multiple system - Re: Scientists question electronic voting

[John Kelsey]

At 12:25 PM 3/6/03 -0800, Ed Gerck wrote:
>"Trei, Peter" wrote:
> > Ballot boxes are also subject to many forms of fraud. But a dual
> > system  (electronic backed up by paper) is more resistant to
> > attack then either alone.
>
>The dual, and multiple, system can be done without paper ballot.
>There is nothing "magic" about paper as a record medium.

I think one benefit of using paper ballots as the backup is that there are 
already pretty well-understood ways to deal with paper ballots.  I like the 
idea of the election observers having at least one piece of the technology 
they really understand.

>I
>can send a link for a paper on this that was presented at the
>Tomales Bay conference on voting systems last year, using Shannon's
>Tenth Theorem as the theoretical background, introducing the idea
>of multiple "witnesses". If two witnesses are not 100% mutually
>dependent, the probability that both witnesses may fail at the same
>time is smaller than that of any single witness to fail.

Is the relevant question here about probabilistic failures, or about 
conspiracies?  Clearly, the size and cost of the conspiracy gets much 
bigger if there's a check value on the election results that is handled 
completely outside the voting machine.

>Cheers,
>Ed Gerck

--John Kelsey, kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com



---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at wasabisystems.com