of hacked programs, and it deters genuine complaints of voters. If source code is made public, independent auditors can confirm if VVPAT, BU and CU are working as per original program; this will allow citizens to prove hacking else it is NOT provable. Therefore, Change #4 of rule of fines or punishment should be removed or else the source code should be made public and the option of auditability of the source code should be provided
 

Second, the pernicious political funding system which reduces chances of honest and smart candidates winning elections - fixes required

Funding reforms that can be done immediately


  • ECI should mandate 100% disclosure of all funds mobilised by every contestant and every political party. In todays world this is easy and the name of the donor, his identifier, the amount of donation and date should be the minimum data included in the list to be published on the website of the party or individual or ECI provided platform. At present donations below Rs.2,000 need not be disclosed. This loop hole is exploited by parties - one party had claimed that its entire funding was of smaller donations, therefore, not a single name was disclosed!
  • The elections expense caps which apply to contestants should be totally removed. The expense caps are so low that virtually all contestants are forced to tell lies because they spend much more money than is legally allowed. Those who do not have unaccounted (black) money, tend to lose out. The existing system reduces the chances of honest and smart candidates winning elections and it rewards those who have lot of black money and who can manipulate the system and get others to spend on their behalf (with quid pro quo of course). 
  • The State should provide free airtime on its TV channels – national and regional - to all contestants. It should also arrange leading three or four contestants to debate so that voters are better informed before they vote. The moderators can be selected by the candidates themselves. The recorded debates and statements of objects should be made available on ECI's portal.    
 
The above election reforms related to political funding will improve the transparency and reduce costs candidates incur in fighting elections. At the same time the citizens will make more informed decisions and the candidates become more accountable because their statements can be recalled by voters, and their accomplishments, can be compared with their promises or objects.
The reforms that can be done in the next five years (2024 – 2029) – before the General Elections of April-June 2029
In the previous Elections of 2019, of those 900 million eligible voters, 67% voted. The largest share of votes was polled by BJP. With 37.4% vote-share, BJP bagged 303 seats; they can thank India’s First Past The Post (FPTP) system for the disproportionate seat-share of 55.8% (absolute majority) they got. The NDA (National Democratic Alliance) of which BJP was the main partner, polled 45% of the votes and won 353 seats which amounts to 65% seat-share in the 543-member lower house of the Indian Parliament – Lok Sabha (LS).
The Two Round System (TRS) followed by France ensures the winner has at least obtained 50% votes. India uses TRS for President and Vice-President elections but not for legislators in LS or State Assemblies (Vidhan Sabha). With TRS, the Opposition parties with similar ideologies (aka “secular” ideologies), or the types which conflict with the right-wing Sangh Parivar ideology (aka Hindu Supremacist ideology), would have fared better because their votes which get splintered in the first round would likely coalesce in the second round in a one-on-one contest; in TRS, if in the first round no candidate wins over 50% votes, the top two candidates in the first round, get to contest in the second round. Therefore, in TRS, Opposition parties and not BJP would have obtained the majority of seats in the Parliament. The election reform of replacing FPTP system with TRS could ensure a far more representative democracy in India as India has multiple parties and often coalition governments, unlike in USA which has two dominant parties. Even without a pre-poll alliance, the Opposition parties would have defeated the BJP in 2019 – a completely different outcome would have been assured – one which would better reflect the preference of the majority (62.6%) of the voters. The irony is that Modi is pushing forward the reform of “One-Nation-One-Poll” (ONOP) whereas the Opposition has no interest in advocating alternative systems – one wonders if they have any clue about the importance of the TRS in context of INDIA grouping they are trying to create before the 2024 elections?  ONOP, it is argued will save costs and time whereas an online voting system can save far more cost and time. Even while continuing the FPTP system, an online system can easily replace the obsolete EVM System and assure greater security – reliability and cost savings.
 
 
RELATED REFERENCES:
 
Challenges updated - on 1-Apr-24 SCI has issued notice to ECI in the petition against EVM processes

how Iran Nuclear fuel processing centrifuges were knocked out by CIA even though Iran's engineers had claimed the plant had "stand alone" systems - just like ECI is claiming their devices are in a "stand alone" state - they allow connecting a SLU before commissioning the system - this is sufficient to infiltrate a rogue program into VVPAT. The hacking can be done selectively - in certain systems only - as all the machines have unique IDs. The rogue program can behave according to a date - time - number of votes cast - schedule - thus defeating the FLC which ECI pompously claims is sufficient proof of proper functioning of the EVM system. They are fooling the public or they are ignorant.

