Re: Polling Place conditions, reframing the issue. Thumb drives and CD's

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Sun May 16 2004 - 00:40:35 CDT

At 12:17 PM -0700 5/15/04, Alan Dechert wrote:
>Ed,
>
>> 4. The next voter arrives and the voting cycle is either initialized by a
>> smart card or a pin number (tbd)
>>
>I want to make this point clear: This is not the original design that I have
>been selling for 3.5 years. I do not agree with it. I think it is very bad.

Is that perhaps part of the reason that there's been no money raised
for most of the those 3.5 years? When you have multiple contributors
to a project, there is often disagreement. The proposal from UC will
include a smart card as part of the draft architecture. How long the
smart card lasts in the architecture is an open question.

>The design for this system is that the voter goes to the voting station with
>no such smartcard or PIN. We're adding steps and complexity for voters and
>election administrators. It solves a non-existent problem.

When there is a study of risks and the threat analysis, we'll see
whether it is a "non-existent problem."

>The EAC has said something important: they want to see "user-centered"
>voting system.
>http://www.eac.gov/docs/procuring.pdf
>
>The PIN/smartcard "solution" is for an administrator-centered voting
>system--not a user-centered voting system. I understand why a few members
>are pushing for the PIN/smartcard. The reasoning has to do with perceived
>marketability of the OVC system. We are marketing to election
>administrators. So we need to give something with cya appeal and is best
>from the administrator's point of view. This reasoning is incorrect. The
>system is really being purchased by the users--not the administrators.

Go ahead and purchase a voting machine and bring it to the polling
place, and see how far you get with it. The reason I am proposing
smart cards is based on the questions of the Calif Secy of State's
office together with my preliminary threat analysis.

>Having said all that, I've said it's okay for now to include this option for
>study and marketing purposes. I fully expect the system to be ultimately
>deployed as originally conceived.

Time will tell.

>You go to the voting station (after
>checking in), make your selections and print your ballot. Put that in the
>privacy folder and go to the ballot box to cast the ballot. Simple as that.
>This is the user-centered idea. In a primary--depending on state and county
>procedures--you may give the voter a "dumb card" (card with a number
>corresponding to party).
>
>So, be sure to include "dumb card or nothing" to the PIN and smartcard
>options tbd.

It can go in the UC proposal as an area of study.

>Alan D.

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 Mon May 31 23:17:45 2004

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