Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Security

Lessons From the Papal Conclave About Election Security 183

Posted by timothy
from the ok-who-dropped-the-black-ball? dept.
Hugh Pickens writes "The rules for papal elections are steeped in tradition. John Paul II last codified them in 1996, and Benedict XVI left the rules largely untouched. The 'Universi Dominici Gregis on the Vacancy of the Apostolic See and the Election of the Roman Pontiff' is surprisingly detailed. Now as the College of Cardinals prepares to elect a new pope, security people like Bruce Schneier wonder about the process. How does it work, and just how hard would it be to hack the vote? First, the system is entirely manual, making it immune to the sorts of technological attacks that make modern voting systems so risky. Second, the small group of voters — all of whom know each other — makes it impossible for an outsider to affect the voting in any way. The chapel is cleared and locked before voting. No one is going to dress up as a cardinal and sneak into the Sistine Chapel. In short, the voter verification process is about as good as you're ever going to find. A cardinal can't stuff ballots when he votes. Then the complicated paten-and-chalice ritual ensures that each cardinal votes once — his ballot is visible — and also keeps his hand out of the chalice holding the other votes. Ballots from previous votes are burned, which makes it harder to use one to stuff the ballot box. What are the lessons here? First, open systems conducted within a known group make voting fraud much harder. Every step of the election process is observed by everyone, and everyone knows everyone, which makes it harder for someone to get away with anything. Second, small and simple elections are easier to secure. This kind of process works to elect a pope or a club president, but quickly becomes unwieldy for a large-scale election. And third: When an election process is left to develop over the course of a couple of thousand years, you end up with something surprisingly good."
Displays

Canon Demos New Head-Mounted Augmented-Reality Display 53

Posted by timothy
from the you-thought-texting-was-bad dept.
Press2ToContinue writes with this excerpt from ExtremeTech: "With products like Google's Glass, the Oculus Rift, and even certain features found on the Nintendo 3DS, augmented, mixed, and virtual reality are starting to make some headway in the consumer space. Canon, best known for its cameras, is looking to break into the mixed reality scene with its new head-mounted display. ... The core of the setup is the Canon HMD (head-mounted display) which works in conjunction with various sensors — optical and magnetic, as well as visual markers — to help create the mixed reality environment. The HMD employs two cameras located in front of each eye that captures video and shoots it off to an off-board, tethered computer. The computer then combines the real-world visuals with computer-generated visuals, and beams that back to two monitors placed in front of the eyes within the HMD. The unit combines with a development platform, dubbed the MR Platform, which allows companies to create mixed reality images to display on the HMD."

Comment: never attribute to malice... (Score 1) 333

by mekkab (#42955429) Attached to: Google Patents Staple of '70s Mainframe Computing
... that which is adequately explained by stupidity. You give people too much credit and I'm sure the average joe at USPTO was being judged by how many applications s/he could get through; not get through competently. So, stupid managerial policy? Definitely the culprit.

/I realize there is a lot of assumption in that. Perhaps I'm also being stupid! :)

Comment: Re:WebmistressRachel... (Score 1) 123

by mekkab (#42759769) Attached to: CES Ditches CNET After CBS Scandal Over Dish's Hopper
now, to bring this all in line; Scott Adams should sue to silence the Federation's Dogbert (which 'Mericans have never heard of), which would spurn a cavalcade of 'news' articles, which would bring a UK police rag to prominence, which would have pedants coming out of the woodwork to claim how this was not the Striesand effect.

Good times!

/Yeah, this got a chuckle from me... schadenfreude is the schönste freude!

Comment: Re:"Secret" as in "well signposted"? (Score 3, Interesting) 101

by mekkab (#42689743) Attached to: Secret UK Uranium Components Plant Closed Over Safety Fears
my apologies for assuming you knew what I meant by "secret" and "top secret". When information (be it technology, strategy, etc) is deemed to be of a sensitive nature, it is considered classified. And there are levels of classification; Proprietary (usually this has nothing to do with national security, but it's sensitive information for a business. If you knew Apple Computer was going to by company Foo before the public announcement, that would be proprietary information that a competitor would love to know), "Secret" and "Top Secret" (these levels pertaining to national security).

So while a bank's vault is secured, what it contains is not sensitive information (it's money, it's bearer bonds, gold perhaps...). You can know what is in there and it doesn't compromise the nation.

Where-as if you know some specific technical detail about uranium enrichment, you could sell that to another foreign nation, and THAT would compromise national security.

I hope this makes some sense!

Comment: Re:No , secret as in "its nuclear , its bad" (Score 1) 101

by mekkab (#42689701) Attached to: Secret UK Uranium Components Plant Closed Over Safety Fears
side note: the baby boomers are not retiring fast enough; the "bathtub" curve of workers for available slots from retirees(since Gen X is ~ half the size of the Baby Boomers) hasn't yet materialized. My take is that due to poor retirement finances, people can't afford to retire!

/I've been waiting for Executive Vice President positions to be handed to me simply due to retirement... I'm still waiting, btw.

Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed. -- Alexander Pope

Working...