David Honig wrote:
First of all, that's not "privacy", that's "anonymity".
We have voter registration precisely so that we know who the voters
are! We are not changing voter registration
Ed Gerck wrote:
4. Fail-safe privacy in universal verifiability. If the
encrypted
The voting apparatus may keep a serial record of each vote, in
order, for auditing purposes. This is also mentioned in WAS's
legislative text.
Good lord no. Here in NY, the inspectors write down each voter's name
on a log sheet with the names numbered in order, and write down the
numbers in
At 1:01 PM -0500 2/4/2001, John Kelsey wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
At 11:02 PM 1/27/01 -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
...
"Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote:
There are a lot of reasons why open source is desirable,
but it does simply the job for an attacker.
I disagree. Security
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
David Honig wrote:
If you give people a paper receipt with their votes on it
(as WAS's scheme mentions) then their votes can be bought or blackmailed.
I'm unaware of how that interpretation might have arisen? I don't see
anything in the proposed text
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I'm sorry for the second message, but I could not let the egregious
error pass uncorrected:
Ed Gerck wrote:
The law does not allow it, and for good reasons as you mention.
...
The voting apparatus may keep a serial record of each vote, in order, for
William Allen Simpson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I'm sorry for the second message, but I could not let the egregious
error pass uncorrected:
:-) egregious ...
Ed Gerck wrote:
The law does not allow it, and for good reasons as you mention.
...
The voting apparatus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
David Honig wrote:
From "Ballot Proposal" version 1.3
10 B DISPLAY
(5) Election software shall print the selected choices on a fixed
visible medium (such as paper), and shall require the voter to
affirm those choices prior to
