3 ms·

I'm just thinking, this e-voting fad will make it really easy for the modern-time hitlers and stalins.

by pvdebbe 11y ago

halviti 11y ago
e-voting does not necessarily mean "100% digital" it's a relatively trivial matter to use a printer attached to a voting machine to create a paper-trail. even something like "choose your candidate, get a receipt, verify it yourself, and put it in the box" the election results would be instantaneous, and the paper trail would still exist for irregularities.
- pvdebbe 11y ago
  Agreed -- when done right, it's very secure. But pretty much all the software suffers from shortcuts one after another, ridden with bugs and backdoors. Someone will most certainly get to exploit the state of affairs before these systems are solid enough for good.
CyberDildonics 11y ago
Only if it continues to be done wrong. A cryptographically open voting system with private keys would be much more difficult to rig.
- snuxoll 11y ago
  Public key cryptography in my eyes is the only proper way to do electronic voting, but it has a severe cost - the lack of secrecy. As anyone knows, the lack of secrecy comes with even more severe ramifications, the purchase of votes, pressure from friends/family/employers, the potential to be arrested in a fascist government, the list goes on.
  - CyberDildonics 11y ago
    There might be some validity to that, but I think you are blurring the lines between a private key being issued to someone and others knowing their vote, which would only happen if other know their public voting key.
    - snuxoll 11y ago
      Public key cryptography by nature requires a persons identity SOMEHOW be tied to their private key. Even if I get a private key issued by the government without any identifying information embedded in it, it's still tied to my identity, at the very least whoever administers the vote knows who I voted for - at least with a paper ballot no one but me knows what ballot I submitted.
      - CyberDildonics 11y ago
        True, although I think a centralized organization for identity, while not at all ideal, is different than everyone knowing who you voted for. I wonder if there are methods for mixing identities. Bitcoin mixing services have many people put coins into a pool, then outputs balances to new addresses. It isn't a 1:1 comparison at all, but I wonder if there are methods that could be used. If more than one identity service is used I wonder if the multiple keys could be mixed to create a unique key that only the voter knows.

I'm just thinking, this e-voting fad will make it really easy for the modern-time hitlers and stalins.

by pvdebbe 11y ago

I'm just thinking, this e-voting fad will make it really easy for the modern-time hitlers and stalins.

e-voting does not necessarily mean "100% digital" it's a relatively trivial matter to use a printer attached to a voting machine to create a paper-trail. even something like "choose your candidate, get a receipt, verify it yourself, and put it in the box" the election results would be instantaneous, and the paper trail would still exist for irregularities.

pvdebbe 11y ago
Agreed -- when done right, it's very secure. But pretty much all the software suffers from shortcuts one after another, ridden with bugs and backdoors. Someone will most certainly get to exploit the state of affairs before these systems are solid enough for good.

CyberDildonics 11y ago

Only if it continues to be done wrong. A cryptographically open voting system with private keys would be much more difficult to rig.

snuxoll 11y ago
Public key cryptography in my eyes is the only proper way to do electronic voting, but it has a severe cost - the lack of secrecy. As anyone knows, the lack of secrecy comes with even more severe ramifications, the purchase of votes, pressure from friends/family/employers, the potential to be arrested in a fascist government, the list goes on.
- CyberDildonics 11y ago
  There might be some validity to that, but I think you are blurring the lines between a private key being issued to someone and others knowing their vote, which would only happen if other know their public voting key.
  - snuxoll 11y ago
    Public key cryptography by nature requires a persons identity SOMEHOW be tied to their private key. Even if I get a private key issued by the government without any identifying information embedded in it, it's still tied to my identity, at the very least whoever administers the vote knows who I voted for - at least with a paper ballot no one but me knows what ballot I submitted.
    - CyberDildonics 11y ago
      True, although I think a centralized organization for identity, while not at all ideal, is different than everyone knowing who you voted for. I wonder if there are methods for mixing identities. Bitcoin mixing services have many people put coins into a pool, then outputs balances to new addresses. It isn't a 1:1 comparison at all, but I wonder if there are methods that could be used. If more than one identity service is used I wonder if the multiple keys could be mixed to create a unique key that only the voter knows.