Begin forwarded message:
From: Declan McCullagh <[email protected]>
Date: October 26, 2006 11:45:42 AM EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IP] more on a new DoD Internet voting scheme
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is NO way to ensure that the voter is not voting with a gun
held to their head (figuratively, or even LITERALLY).
[...]
While the same argument can be made about mailin ballots in
general, those in most places represent a small percentage of the
total vote; if Internet voting were to become widespread, it could
easily become 60% or more of the total vote, and with an inherent
and uncontrollable risk of fraud... in fact, it would be an
irresistable target for it.
The first point is true, of course, but:
(a) I don't see the anti-Internet voting activists campaigning
against mail-in-ballots, which would be consistent with the coercion
argument if they're serious about its validity.
(b) In Oregon, all elections are conducted by mail. In Washington
state, 33 of 39 counties are entirely vote-by-mail. The parade of
horrors that the coercion argument predicts has not been publicly
reported. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote-by-
mail#First_State_with_vote-by-mail)
(c) I think the security argument (customized malware) is a far
stronger one against Internet voting than the coercion one.
-Declan
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as [email protected]
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
