[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: High Rate of ballot rejections this year



>> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 21:30:01 +0100 (CET),
>> Peter Karlsson <peter@softwolves.pp.se> said: 

 > Manoj Srivastava:
 >> gpg: verify signatures failed: unexpected data Encrypted Ballot 1

 > Uh, I thank that's me. Does this mean that one cannot cast the
 > votes secretly, but must send them unencrypted? Or did I use the
 > wrong key (I used your personal key as the recipient)?

	My personal key never leaves my non-networked machine; there
 is no way that the voting machinery can decrypt that.

	Additionally, it would make it much harder for someone
 appointed by the project leadership to determine if I was fudging
 the vote, or to easily cross check the results.

	I suppose we could create a voting key for future elections,
 once the last kinks in the vote engine are worked out and debugging
 is no longer a top priority (right now, in about 1.5% of balots that
 pas the GPG check, my code extracts an  incorrectr fingerprint, and
 thus the ballot subsequently fails LDPA tests I have to manually
 intervene and finagle that (since each step of the voting machinery
 is independent, and keeps state on the file system, this is
 trivial). I need to debug that, and add facilities to handle a vote
 key. 

	If I am still secretary next year, I'll see what we can do
 about that.

	Bottom line, so far there is no way to encrypt a ballot, and
 encrypting it to my key means it shan't get counted.

	manoj
-- 
The face of war has never changed.  Surely it is more logical to heal
than to kill. Surak of Vulcan, "The Savage Curtain", stardate 5906.5
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C



Reply to: