Re: Ballot Timestamps

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Thu May 27 2004 - 00:13:21 CDT

On May 27, 2004, at 12:59 AM, james_in_denver wrote:
> David, this is exactly one of the reasons that I proposed using a
> database to record votes as opposed to files. The file
> creation/modification times are absolute giveaways as to the order
> that ballots were cast in.

Well... from what I know about RDBMS's (which is quite a lot,
actually), the give away is even "deader" using them. Records written
to databases tend to have rather predictable layout, and are hard to
unorder. The RDBMS interface may not present this order (though even
there, logs, timestamps, and internal tables often will), but a simple
hex editor reveals most everything.

This isn't the main reason I don't want an RDBMS at precincts... but
you've managed to raise an awfully good argument against them
(inadvertently)!

On the other hand, files won't have timestamps in them. The EBIs
aren't written to removable media until finalization, so all ballots
will have the same timestamp... or if there are a couple seconds
difference, they will only correspond to the random ballot-id order.
==================================================================
= 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 23:18:08 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:17 CDT