[E-voting] UK govt circular mentions open-source e-voting
caburt at alphalink.com.au
Thu Jul 21 13:10:20 IST 2005
Voters need to build their own voting systems and I have plans to use
comic rays to convert the list to an evoting hegemony.
I am aware of the many problems evoting presents and I don't advocate
any of the current or proposed evoting machines in poll sites.
I recall this list considered that trustworthy evoting would be
acceptable. Someone else on this list (I can't recall) stated it's not
the job of the list to propose alternatives, but merely to comment(?) on
whether systems are adequate(?) or not.
Well, I hope the forum might also consider what might be adequate.
Checksum lookups would not be a good task to expect voters to execute to
help them "trust" the system.
Trust of the system, any system, will always be our confidence that
mutually distrusting parties observe all parts of the system and each
other and don't complain. Is this arrangement beyond technology?
Aengus Lawlor wrote:
>On Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:28 AM [EDT],
>Craig Burton <caburt at alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>>>Your point about checksums - can I ask for a link? I wonder if some
>>>other code signature would work or whether the hack in question gets
>>>around code checking altogether. I suspect the latter; below I
>>>suggest that any kind of integrity check has to be performed on the
>>>DRE from some trusted external service - a dongle, a networked
>>>service or something else its a self-check.
>>>Even then, I'm yet to understand how an adequately hacked current DRE
>>>machine could not report "alls well" to an external source.
>Craig, checksums on a computer screen don't do anything to reassure a voter
>that their votes will be tallied correctly. An OSS e-voting system is just
>as much a black box that I have to trust as a proprietary system. The fact
>that I can, in theory, read some source code that I've been told is actually
>running on the voting machine is utterly irrelevant because it is completely
>impossible for me to verify that it actually is running that code.
>unless you are advocating that voters be allowed to dowload the source,
>compile it on their own machines, bring their own hardware to the polling
>place and cast their own vote on their own hardware, then please, don't
>waste our time extolling the virtues of OSS for solving the e-voting
>problem. The advantages of OSS are simply not relevant to the actual problem
>that e-voting represents.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the E-voting