Re: Report on EVM Rating Workshop

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Tue Jun 13 2006 - 19:40:35 CDT

We are not oblivious to the privacy issue with barcodes on the
ballot. Section 5.5 of our privacy paper discusses that very issue.

Best regards,

At 5:19 PM -0400 6/13/06, Lillie Coney wrote:
>Arnold it was a pleasure meeting you at the workshop.
>I did want to concur that there are privacy and transparency
>issues associated with the use of barcodes on physical ballots.
>The barcode is not human friendly and is produced at the time
>the vote is captured. This creates two of areas of concern:
>the voter only has the assurances of the administrator that no
>identifying information is contained on the ballot, and that
>the votes represented on the bardcode are in fact their choices.
>Transparency challenges are real, but the federal standards
>process has not lent itself to voter access to the ballot barcode
>The following is an excerpt from the transcript on the use
>of barcode readers by voters, while in the privacy of the voting
>cubical. The transcript is from the last meeting of the TGDC
>on their recommendations for voluntary voting standards.
>Full Transcript
>Thank you for the notes from the meeting.
>>5. A couple of participants expressed concern about the lack of
>>transparency associated with the use of bar codes on ballots.
>Lillie Coney
>Associate Director
>Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
>Coordinator, National Committee for Voting Integrity (NCVI)
>1718 Connecticut Avenue, NW
>Washington, DC 20009
>(p) 202-483-1140 x 111
>(f) 202-483-1248
>OVC-discuss mailing list

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
OVC-discuss mailing list
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Fri Jun 30 23:17:05 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jun 30 2006 - 23:17:12 CDT