----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Frantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ed Gerck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 2:14 AM Subject: Re: Scientists question electronic voting
[..] > The best counter to this problem is widely available systems to produce > fake photos of the vote, so the vote buyer can't know whether the votes he > sees in the photo are the real votes, or fake ones. > > The easiest way to implement is to let people photograph the paper on the > sample/practice -- not for real voting -- machine that poll workers use to > teach voters how to use the real machines. An extortionist could provide their own camera device to the voter, which has a built in clock that timestamps the photos and does some watermarking, or something like that, which could complicate the counter-measures. But this problem already exists with current non-electronic voting scheme. It depends on the value attributed to a vote (would an extortionist be willing to provide these custom devices?). --Anton --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
