Re: Barcode Redux

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Fri Jun 04 2004 - 18:12:56 CDT

At 9:24 PM +0200 6/4/04, Jan Karrman wrote:
>On Fri, 4 Jun 2004, David Mertz wrote:
>
>> On Jun 4, 2004, at 10:33 AM, Jeff Almeida wrote:
>> > 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;
>>
>> This is exactly what I wrote in the my note that launched this
>> discussion!
>>
>
>I believe the cryptographic signatures, suggested to be included on
>the ballots, will be more difficult to convince to the voters as not
>containing hidden personal information.

And if you use OCR, you'll need gibberish text representing the
digital signature. Is that a reason to dump digital signatures, or
to relax the "perception of covert channel" constraint? The average
person won't care about covert channels unless DRE vendors bring it
out, and they are even more vulnerable to the same challenge. We
must publish the content of the bar code, if only to allow 3rd party
verifiers and tabulators.

Best regards,
Arthur

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
==================================================================
= 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