 

EVM System - updated website - new revelations and questions 

(ECI has updated its website pages; new FAQ on 7-Feb-24, Presentation too is changed; probably in response to recent protests and demos of hacking; it has now changed the definition of EVM - earlier it used to mean BU and CU but now it includes VVPAT; so, EVM now cannot be claimed to be OTP device as VVPAT has programmable memory; furthermore EVM System, is more than EVM but ECI is silent on it). 

 

ECI presentation on EVMs - false claims and misrepresentations discussed in this note

 

Are EVM System components OTP type devices? No clear answer from ECI/GOI

 

The hardware in EVM System of today can be easily replaced by Smartphones running a secure App - within weeks

 

Kannan Gopinath's interview on EVM system hackability

Read about the two hack demos. Recently hacks of EVM System were demonstrated and videos shown on 4pm News Network. In these hacks the VVPAT votes differently from the actual votes cast - the slips printed and vote recorded in the CU were consistent. Therefore, the manual count of slips and the count from the CU would match. This type of fraud can only be prevented if Demand#1 is met, else it would require software audit but that is not possible as ECI and SCI have said that software is secret. SCI on the one hand ecourages Open Source - but on the other hand, in this particular instance, it protects the IPR of a ridiculously simple program - GOI can easily get the same software developed in Open Source or buy the IPR for cost which is not likely to exceed few million rupees! Another intriguing thing to read about is that 1.9 Million EVM Systems have gone missing - The Wire article of 22-May-19.

 The Wire article series on multiple issues including EVMs "India Black Boxed":

4-Jan-24 MK Venu

24-Feb-24 Venkatesh Nayak


EVM Opposition - by senior leaders - call for reforms - urgency ignored by ECI and SCI - 2024 General Elections become fraught

 

Political funding existing in India today is recognised as the fountainhead of corruption: Notes

 

SBI stonewalling SCI - is it perjury and contempt? SCI's honour was at stake - partially redeemed

 

How BJP raises its funds - white (5% to 10%) and black (90% to 95%) - world's biggest and most corrupt party

 

On-line voting and political funding India requires: Blog

 

 

Thursday, February 8, 2024

EVM System usage in 2024 General Elections - minimum demands necessary to place before SCI and ECI

IN A DEMOCRACY PEOPLE GET THE GOVERNMENT THEY DESERVE - BUT WHAT IF THE ELECTION PROCESS IS COMPROMISED?

Anything can be made more complex than it really is. However, the looming threat due to the existing EVM System usage process, coupled with the attitude of ECI and SCI, is so serious and complex that political party leaders, technical experts, lawyers and activists must collaborate. Without collaboration and a unified approach, it will be tough to mount a credible campaign to counter the threat to "purity of the election process".


This note has references to old notes and one new note on an online solution - all links (in orange colour) provided below. Just so that we are clear of the terminology, copied below is the existing EVM usage (graphics copied from ECI website - however, red colour annotations are added):


IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WITHIN 15 DAYS BEFORE POLLING COMMENCES, SLU IS CONNECTED TO LAP TOP FOR DOWN LOADING THE CANDIDATES + SYMBOLS DATA FROM THE CENTRAL SERVER  AND THEN IT IS INSERTED INTO VVPAT FOR UPLOADING THE SAME - IT IS AT THIS MOMENT, A ROGUE PROGRAM CAN INFILTRATE THE VVPAT AND EVM SYSTEM COMPROMISED. HACKER NEEDS TO SUBVERT ONLY FEW FIELD STAFF IN THOSE BOOTHS WHICH MATTER MOST TO HACKER'S MASTER. AS THERE ARE OVER A MILLION EVMS TO BE COMMISSIONED, WITHIN 15 DAYS, THERE HAS GOT TO BE AN ARMY OF FIELD STAFF HIRED BY ECIL AND BEL. TO SAY THE LEAST, THIS SHOULD BE A SECURITY NIGHTMARE FOR ANY SYSTEM DESIGNER. WHY HAS ECI NOT DISCUSSED THE RISKS IN THIS SORT OF OPERATION IS A QUESTION BEGGING TO BE ASKED. It is also ironical that none of the well-known IT tycoons of India has spoken out about the obsolete design of the "EVM System" and its hackability, instead ECI is flogging the assessments of IIT Professors (on Government's payroll) about the "non-hackability" of the "EVM" (do they even know the difference between the "EVM" and "EVM System", one ought to ask). Just as the rewards or stakes of hacking India's elections bear no comparison with ordinary hacking of an organisation's or an individual's account, expectedly the calibre and organisational wherewithal of the two sets of hacker groups are non-comparable. [Read in the RELALTED links below, the story of Stuxnet virus and ECI presentations and FAQ anomalies and lies] 





