In elections to the Duma Russians will be able to vote via the Internet.
Chairman of the CEC of Russia Vladimir Churov proposes that in the State Duma elections in December 2011 an opportunity for voters to vote remotely by internet or by mobile phone. In his opinion, it will increase turnout and reduce the cost of elections.
"There should be a possibility of remote voting via the Internet or mobile communications - satellite, or conventional, it can seriously affect the increase in turnout," - he said Tuesday at a meeting of the Federation Council Committee on Regional Policy.
In addition, says Mr. Churov, such a move would seriously reduce the cost of expenditure on elections, because, for example, in the Murmansk region helicopter, which gives the voters the ballot box, costs about 65 thousand rubles per hour, and the Far East - More expensive.
"No reason to resist the remote vote no" - quoted by the CEC Chairman , RIA Novosti . According to him, remote voting in elections to the Duma may be introduced in remote regions, as well as the vote of Russians abroad.
http://tinyurl.com/IVinRuski
USA Wake Up!!
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Was the DC Hack a Conspiracy?
RE: Washington Post article on DC hack, at http://ow.ly/31Wgp
One true statements in this article is, “For more than a decade, computer security scientists have been warning of certain core dangers related to Internet voting." Yes, "warning," but never offering any evidence!
Simons and Jefferson, especially, are experts in what I call the Halloween method of opposing Internet voting; that is, telling really scary stories about what COULD happen if a system was hacked.(1) After a decade of crying "wolf!" without any actual facts to point to, the alarmists needed something concrete. The DC fiasco seems to be just what the doctor ordered. Now they use the DC hack as if it were proof that ALL Internet voting systems are as easy to hack. How convenient! Never mind the fact that in Europe, Canada, and the US Internet voting trials have all worked well – right now West Virginia and Arizona are having great success with well-built Internet voting systems.
Besides those pesky facts, all the facts have yet to be discovered about the DC incident. The article neglects to mention that the team at Trust the Vote, who built the DC system, have been long-time critics of Internet voting. That raises some yet unanswered questions.
Why did they submit a bid to build an Internet voting system? Why did the DC officials hire them, as opposed to the companies that built the currently successful West Virginia and Arizona systems?
One observer wrote on Slashdot (not me) that the system seems designed to fail.(2) Could that be true? Was the very construction of the system an insider attack? Did the builders plant a back door? What kind of communication did Trust the Vote members have with Halderman, after they got the DC contract? Just how duped and used were the DC officials?
1. For more details on this history see "Scary Stories Fail to Stop Internet Voting"
http://ssrn.com/author=1053589
2. More details and citations at, http://bit.ly/bk0cpQ
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Email: InternetVoting@gmail.com
Blog: http://internetvotingforall.blogspot.com/
Twitter: wjkno1
FB: William Kelleher
Posted as a comment to the WashP article by: wjkellpro | October 30, 2010 3:50 PM
One true statements in this article is, “For more than a decade, computer security scientists have been warning of certain core dangers related to Internet voting." Yes, "warning," but never offering any evidence!
Simons and Jefferson, especially, are experts in what I call the Halloween method of opposing Internet voting; that is, telling really scary stories about what COULD happen if a system was hacked.(1) After a decade of crying "wolf!" without any actual facts to point to, the alarmists needed something concrete. The DC fiasco seems to be just what the doctor ordered. Now they use the DC hack as if it were proof that ALL Internet voting systems are as easy to hack. How convenient! Never mind the fact that in Europe, Canada, and the US Internet voting trials have all worked well – right now West Virginia and Arizona are having great success with well-built Internet voting systems.
Besides those pesky facts, all the facts have yet to be discovered about the DC incident. The article neglects to mention that the team at Trust the Vote, who built the DC system, have been long-time critics of Internet voting. That raises some yet unanswered questions.
Why did they submit a bid to build an Internet voting system? Why did the DC officials hire them, as opposed to the companies that built the currently successful West Virginia and Arizona systems?
One observer wrote on Slashdot (not me) that the system seems designed to fail.(2) Could that be true? Was the very construction of the system an insider attack? Did the builders plant a back door? What kind of communication did Trust the Vote members have with Halderman, after they got the DC contract? Just how duped and used were the DC officials?
1. For more details on this history see "Scary Stories Fail to Stop Internet Voting"
http://ssrn.com/author=1053589
2. More details and citations at, http://bit.ly/bk0cpQ
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Email: InternetVoting@gmail.com
Blog: http://internetvotingforall.blogspot.com/
Twitter: wjkno1
FB: William Kelleher
Posted as a comment to the WashP article by: wjkellpro | October 30, 2010 3:50 PM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)