Re: EVM Fraud Detected

Voter-verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) is planned to be used in Nandan
Nilekani contesting constituency, everybody is confounded why it is tried
out here in this constituency. Already people had come out with the faults
with the system, most ridiculous (but real), is 'cheeti' can be used to
prove to whom they voted and 'collect' the money. Pls check the link below
for the article including photo of VVPAT.

http://www.bangaloremirror.com/bangalore/others/Why-was-Blore-South-chosen-forcheeti-system/articleshow/33192416.cms
?


On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Arun Mehta <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On Apr 4, 2014 5:48 AM, "Narendra Sisodiya" <narendra-djpCnAWmwNRnjiQx+Zhyb1aTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
> wrote:
> > It is possible that Paper trail shows Vote was given to party A but
> actually inside electronic vote goes to party B ??
>
> Short answer, Narendra: yes. It depends on how the software is written.
>
> About a year ago, I had posted on this in detail, appended below. The
> paper ballot, verified by the voter as accurate, is only used if a recount
> is ordered, in which case the electronic vote is disregarded, and the paper
> votes physically counted by hand.
>
> Arun Mehta
> My post from May 5, 2013:
> a purely electronic voting system necessarily suffers from one of two
> flaws: either there is no possibility of a recount, or you can determine
> who voted for whom.
>
> In India, we have had two versions of evm. Version 1 suffered from flaw 1,
> you couldn't recount. They tried to fix that in Version 2, but guess what:
> they landed up with flaw 2. I have verified this
>
>
> http://www.bapsi.org/httpssitesgooglecomabapsiorghomepagerti-queries-responses-1/on-technology--evms
> 13-04-2010 to the CPIO, Election Commission of India
> Is it technically possible to determine which voter voted for whom in the
> process of electronic voting?
>
> Response: "By attaching a device called the 'decoder' to the EVM a
> statement of voting data showing the order in which the voters voted and to
> whom they voted may be printed. This is done only on the orders of
> competent court, such information can be printed and shown."
> ___
>
> Each party is allowed a person in the booth, who checks off the names of
> the people who have cast their votes. All this person needs to do, is to
> give the names a running number. With the above printout, finding out who
> voted for whom is a breeze.
>
> It is now time for Version 3. This one basically is a version 1 evm, which
> only maintains a count of total votes polled by each candidate. But it also
> has a printer, that allows the voter to see how she voted in the form of
> hard copy, which however she cannot access, merely allow to fall into a
> ballot box. Should a recount be ordered, the ballot box is opened, and the
> paper votes counted by hand.
>
> My suggestion for improvement would be to make the ballot box of a single
> piece of translucent plastic, so that it can be verified at the start that
> it is empty, and you cannot get at the paper votes without destroying it.
> Also, at the slit through which the paper falls, I would embed into the
> plastic a single-chip photo-diode cum microcontroller, which would record
> the time every time the photo diode went from light to dark (e.g. when the
> paper falls through) or from dark to light. So, the exact
>
> _______________________________________________
> India-gii mailing list
> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>
>


-- 
Thankyou
regards
sashi

_______________________________________________
India-gii mailing list
India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii