Re: Renewed anonymity concern in OVC design

From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joehall_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Thu Jul 08 2004 - 12:59:22 CDT

It seems that the problem here is that the voter and colluder (that's
not a word, is it?) can easily remember the numbers... how about
chaning that? Make them 20-digit numbers or symbols that are hard to
remember (I can't imagine what). Is the concern with 20-digit numbers
that this constitutes another possible covert chanel?

Joe

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:50:53 -0400, David Mertz <voting-project@gnosis.cx> wrote:
> > For that matter, someone can take a miniature camera into the voting
> > booth.
> > There is no end to this line of inquiry.
>
> The camera does not prove that the ballot was actually cast, rather
> than merely printed. A voter who wished to avoid complying with
> vote-coercion/buying, but keep her kneecaps intact, can defeat the
> attack. Specifically, photograph an uncast ballot, send it to
> bad-guys, either spoil it with poll-worker or simply do not cast it.
>
> In contrast, a voter has no similar recourse for the
> ballot-ID-memorization attack.
>
> There is an end to this line of inquiry... it just may not occur at the
> same place as the beginning of the inquiry.
>
>

-- 
Joseph Lorenzo Hall
UC Berkeley, SIMS PhD Student
http://pobox.com/~joehall/
blog: http://pobox.com/~joehall/nqb/
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Sat Jul 31 23:17:12 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jul 31 2004 - 23:17:15 CDT