In the existing process, this is what happens (or can happen):

  1. An elector (voter) walks into the Polling Station (PS) with an ID proof. S/he walks up to the row of Polling Agents of Political parties and they tick off the name after verifying his/her name on the voters list. If name is not found, the voter is not allowed to vote; s/he is asked to exit the booth.
  2. Indelible ink is smeared on one finger of the eligible voter.
  3. The voter walks up to the Voting Compartment and waits to press a button on the BU to register his/her vote. The BU has the names of contestants and election symbols adjacent to buttons. Max 16 names per BU - they can be daisy-chained.
  4. The Polling Officer with the CU presses a key to enable the BU to register a vote.
  5. The voter pushes a button to register his/her vote after hearing the audio beep that tells everyone that BU is enabled to accept one vote.
  6. VVPAT lights up for 7 seconds during which the voter can see the voting slip with the name of the candidate and symbol. Voter must assume that this slip is not of the previous voter - though there is no telling it could well be of the previous voter - a hacked VVPAT could behave in this manner. If the visible slip is NOT as per the vote cast then the Voter can complain and fill out a a form to nullify the "wrong vote". There is an intimidating process to rectify the error - which includes actions to "prove" that the machines are misbehaving! VVPAT is supposed to write a record of the vote in the CU; a hacked VVPAT could well write a vote in favour of a candidate of hacker's choice.
  7. The voter having cast his/her vote walks out trusting the the vote is recorded correctly in the CU and that the slip s/he saw in the VVPAT has been indeed dispensed in ballot box. It could well be that the the slip has NOT been dispensed in the ballot box nor recorded in the CU. A hacked VVPAT could behave like this - hold all consecutive votes of an adversary party (adversary of the hacker's party) until a vote is cast of a different party - upon that happening, the hacked VVPAT could print and dispense all the votes it had held back, in favour of the hacker's party candidate and also record the votes in the CU consistent with the printed slips!      
 
This note is prepared with the intention to sensitise few more influencers and politicians who can mobilise public opinion against the continuance of the EVM usage in the present form. Regarding the pitch to be made before the ECI/SCI - what exactly should be the demand that is feasible to implement within weeks - to mitigate the risks of hijacking of the 2024 General Elections? We all believe that the outcome of upcoming General Election will be pivotal for the future (secular and democratic) character of the country.

  1. CJI recently said, "The great stabilizing force in the country is the purity of the election process". Ironically, the existing EVM usage process is DEMONSTRABLY HACKABLE - what makes it doubly fraught is that existing rules PREVENT AUDITABILITY and ECI is not prepared to engage with the citizens who have sought a meeting. To repeat - the present processes and rules allow a certain type of hacking to be done and the hack is not provable - this is a mockery of democracy and we should jettison such a set of processes and rules. As ECI is clearly aligned with the Government, it is only the SCI that can provide a solution. If SCI does not grant the following demands, the opposition ought to boycott all elections.

