[E-voting] Commission on Electronic Voting

Fergal Daly fergal at esatclear.ie
Thu Mar 11 14:07:04 GMT 2004


On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 01:47:51PM +0000, Dr J Pelan wrote:
> Agreed. Make very, very few points but make them very, very well.
> 
> Don't worry about the side-issues. Look after the voter-verified, paper
> audit trail and the side-issues will take care of themselves.

If the terms of reference are to examine the current system then VVAT is in
some ways a side issue itself. The panel is not there to decide how to get
it "right" in the future, it's just there to see if this one is right or
not. Obviously knowing whether this one is right or not involves knowing
what better solutions are available.

So rather than focussing on how VVAT is an acceptable solution, we need to
focus on how no-VVAT is not not acceptable. These are not quite the same.
For example givng a detailed description of some particular VVAT system
would be pointless. Talking about other types of critical systems and how
they are made robust and the fact that these techniques have not been used
(and cannot be used) for voting machines is pointful.

They are not selecting a system, they're just asking is this system good
enough. We can show them that it's not good enough by showing that such a
system does not have any of the usual reliability features you would find in
banking, industry, medicine and aviation. The fact that VVAT solves the
problem should not be of significant interest to the panel,

F





More information about the E-voting mailing list