A Declaration of Software Independence

October 26, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Protocols, Strands, and Logic

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Wojciech Jamroga, Peter Y. A. Ryan, Steve Schneider, Carsten Schurmann, Philip B. Stark arXiv ID 2311.03372 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Citations 3 Venue Protocols, Strands, and Logic Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
A voting system should not merely report the outcome: it should also provide sufficient evidence to convince reasonable observers that the reported outcome is correct. Many deployed systems, notably paperless DRE machines still in use in US elections, fail certainly the second, and quite possibly the first of these requirements. Rivest and Wack proposed the principle of software independence (SI) as a guiding principle and requirement for voting systems. In essence, a voting system is SI if its reliance on software is ``tamper-evident'', that is, if there is a way to detect that material changes were made to the software without inspecting that software. This important notion has so far been formulated only informally. Here, we provide more formal mathematical definitions of SI. This exposes some subtleties and gaps in the original definition, among them: what elements of a system must be trusted for an election or system to be SI, how to formalize ``detection'' of a change to an election outcome, the fact that SI is with respect to a set of detection mechanisms (which must be legal and practical), the need to limit false alarms, and how SI applies when the social choice function is not deterministic.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted