[LINK] Fwd: vip-l: Electronic votiing

[Craig Sanders]

On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 11:57:37AM +1100, Stewart Fist wrote:
> Craig wrote:
> > not exactly. unless they can read the printed ballot (which, of course,
> > they cant) they have no way of knowing whether what was printed actually
> > matches their vote. they'd have to have a sighted assistant to verify it
> > for them.
> 
> Good point, but wrong conclusion about sighted assistant.
> 
> There's no reason why a scanning machine can't read-back the filled in
> ballot form. So if you want even greater security, then have a separate
> checking machine that scans and plays back through headphones.

and there's no reason why THAT machine couldn't be compromised too.  if the
vote-printing machine is, then it's likely that the scanning machine will be
too.

the voter's intended vote could be encoded into the printout in a
similar manner to the way that laser and ink-jet printers can encode
their serial number into the miniscule dots that make up the printout
(e.g. for tracking counterfeiting).  the scanner could be mis-programmed to
read that so the voter would have no way of knowing.

sure, it could be picked up later in an audit. if there was any reason
to suspect a problem, and if the stegonographic technique being used
was discovered, and if the winner of the election didn't suppress any
audits.


> The key point is that you don't ask the computer to perform tabulation
> functions; just act as an assistant.

actually, the key point is that making any part of the process a
black-box compromises the whole process.

> I think the solution is pretty obvious.  Use computerised, punch-tape,
> punch-card or any other type of devices you can think of as assistants
> to aid ballot selection.

that ignores the basic question, though, which is: why do we actually
NEED a solution anyway? the current manual system works well and is
extremely difficult to compromise. why toss that out for minimal, at
best, benefit.

e-voting is a solution in desperate need of a problem.

the only people who really benefit from e-voting are those who make
and sell the machines, and those who want the opportunity to commit
wholesale electoral fraud.

> But never let these machines do any form of tabulation.
> 
> Speed of counting is a trivial issue anyway.

true.

craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>           (part time cyborg)