[E-voting] Commission on Electronic Voting

Dr J Pelan J.Pelan at gatsby.ucl.ac.uk
Thu Mar 11 20:25:17 GMT 2004


Fergal Daly <fergal at esatclear.ie> writes;
> The fact that VVAT solves the problem should not be of significant
> interest to the panel,

Adrian Colley <aecolley at spamcop.net> write;
> I think we do have to cover the "side issues", not least
> in case the main issue is somehow dismissed.

Folks, let's start from the publicly stated position of the ICTE;

 The system does not include a Voter Verified Audit Trail (VVAT). Irish 
 Citizens for Trustworthy Evoting (ICTE) believe that no electronic voting 
 system can be trustworthy unless it includes a paper-based VVAT. 

The ICTE must attempt to convey the validity of this single point within
the context of the Commission's remit, namely the 'secrecy and accuracy of
the chosen electronic voting and counting system'. It must do this in such
a manner so that the point cannot be readily dismissed.

As demonstrated earlier, you can start from first principles and establish
the necessity of VVAT without recourse to any technical argument or "side
issue" whatsoever. Or you might choose to use a "side issue", like
end-to-end testing, to help demonstrate your case - but don't rely on it.  
Either way the raison d'etre of ICTE is VVAT.

Of course, THE SIDE ISSUES ARE VERY IMPORTANT AND SIGNIFICANT - just not
necessarily to ICTE. The multitude of other serious concerns and technical
points MUST be submitted but by others because the ICTE's banner is nailed
to the VVAT flag.  To remove it now is to accept that the VVAT argument is
too weak to stand on its own when, plainly, it isn't.

--
John P.





More information about the E-voting mailing list