1.1 DEMAND#1 THE VOTER SHOULD BE ABLE TO PICK UP THE SLIP TO VERFIY ITS CORRECTNESS AND THEN PHYSICALLY INSERT IT INTO THE BALLOT BOX.   Or else the voter should be assured that the vote slip coming out of VVPAT, after the vote is cast (by pressing the button on the BU), has the right candidate name and symbol AND it is dispensed into the ballot box. At present the slip is illuminated for 7 seconds behind a one way mirror in the VVPAT and the voter CANNOT EASILY recognise the candidate name or the symbol AND FURTHERMORE, THE VOTER CANNOT FIND OUT IF THE SLIP IS ACTUALLY DISPENSED INTO THE BALLOT BOX. THEREFORE, THE VVPAT SHOULD BE RECONFIGURED (OPENED UP) FOR ENABLING EASY RECOGNITION OF CANDIDATE'S NAME & SYMBOL ON THE SLIP AND ITS DISPENSATION INTO THE BALLOT BOX.

1.2 DEMAND#2 The results should not be based on the count read off from the memory of the Control Unit (CU) rather it should be based on a MANUAL COUNT of 100% SLIPS or RECOUNT IN CASE OF DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE MANUAL COUNT AND THE CU COUNT. To further reduce the chances of errors of the manual count, TWO RECOUNTS MAY BE ORDERED, IF NECESSARY. 

1.3 DEMAND#3 After the Polling finishes, the CU and the Ballot Box pairs are supposed to be transported to the counting station and en route they have to be stored for many hours or even days. ECI has prescribed an elaborate and secure process for transportation and storage but it precludes presence or oversight of contestants' representatives. Fraud can be committed by replacing the sets of the pair of CU and Ballot Box. To mitigate risks - i) CU and Ballot Box pairs should NOT be transported and stored together and ii) Oversight of contestants' representatives should be allowed.

1.4 DEMAND#4 Presently a voter who complains to the Presiding Officer in the Polling Booth that his/her vote is not properly generated, i.e. the VVPAT has printed the wrong vote - is required to prove the allegation is correct through a retest - if the error is repeated well and good but if it is not repeatable, the voter can face a fine of up to Rs.1,000 and imprisonment of up to 6 months or both. It is a matter of common knowledge that hacked programs can be made to misbehave erratically or based on parameters such that without the knowledge of source code, no one can predict if the error will repeat or when it will repeat. The punishment under rule 49MA - Section 177, should be totally removed as it is illogical, and it works as a deterrent for genuine voter complaints - unelsss source code is made public and its auditability allowed before and during elections.  


  1. Anything more than above demands may not be feasible to implement in the short time available before the elections. Anything less will not eliminate the threat of the election results getting hijacked. By getting bar coded slips, the counting process can be hastened by few hours. However, again the hacked VVPAT  could print a bar code different from the correct candidate id / symbol printed on the slip. So further sample audit will be needed and this is avoidable complexity. It is also doubtful if 1 million+ bar code printers can be procured and fitted up in VVPAT in the available time. The demand of junking EVMs and switching over to paper ballot is neither feasible in the short time available nor necessary. There are many advantages of continuting to use the existing infrastructure and processes in which millions of people are trained. The demands listed here are entirely feasible to make and will ensure a FAIR and SAFE process.

  1. Manual count in 100% of polling stations may add one or two days which is trivial considering the elections are conducted for a period longer than a month. The 2019 General Elections were scheduled from 11-Apr-2019 to 19-May-2019. ECI website shows that over one million polling stations were setup. Each BU can accommodate only 16 names, with greater number of contestants more BUs would be required. Each CU has a capacity to record max of 2K votes.

  1. In summary, the demand for software auditability will encompass disclosure of software and its revisions, setting up auditors panel, process of audit challenge by contestants and its resolution - for all of these both SCI ruling and ECI cooperation will be required which may be difficult to obtain. ECI will likely not cooperate with this demand as it is perfectly aligned with GOI. Therefore, absent the software auditability, there is no alternative to the demands formulated above. At least the first two must be acquiesced to - if any one is granted it is not sufficient. Remember the VVPAT hack can be of two types -

    4.1 the vote slip dispensed and and the vote recorded in CU are consistent but NOT according to the actual vote cast (hence demand#1 is made)

    4.2 the vote slip dispensed is consistent with the actual vote cast but the vote recorded in CU is NOT (hence demand#2 is made)

    4.3 The possibility of a fraud of replacing the CU and Ballot Box pairs is non-trivial because a RTI based PIL had revealed that whereabouts of 1.9 Million EVM Systems are not known to ECI.
4.4 The punishment should be totally removed as it is based on an illogical prmise of predictability of hacked programs and it deters gneuine complaints of voters. If source code is made public, independent auditors can confirm if VVPAT  BU and CU are working as per original program; this will allow citizens to prove hacking else it is NOT provable. Therefore, no fines or punishment should be inflicted on a complainant without the option of auditability of the source code.

