[ale] OT: Electronic Voting in GA

[Jeff Hubbs]

On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 12:59, Michael D. Hirsch wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 October 2003 09:36 am, Bjorn Dittmer-Roche wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Bob Toxen wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 20, 2002 at 11:25:58PM -0600, Joseph A Knapka wrote:
> > > > Public key cryptography allows us to achieve provably
> > > > secure electronic voting, immune from this sort of
> >
> > I should dispell a myth here. Public key cryptography has NOT been proven
> > to be secure through any mathematical process.
> 
> True--that is one reason why quantum crytography looks so cool.  It is 
> provably secure.  At the moment, it is also damn hard to do, but it's getting 
> easier every year.  Until that time, or someone proved P != NP, we'll have to 
> settle for something that has every appearance of being secure without an 
> exact proof.
> 
> Michael

This is all wonderful and possibly even just what the doctor ordered, 
but I am concerned that the processes described are too esoteric, opaque,
and complex to be applied in such a way that an "ordinary person" could
investigate it and convince himself or herself that it's all on the up and
up.  

Here's a rule of thumb:  suppose you could beam Leonardo De Vinci, Thomas 
Edison, or Ben Franklin to the present day.  Could these intelligent and
capable men from their respective times examine, comprehend, and verify 
the voting process to their satisfaction,  Even if they had to learn about 
new things to do so?  

Say all you want about quantum cryptography, but how to you keep it or any 
other mechanism from being perverted or subverted?

- Jeff