<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Secure Online Voting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://adammonsen.com/post/324/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://adammonsen.com/post/324</link>
	<description>blog and sundries of Adam Monsen</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:52:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Boger</title>
		<link>http://adammonsen.com/post/324/comment-page-1#comment-11726</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Boger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:50:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://adammonsen.com/post/324#comment-11726</guid>
		<description>Hey Adam,

I&#039;m now a Senior Engineer at a German-owned Mobile Carrier in the Messaging Systems/Social Networking department.

Seeing first-hand how we deal with Short Messages, my first question is how we would get past dealing with private mobile carriers.  Even if the Mobile Terminating vote ends at a government facility it has to pass through the voters carrier on the way to that endpoint. 

First, most carriers can&#039;t even handle the New Years rush of SMS&#039;s, with statistics at high as a 30% failure rate and delays in the hours to days.

Second, the point from the phone to the carriers SMSC is completely open to tampering.  Also, most carriers rely on a third party to actually hand off the message to a different carrier (or in this case, a government endpoint).  That would mean routing all votes through a single point of failure and tampering.

I understand the desire to enable developing countries to vote, and latching onto the idea of cellphones as they are more ubiquitous than computers, but I think the capacity issues and security issues would make it a near impossibility.  I&#039;d rather focus on a per-ward(/district/city) open voting platform with numerous standardized checks and safeguards (all visible, testable, and open to public scrutiny) that is then merged to a main open system and then tallied in real-time to the populace.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Adam,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m now a Senior Engineer at a German-owned Mobile Carrier in the Messaging Systems/Social Networking department.</p>
<p>Seeing first-hand how we deal with Short Messages, my first question is how we would get past dealing with private mobile carriers.  Even if the Mobile Terminating vote ends at a government facility it has to pass through the voters carrier on the way to that endpoint. </p>
<p>First, most carriers can&#8217;t even handle the New Years rush of SMS&#8217;s, with statistics at high as a 30% failure rate and delays in the hours to days.</p>
<p>Second, the point from the phone to the carriers SMSC is completely open to tampering.  Also, most carriers rely on a third party to actually hand off the message to a different carrier (or in this case, a government endpoint).  That would mean routing all votes through a single point of failure and tampering.</p>
<p>I understand the desire to enable developing countries to vote, and latching onto the idea of cellphones as they are more ubiquitous than computers, but I think the capacity issues and security issues would make it a near impossibility.  I&#8217;d rather focus on a per-ward(/district/city) open voting platform with numerous standardized checks and safeguards (all visible, testable, and open to public scrutiny) that is then merged to a main open system and then tallied in real-time to the populace.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