  

To dig deeper, refer to other notes for which links are copied below.  


RELATED REFERENCES:

Read the "Stuxnet" virus story - how Iran Nuclear fuel processing centrifuges were knocked out by CIA even though Iran's engineers had claimed the plant had "stand alone" systems - just like ECI is claiming their devices are in a "stand alone" state - they allow connecting a SLU before commissioning the system - this is sufficient to infiltrate a rogue program into VVPAT. The hacking can be done selectively - in certain systems only - as all the machines have unique IDs. The rogue program can behave according to a date - time - number of votes cast - schedule - thus defeating the FLC which ECI pompously claims is sufficient proof of proper functioning of the EVM system. They are fooling the public or they are ignorant.

EVM System - updated website - new revelations and questions (ECI has updated its website pages; new FAQ on 7-Feb-24, Presentation too is changed; probably in response to recent protests and demos of hacking; it has now changed the definition of EVM - earlier it used to mean BU and CU but now it includes VVPAT; so, EVM now cannot be claimed to be OTP device as VVPAT has programmable memory; furthermore EVM System, is more than EVM but ECI is silent on it). 





Read about the two hack demos. Recently hacks of EVM System were demonstrated and videos shown on 4pm News Network. In these hacks the VVPAT votes differently from the actual votes cast - the slips printed and vote recorded in the CU were consistent. Therefore, the manual count of slips and the count from the CU would match. This type of fraud can only be prevented if Demand#1 is met, else it would require software audit but that is not possible as ECI and SCI have said that software is secret. SCI on the one hand ecourages Open Source - but on the other hand, in this particular instance, it protects the IPR of a ridiculously simple program - GOI can easily get the same software developed in Open Source or buy the IPR for cost which is not likely to exceed few million rupees! Another intriguing thing to read about is that 1.9 Million EVM Systems have gone missing - The Wire article of 22-May-19 linked.


Wednesday, December 13, 2023

EVM voting & ECI processes - program, data and counting - current vulnerabilities, remedies and action required by INDIA

 

Synopsis: It is said in a Democracy people get the Government they deserve; but what if the Election System - the machines or the processes - are deficient? Then the Government ought to fix it or else the people should agitate to fix the deficiencies. Recent disclosures - as documented by independent journalists and pointed out by activists - show the Electronic Voting Machines (EVM), voting and counting processes in use in India can be manipulated (are hackable). Denying audit challenges is not consistent with democratic norms nor the Constitution of India. The Government, Election Commission of India (ECI) and Courts should accept the citizens' right to know and even provide the means to the contestants to make feasible verifications and allow them to mount audit challenges. The authorities should publish a fair process to allow and resolve contestants' audit challenges. What can be the means and processes for enabling audit challenge which will deter frauds that thwart our democracy?   


In the context of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM), how democracy is subverted, or can be subverted, is a question much debated. Concerned citizens have been agitating in India and have met with only limited success - especially now, since all pillars of the Indian democracy seem to be failing in unison.

Election Commission of India (ECI) is a constitutional body supposedly independent of the GOI. However, in reality, a whole lot of processes related with the use of Electronic Voting Machines reveal that GOI is in charge where ECI ought to be in charge. Under the bogey of secrecy for reasons of national security or abdication of judiciary to rule in its domain by calling it the domain of the executive, the democratic processes have been imperiled and even subverted.

People who have little understanding of Information Technology and Digital Security are in charge of designing policies and processes and even SCI has ruled in a way to curtail citizens rights to access programs that ought to be "open source" under the garb of "sensitive", "Intellectual Property" and "Executive Domain". After observing strange coincidences (statistical improbabilities), unexpected electoral results (outside the forecast of all pollsters) and documented anomalies (see articles below in RELATED section), this note references the on-going agitations for fair elections and prescribes what ought to be additional and very important concerns of Indian citizens and actions required for deterring electoral frauds in the future.


