On Wednesday 01 October 2003 19:53, Ian Grigg wrote: > "Roy M. Silvernail" wrote: > > On Wednesday 01 October 2003 17:33, R. A. Hettinga forwarded: > > > VeriSign tapped to secure Internet voting > > > > > > "The solution we are building will enable absentee voters to exercise > > > their right to vote," said George Schu, a vice president at VeriSign. > > > "The sanctity of the vote can't be compromised nor can the integrity of > > > the system be compromised--it's security at all levels." > > > > One would wish that were a design constraint. Sadly, I'm afraid it's > > just a bullet point from the brochure. > > It's actually quite cunning. The reason that this > is going to work is because the voters are service > men & women, and if they attack the system, they'll > get their backsides tanned.
Good observation. I missed that one. > Basically, it should > be relatively easy to put together a secure voting > application under the limitations, control structures > and security infrastructure found within the US military. > > It would be a mistake to apply the solution to wider > circumstances, and indeed another mistake to assume > that Verisign had anything to do with any purported > "success" in "solving" the voting problem. Definitely, but I can see Verisign doing both. The rabbit hole gets ever deeper. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
