[Cryptography] "we need to protect [our dox] by at least encrypting them"
Bill Frantz
frantz at pwpconsult.com
Fri Nov 11 21:57:24 EST 2016
On 11/11/16 at 11:12 AM, agr at me.com (Arnold Reinhold) wrote:
>Optical scanners for paper ballots can detect over-votes at the
>time of submission and return the paper ballot to the voter so
>they can get it voided and try again. ( See
>http://vote.nyc.ny.us/html/newway_en/faq.shtml
><http://vote.nyc.ny.us/html/newway_en/faq.shtml> Faq #10) So
>any over-voted ballot detected during later hand counting
>should arouse suspicion, more than one alarm. I assume that
>when you were a child there were no scanners. But this rather
>clever scheme was non the less detected. The skills needed to
>figure out mischief with paper ballots are widely held, the
>skills needed to discover problems in electronic systems are
>far more scarce.
Our walk-in polling places do not scan the ballots while the
voter is still there. The just put them in a ballot box. No
chance for an automated reality check of a person's vote.
Cheers - Bill
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz | Concurrency is hard. 12 out | Periwinkle
(408)356-8506 | 10 programmers get it wrong. | 16345
Englewood Ave
www.pwpconsult.com | - Jeff Frantz | Los Gatos,
CA 95032
More information about the cryptography
mailing list