PETITION FILED TO ECI to conduct FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS - Citizens campaign, started a few months ago, by concerned citizens - Petition started on 24-Aug-23 by Prof. MG Devasahayam


ADR's recommendations for Electoral Reforms, Political Reforms and Rules for ECI: PDF file from ADRINDIA.org

The above petition and recommendations miss out some of the important issues arising from the points raised in the article of 10-Nov-23 in The Wire by Meetu Jain.

Most importantly, there are three points of hacking that need to be safeguarded against for preventing subversion of the voting and counting process -
i) EVM program hack,
ii) EVM results hack and
iii) results counting by ECI hack.

>>INDIA parties should ask for the following five things in the petitions to ECI and SCI; these steps for transparency are meant to deter voting frauds without forcing withdrawal of EVM or change in any methodology ECI follows in their deployment:

1) Source code of EVM must be shared with public - (this will have to go into a review petition as SCI has already ruled against revealing the source code even to ECI for audit),

2) "Audit Challenge" to discover fraud through any EVM must be resolved through a published process that should include comparing source code of suspect EVM with master copy - can be done by Political Parties/independent auditor,

3) At the Start of voting and after close of voting, the program AND results from each EVM should be allowed to be saved in an external storage by each contestant party for fulfilling the option of an "audit challenge" - each record in the votes cast data file will contain EVM ID, date time stamp, ID of candidate voted for; voter id is not available (so secret ballot is honoured - no one can find out who voted for whom); if there is an "audit challenge" then ECI's database from which results were announced will have to be compared with records saved in external devices submitted by the challenger political party/parties; If ECI aggregates the results filed (entered online manually) by the ECI's Returning Officer (RO) at each constituency, then the audit challenge will involve comparison of the EVM wise Candidate wise counts filed by the RO i.e. the figures from each of the EVMs the RO took into account (see the ECI's counting process note here: link). It should be noted that the data copied from memory stick has only the candidate ID and NOT the name of the candidate; as ECI does not want the results to be known until all voting is completed, in multi-phase and bunched multi-State elections, the password to the list of Candidate ID + Names will be released by the ECI when it wants - i.e. after voting is over; the encrypted list of Candidate names & their IDs will be downloadable from ECI portal by authorized Party representatives and Independent candidates right at start of elections.

4) ECI must have control over randomized distribution of EVMs at State and Constituency levels,
 
5) Sample checking at random of 5% to 30% should always be done of results counted through EVMs and manually of VVPATs.

[For meeting the requirements in point# 2 (detection of program hack) & 3 (detection of "data of EVM results" AND "results transmission & counting by ECI" hacks) EVM could provide a removable memory stick (flash memory card) which can easily hold the copy of the program AND results stored in the internal memory of EVM. Memory sticks have capacities ranging from 1 GB to 1 TB and more. EVM will have to be provided two buttons - "Start" and "End" - when these buttons are pressed, BOTH - the program and results data will be copied into the memory stick - further, only after the Start button is pressed, voting can commence and after the End button is pressed, voting will cease - i.e. the EVM will not be usable for any further voting until it is initialised for next round of election through the existing ECI processes. Using the removable memory stick, the ECI's booth officer and contestants' representatives will be allowed to copy the program + data into their own phones or computers - twice - at the time of Start event and also at the End event]

If these requests (#1 to #4) are denied, all Opposition parties should resist the use of EVMs henceforth and INDIA parties could use Point#5 - for negotiating 100% of VVPAT counting AND for the printed slip to be physically picked up by the voter and for the voter to push it into the box of votes for counting - ONLY the physical count would be treated as the final result - not the EVM memory results (in case they differ). See the hack video in the Notes below on Challenges to EVM and reaction of authorities (presently 5% VVPAT vs EVM counting comparison per constituency has been allowed - this is pointless in view of the hack of EVM + VVPAT actually demonstrated).



Most disconcerting facts and revelations uncovered by the staff of The Wire and reported in the article (verbatim extracts):

(1) In September, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a public interest litigation that asked for an audit of the source code of the Election Commission’s electronic voting machines (EVMs) by an independent agency. While dismissing the case, the court said “there is no material on record to indicate the Election Commission is not fulfilling its mandate.” 

