Comments on: What This Blog is About http://www.trustthevote.org/what_blog_about Re-inventing How America Votes Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:21:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: jsebes http://www.trustthevote.org/what_blog_about/comment-page-1#comment-8 jsebes Tue, 04 Mar 2008 00:52:00 +0000 http://wordpress.trustthevote.org/2007/12/10/what-this-blog-is-about#comment-8 <p>Open source software (or an open development process more broadly) is neither necessary nor sufficient. But it is very close to necessary in a practical sense because open access to a system enables a much more feasible and cost effective process of building assurance, including inspectaion, assessment, and certification. Openness is certainly not sufficient, because that assurance building process is required as well -- and that it be based on at least de facto standards and methodologies in order for results to be consistent and repeatable.</p><p>As for convincing someone that a particular computer is running a particular software build-- including a computer that is a voting system-- there is certainly a body of techniques for doing so at least for a system's boot image. However, these techniques are only convincing to computer software and systems professionals (or those similarly skilled), so that again we fall back to a public process for review, and public trust in the review process and reviewers. It's not mainly a technology solution, though the technques exist as a basis - code signing, trusted software distribution, tamperproof (write-once) phsyical media, and so forth. </p> Open source software (or an open development process more broadly) is neither necessary nor sufficient. But it is very close to necessary in a practical sense because open access to a system enables a much more feasible and cost effective process of building assurance, including inspectaion, assessment, and certification. Openness is certainly not sufficient, because that assurance building process is required as well — and that it be based on at least de facto standards and methodologies in order for results to be consistent and repeatable.

As for convincing someone that a particular computer is running a particular software build– including a computer that is a voting system– there is certainly a body of techniques for doing so at least for a system’s boot image. However, these techniques are only convincing to computer software and systems professionals (or those similarly skilled), so that again we fall back to a public process for review, and public trust in the review process and reviewers. It’s not mainly a technology solution, though the technques exist as a basis – code signing, trusted software distribution, tamperproof (write-once) phsyical media, and so forth.

]]> By: AllAboutVoting http://www.trustthevote.org/what_blog_about/comment-page-1#comment-7 AllAboutVoting Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:40:13 +0000 http://wordpress.trustthevote.org/2007/12/10/what-this-blog-is-about#comment-7 >But the only position of advocacy that we take is >that there are real problems with voting in the >U.S. where technology is partly the cause Agree. >and where new technology can make substantial improvements. Partially agree. For many in the election integrity community that is a controversial position. In particular, your site states that your goal is to help "develop open source guidelines, specifications, and prototypes of high assurance digital voting systems and services". (It is not clear to me whether you are angling towards electronic voting machines or towards on line voting.) In my view having an open source voting system is <strong>not</strong> enough to ensure a sufficient level integrity. In particular there is no good way that I am aware of to convince someone that the voting system is running the software that it claims to be running. >But the only position of advocacy that we take is
>that there are real problems with voting in the
>U.S. where technology is partly the cause
Agree.

>and where new technology can make substantial improvements.
Partially agree.

For many in the election integrity community that is a controversial position.

In particular, your site states that your goal is to help “develop open source guidelines, specifications, and prototypes of high assurance digital voting systems and services”. (It is not clear to me whether you are angling towards electronic voting machines or towards on line voting.)

In my view having an open source voting system is not enough to ensure a sufficient level integrity. In particular there is no good way that I am aware of to convince someone that the voting system is running the software that it claims to be running.

]]>