Re: Security markings on the ballot

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Wed Oct 22 2003 - 23:21:15 CDT

Chris Schaefer <evm@1reality.org> wrote:
|The ONLY way to do this is to use cryptography...

I'm with Chris in STRONGLY wanting an actual cryptographic approach,
rather than some easily forgeable watermark/image thing. I proposed a
specific protocol back in July, actually.

(See http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/initial-digests/0109.html)

In fact, I believe it would be much better to entirely omit ANY ballot
validation marks until we use a proper cryptographic approach. For the
demo, we would be better off ignoring the issue altogether than raising
a bunch of questions we cannot answer about the flaws in a image mark
system. The cryptographic approach is both sufficient and necessary.

Yours, David...

--
 mertz@  _/_/_/_/ THIS MESSAGE WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY: \_\_\_\_    n o
gnosis  _/_/             Postmodern Enterprises            \_\_
.cx    _/_/                                                 \_\_  d o
      _/_/_/ IN A WORLD W/O WALLS, THERE WOULD BE NO GATES \_\_\_ z e
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Fri Oct 31 23:17:03 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Oct 31 2003 - 23:17:07 CST