(2) The TEC in fact recommended again and again that the veil of secrecy surrounding source codes should be lifted. In 2013, the TEC said that a facility be provided so the “code in the EVM units can be read out by an approved external unit and the code so read may be compared with corresponding reference code to show that code is same as that in the reference units. The scope of comparision is only to ensure that there is no trojan or other malware for EVMs in use.” 
This report of 2013 was the last the government shared with activist Venkatesh Nayak via RTI. No report has been made public post 2013. 

(3) India’s disproportionate secrecy is in marked contrast to other countries still using electronic voting devices. 

(4) Emails and phone calls to officials of the ECI and spokesperson elicited no response. However, government officials told The Wire, “There is no reason why the source code information should be shared. People have gone to the Supreme Court again and again on this matter and their efforts have been rebuffed. The Election Commission has answered the court each time. These are nothing but motivated questions.” 
Former CEC, Ashok Lavasa, says, “There have been a number of discussions on making source code public though the ECI goes by what the TEC says. The ECI prefers to be guided by academics like those at the TEC and go with their wisdom.” 

(5) In an RTI response to Venkatesh Nayak, BEL admitted that the chip they are using is from US-based NXP semiconductors. In addition, the NXP website says, this is not OTP. Instead, it has three different kinds of memory – SRAM, FLASH AND EEPROM. All three types can erase and rewrite data, or retain data bits in its memory or the memory can be electronically erased and rewritten. In other words, software that can be overwritten or reprogrammed cannot have the safeguards of being one time programmed. 

In a paper on EVMs in 2010, a committee including Michigan University professor Alex J. Halderman had this to say with reference to expert committee members picked for EVMs: “This time the committee members were A.K. Agarwala and D.T. Shahani, with P.V. Indiresan serving as chair. All three were affiliated with IIT Delhi, but, like the first committee, none appear to have had prior computer security expertise. Again, the committee members did not have access to EVM source code and relied on presentations, demonstrations, and site visits with the manufacturers. 

“In their report, the ECI has reiterated its view that the machines were “tamper-proof”. 
In fact, Professor Indiresan is reported to have once said that questioning the ECI’s integrity is like asking Sita to undergo trial by fire.


Observations on the above facts and revelations:

(1) Judgment of SCI is beyond ridiculous - judiciary needs education on the concept of "Open Source" (ironically CJI, DY Chandrachud is a votary of "Open Source" technologies - having introduced a number of open source ICT based innnovations he only needs to be reminded of the benefits of Open Source in a voting system which is plainly a public service system); citizens right to know that fair processes are in place for elections is non-trivial; knowledge of source code cannot compromise national security; policy of executive is violative of citizens right to information; finally the alibi of IPR in not sharing the source code is a big joke - the program for EVM is one a junior programmer can write - even an elevator operations program will be more complex in comparison! 

(2) TEC report of 2013 is absolutely correct - made by competent people of integrity

(3) India can learn from USA, Australia and many other countries before claiming to be mother of democracy - the article cites many examples

(4) ECI boss needs to show some spine, it is doable - s/he can take inspiration from late T.N. Seshan

(5) These so called ECI's tech experts claiming the EVMs are tamper proof and that ECI cannot be questioned - are at best digital illiterates or worse - individuals of compromised integrity - like Sita, they must be subjected to undergo trial by fire!

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


RELATED

Challenges to EVM and reaction of authorities: Notes
(See the link in the notes to the most ingenious hack - 4pm New Network - viral video)

See in this 5 min video the striking pattern of BJP wins whenever the counting happened after a delay of a week or more of polling; BJP lost more seats whenever the counting happened soon after polling..

Ds4 News clipping of 5M:53S

8-Dec-23 INC TV Chhatisgarh voting % changed by ECI after having announced the voting percentage two days earlier and confirming that EVMs were sealed and placed in a strong room. ADR representative has pointed this out. Reply from ECI? Tweet


Citizens’ Commission on Elections’ Report on EVMs and VVPAT - Report of 11 pages of 8-Apr-21 - recently signed by 6,500 eminent people Report



12-Dec-23 The Wire - Meetu Jain's article on the bill GOI intends to pass that will replace CJI by a Minister of PM's choice in the Committee that appoints CEC and ECs - making ECI totally subservient to the Government: Link

Electoral Reforms India urgently needs - Anil Srivastava's blog:  Link