Re: Barcode Redux

From: charlie strauss <cems_at_earthlink_dot_net>
Date: Fri Jun 04 2004 - 12:23:08 CDT

Alan is right I beleive. Besides the warm fuzzy intuition you are suggesting is precisely backward. as others have pointed out, techically an OCR system leaves the door open to steganograhy and hence the real possibility personal info could be encoded. A bar code that is deliberately limited in its bit count can be reliably inspected by any reasonably skilled geek to determine if it could include more than required information. And my "hunch" is that this combined with open source adds up to a trustable to the public. I frequently install open source software whose contents I have not personally inspected but do so on the plausible assumption that other could and may have inspected it. The hunch needs to be tested.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Dechert <alan_at_openvotingconsortium_dot_org>
Sent: Jun 4, 2004 11:19 AM
To: voting-project@lists.sonic.net
Subject: Re: Barcode Redux

Jeff,

> Put more bluntly, it is impossible for a warm, fuzzy biped to satisfy
> himself that a ballot containing a printed barcode DOES NOT contain any
> personally identifiable information on it; ....
>
I don't know if that's true. We'll certainly look at the trustworthiness
(technically and psychologically) of barcodes in our full funded study. We
will avoid make important strategic decisions based on hunches.

Alan D.

==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Wed Jun 30 23:17:06 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT