Re: Alternatives to a single bar code

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Wed May 05 2004 - 11:27:10 CDT

At 3:04 AM -0700 5/5/04, Steve Chessin wrote:
> >From Wed May 5 02:22:48 2004
>>Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 02:22:35 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: [voting-project] Alternatives to a single bar code
>>On Wed, 5 May 2004, Steve Chessin wrote:
>>> The nice thing about multiple bar codes is that they scale.
>>I'm concerned that the presence of multiple bar codes could lead to reader
>I don't understand. How would the presence of multiple bar codes lead
>to reader misreads?
>>But more importantly, I'm concerned about attacks that could occur should
>>individual bar-codes from different ballots be scanned as if they were
>>from the same ballot.
>This seems to assume that ballot counting is done by using a hand-held
>scanner. This attack is not possible with a flat-bed scanner that
>scans the entire ballot at once. (Well, it is possible, if you take a
>pair of scissors and cut and paste the old fashioned way, but I assume
>that the other people in the polling place observing you count the
>ballots will stop you from doing this.)
>If the bar codes are used for tabulation as well as audio output (and I
>don't recommend this), you could also include with each bar-code the
>ballot number. Remember, I'm recommending OCR printing and flat-bed
>scanning for tabulation.

Use of an OCR font for the text is a good addition to the mix.
Full-page flat bed scanning requires that the ballot be removed from
the privacy folder for BVA (barcode vocalization app.), which is a
privacy risk for visually impaired voters.

Best regards,

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 Mon May 31 23:17:15 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:15 CDT