[Fwd: Re: [E-voting] About Estonian e-voting]
cansbro at eircom.net
Mon Oct 24 14:45:01 IST 2005
Craig Burton wrote:
> Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
>>On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 09:40:43PM +1000, Craig Burton wrote:
>>>We wouldn't be discussing it if it was never successful. One virtue of
>>>electronic voting is that fewer hands touch the votes.
>>That's not a virtue. That's a weakness.
> This relies on the hands being virtuous.
But this is the problem--one cannot (and should not) rely on hands being
virtuous. Ever. Not in anything relating to elections. We must assume
the opposite--which is closer to reality. Given an opportunity, people
will cheat--especially when there is much to be gained.
>>You will need a clean compiler, a clean version of every library that
>>compiler uses, a clean version of the kernel running the compiler, and
>>clean version of the hardware running the compiler. And you'll need all
>>of that all over again for the running binary. It is a complete waste of
> There are no absolutes; that's bad form.
> A hack has to work, it has to work silently and specifically and it
> has to not be detected. It has to work in the presence of other
> software, it has to work on software that changes, it has to be
> developed, tested, successfully deployed, it has to wait till the
> right time. You imply its a cakewalk to have whatever hack you can
> think of hidden anywhere you can imagine on any machine anywhere.
> That's simply impossible. The real risks can be managed.
I disagree. Much time can be spent preparing a hack.
In contrast, the attention, resources and legal backup to detecting and
acknowledging (let alone rectifying) a hack are minimal. Rather we have
already seen in Ireland attempts to coverup problems in a real-life
election. (And in the USA--well, the extent of the problems, the extent
of the denials, the extent of the obstruction to investigation all speak
> If this software process looks cumbersome, you haven't seen a
> Hare-Clarke recount with Robson Rotation (there are several
> permutations of the ballot layout) for 200,000 votes. Actually, I
> haven't either, but it took a month. That's enough.
>E-voting mailing list
>E-voting at lists.stdlib.net
More information about the E-voting