[16221] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: They Said It Couldn't Be Done
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ian Brown)
Tue Sep 21 14:22:22 2004
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 07:05:41 +0100
From: Ian Brown <I.Brown@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
To: Dave Howe <DaveHowe@gmx.co.uk>
Cc: Email@metzdowd.com, Cryptography <cryptography@metzdowd.com>,
Rebecca Mercuri <notable@mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <414F4A07.5060702@gmx.co.uk>
> [snip HAVA quote and Nevada news]
> So unless there is a amendment to that law (that I am obviously unaware
> of) it isn't up to individual States to add this as an additional
> requirement - its already required. perhaps someone could enlighten me?
I believe many e-voting machines "meet" this requirement by printing out
a tally of votes *when the election has closed* -- and so the voter
doesn't get to check that the paper record actually matches the vote
they intended to cast :(
--
+44 7970 164 526 / http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/I.Brown/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
