Electronic Voting Is Safe?!?

Welcome to Crypto. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Electronic Voting Is Safe?!?; Cryptography and Gouverment
Topic Started: Feb 24 2006, 11:53 AM (723 Views)
Boulemans	Feb 24 2006, 11:53 AM Post #1
Just registered Posts: 18 Group: New Members Member #32 Joined: January 20, 2006	In all this cryptography and stuf, I see one practical thing to do with (srr for bad english). Electronic Voting should be safe, and so, encryptid in a unbreakable code (One Time Pad's?). But is it safe and fast enough to make it into practical use? My oppinion is that electronic voting is'n safe enough, couse anyone who can crack codes quickly, can change everyone's votes. On the other side, it would be easier to do, and so, more voters will vote. And the new leader of the country (or company) is announced emmidiatly.



rot13	Feb 24 2006, 12:58 PM Post #2
Elite member Posts: 306 Group: Trusted Member Member #14 Joined: September 29, 2005	I don't think encryption is the solution for the voting problems. As long as the data is only available digitally, I think it is much more open to fraud. I think we need to push for having a paper trail as well so the results can be verified by the press or anyone else who wishes to do so. Although that doesn't eliminate fraud, I think it makes it considerable harder to change massive numbers of votes. Also, I don't think you want to encrypt the votes, just digitally sign them. Everyone should be able to read them, just not tamper with them.



Boulemans	Feb 24 2006, 04:11 PM Post #3
Just registered Posts: 18 Group: New Members Member #32 Joined: January 20, 2006	Quote: Everyone should be able to read them, just not tamper with them. But that would help bribing peaple. Nowadays, if you bribe a guy to vote on you, you don't have incurence that the guys accually votes on you. So, if you would be able to read it, it could begin a lot of Maffia habbits. That's why I think that cryptography should be used in sush ways.



insecure	Feb 24 2006, 04:53 PM Post #4
Elite member Posts: 381 Group: Trusted Member Member #10 Joined: September 9, 2005	A digital signature isn't enough, since it doesn't conceal how you voted. Fine in Parliament, where your vote is a matter of public record, but not so good for a secret ballot. Schneier 1996 includes a variety of protocols for secure elections.



rot13	Feb 24 2006, 06:00 PM Post #5
Elite member Posts: 306 Group: Trusted Member Member #14 Joined: September 29, 2005	I don't think we have ever recorded how someone voted, have we? I don't think it has ever been possible to go back and see how someone voted, and for exactly the reason that Bouleman's pointed out - bribery.. or extortion. It would be up to you at voting time to ensure that the paper receipt accurately reflected your votes, but you wouldn't keep the receipt and it could not be tracked to you.



insecure	Feb 24 2006, 09:15 PM Post #6
Elite member Posts: 381 Group: Trusted Member Member #10 Joined: September 9, 2005	rot13 Feb 24 2006, 06:00 PM I don't think we have ever recorded how someone voted, have we? I don't think it has ever been possible to go back and see how someone voted... I guess that depends who "we" is. In the UK, every ballot paper carries a unique number which is associated with the voter. In theory, it is possible for someone with sufficient authority to trace the way in which a particular person cast their vote. In practice (we hope and trust), this has never been done.



Boulemans	Feb 24 2006, 09:48 PM Post #7
Just registered Posts: 18 Group: New Members Member #32 Joined: January 20, 2006	In Belgium (were you are forced to vote) there are two list: one to annonce you came by, and another for your vote. On that last paper, there is no number, no traceable thing (I bloody hope).



Donald	Feb 27 2006, 04:22 AM Post #8
Elite member Posts: 454 Group: Trusted Member Member #8 Joined: September 2, 2005	Voting should leave a paper trail. Any form of electronic voting that does not leave a simple, verifiable paper trail is just ASKING for trouble. When I vote, I should be able to see a PAPER copy of my vote go into a box, and know that if anyone questions the electronic version, the paper recount will confirm my vote. Note that in the big US scandle 6 years ago, the regions of the country that used paper ballots with little ovals that you scribbled in were able to do recounts in a few hours, and the recount totals came out exactly or very near to the original counts. Now, of course, these ballots are being read by machine, so the readers could be hacked, BUT, since the ballots can also be easily read by humans, it's very easy to do spot checks to confirm that the machines are counting accurately. If you go with a completely digital voting system, you lose most of your checks and ballances.



Zofc	Jul 23 2007, 02:24 PM Post #9
Just registered Posts: 10 Group: Members Member #352 Joined: December 24, 2006	Donald Feb 26 2006, 10:22 PM When I vote, I should be able to see a PAPER copy of my vote go into a box, and know that if anyone questions the electronic version, the paper recount will confirm my vote. Exactly! I completely agree. A receipt or proof of purchase (well not purchase but confirmation or vote).
	FZZIX IMAEG GVTHX ENFHR FTPKB LLDIA ZAAGC WHMJV FRCMS GAHMJ LAQJX EMDBF LPGKC. -VZKMG NQFCC ML


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Debates · Next Topic »