[E-voting] RE: CEV submission -- draft

John Lambe icte-jlambe at johnlambe.com
Mon Mar 15 14:37:39 GMT 2004

I haven't finished reading the submission, but it seems very good and
very well worded.

I have some initial general suggestions:
1. Quote references clearly, preferably in the academic paper style.
   This could give the arguments more weight, showing, in some cases
   that other experts share the views stated, and making it easy for
   the reader to verify facts stated (even if they don't go to the
   trouble of looking them up, the fact that they are clearly provided
   can give a statement more credibility).
2. Add a table of contents.

We could possibly go into more detail in justifying the analogy on page
2, since I think that the analogy is more accurate than most people
would realise.
For example, someone reading it might think that testing the official
behind the curtain would not work because he/she knows that he/she is
being tested. We could point out the same may apply to a machine (by
use of a trigger, referred to later in the document).

There is a typo on page 3: something missing after "their" in the
following sentence:
"Although a laboratory examination of the chips would reveal a
change in their, it is important to note that the change would not be
noticed by a returning officer conducting an inspection of the software
version numbers and checksums."

John Lambe
Phone (mobile): +353 86 2895286
Phone:          +353 1 4905842  
Address:        64 Brighton Road, Rathgar, Dublin 6, Ireland    
Email:          jlambe at johnlambe.com

More information about the E-voting mailing list