Re: TED SELKER: US Election Assistance Commissio n--Questions

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Mon May 10 2004 - 20:48:27 CDT

On May 10, 2004, at 9:25 PM, Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) wrote:
> It's [harder?] to manipulate a tape than a stack of paper. And it's
> easier to record onto cassette tape than to print out and handle
> paper.

It's not all THAT hard to re-record over a section of a cassette tape
(or even just erase it). If you pop out those plastic tabs, it's true
that you'd need to resort to the "extreme hacking" of attaching scotch
tape; but I'm not sure that's a perfect assurance.

> Ted doesn't address the privacy issues of the tape being sequential. I
> can't think of a meaningful way to address that -- if you reshuffle
> the recordings on the tape, you've eliminated the value of the tape as
> a "true" recording of the voting. Perhaps his answer would be that you
> lose that privacy? Of course, the tape doesn't record the time between
> voters, so there's some protection there, somewhat.

Pretty darn weak protection, IMO. Sequence isn't *quite* a time stamp,
but it's close.
= 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 23:17:32 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT