Re: Paper on Privacy in Electronic Voting for the Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society

From: David Jefferson <d_jefferson_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Wed Jun 16 2004 - 15:04:40 CDT

Arthur,

I enjoyed reading your privacy paper. But there is an element to
privacy/secrecy that you hardly touched, and I would very much
like to read a scholarly, historical discussion of it: the fact
that in most states vote privacy is MANDATORY in precinct
voting. A voter is not allowed to take a second person into the
polling booth even if s/he wants to (with rare exceptions, such
as for the blind), and the voter is not allowed to take away any
proof of how s/he voted. This is not just to prevent coercion,
but to make vote buying/selling more difficult. People are free
to talk about how they voted, but not to PROVE it, even if that
is their desire.

This has obvious implications for the security architectures of
DREs and ballot-marking systems, but the historical roots go
back to a time long before DREs. Still, I don't know much of
the history of this aspect of the idea. I though if you did,
you might want to add a few sentences to the paper.

Thanks,
David

--- Arthur Keller <arthur@kellers.org> wrote:
> The latest draft of the paper can be found at the URL below.
> Comments are welcome.
>
>
http://www-db.stanford.edu/pub/keller/2004/privacy-electronic-voting.pdf
>
> The paper is due Thursday.
>
> 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 23:17:17 2004

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