|
|
Post by beesknee5 on Mar 2, 2018 16:18:33 GMT
I didn't intend to distract this thread but why would you continue to use postal voting when a person's identity can be identified online to the standard required of banks and government. Electronic transmission using secure modern protocols like TLS & SSO SAML is always going to beat the security of receiving a piece of paper from an unknown source through the post. I take it you didn't watch the video I posted on the previous page - which explains why there are inherent security problems with electronic voting. As for the required standard of banks and government, standard internet banking security systems require each user to have their own security device, which has to be individually set up, after following a verification procedure of some kind. Practically speaking, employing this level of security would require a new security device to be issued to the overwhelming majority of voters every time an election comes around. Elections would become several times more expensive and several times more difficult to run. Yes, it could theoretically be built to be mildly more secure than requiring signature and date of birth verification (but only if we're lucky enough that there are no security holes in any of the software running on the vote counting server). But the very nature of the system means that there is no way to verify that the result is correct. And, let's not forget, postal voting is predominantly used by the demographic that is least likely to have ever used the internet. How is a computer-illiterate housebound granny going to cast her vote under your system? Sorry I didn't have time earlier. If you had asked me four years ago whether the systems could be secure I would've said no. Much of the video doesn't relate to today's cloud based systems and the digital transformation work I'm doing with the government. A voting API as part of the government GATEWAY or the CIS system tied into the electoral register would piggy back on much of the new structure and not be a stand alone, unmaintained piece of software. When you talk about secure devices then the most common way of accessing the internet is via a mobile phone and today's phones are now coming with a fingerprint reader as standard that banks accept as a valid login through their apps. It is also the case that separate users on a PC can independently access their banking/gov gateway information with their identity validated. The security point ends up relying on the algorithms the government currently use to identity valid access and identity. The ultimate restriction will be fear and trust of new technology but I've seen that largely overcome elsewhere so it doesn't scare me. |
|
|
|
Post by froome on Mar 2, 2018 16:27:49 GMT
Frustrating that once again we know who's won, we know the turnout, but we don't know the voting figures. From @eastdevonlibdem on Twitter (the Tim isn’t me by the way): Figures as noted by Tim: Exmouth Town ward by-election figures District Council LD 187 Ind 176 Tory 142 Labour 86 Green 71; Town council: LD 252 Tory 156 Green 152 Labour 96 That's an impressively close result for the district seat. It makes you wonder what the result might have been if turnout had been at the level that might be expected in normal circumstances (which I would think would be 20-25% at least). The earlier comment about city centre ward turnouts would not apply to this seat. The town council result appears to be very close to the district result in 2015, which suggests little actual movement in votes here. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Mar 2, 2018 16:29:14 GMT
I take it you didn't watch the video I posted on the previous page - which explains why there are inherent security problems with electronic voting. As for the required standard of banks and government, standard internet banking security systems require each user to have their own security device, which has to be individually set up, after following a verification procedure of some kind. Practically speaking, employing this level of security would require a new security device to be issued to the overwhelming majority of voters every time an election comes around. Elections would become several times more expensive and several times more difficult to run. Yes, it could theoretically be built to be mildly more secure than requiring signature and date of birth verification (but only if we're lucky enough that there are no security holes in any of the software running on the vote counting server). But the very nature of the system means that there is no way to verify that the result is correct. And, let's not forget, postal voting is predominantly used by the demographic that is least likely to have ever used the internet. How is a computer-illiterate housebound granny going to cast her vote under your system? Sorry I didn't have time earlier. If you had asked me four years ago whether the systems could be secure I would've said no. Much of the video doesn't relate to today's cloud based systems and the digital transformation work I'm doing with the government. A voting API as part of the government GATEWAY or the CIS system tied into the electoral register would piggy back on much of the new structure and not be a stand alone, unmaintained piece of software. When you talk about secure devices then the most common way of accessing the internet is via a mobile phone and today's phones are now coming with a fingerprint reader as standard that banks accept as a valid login through their apps. It is also the case that separate users on a PC can independently access their banking/gov gateway information with their identity validated. The security point ends up relying on the algorithms the government currently use to identity valid access and identity. The ultimate restriction will be fear and trust of new technology but I've seen that largely overcome elsewhere so it doesn't scare me. It is just really important that you do not restrict voting to people who have particular gadgets, good online access etc. While everyone you know personally may have a smartphone I guarantee there are many many people who do not, and never will (and my 1 year old smartphone does not have fingerprint recognition because of various other requirements I had such as being able to fit in my pocket, which were higher priority...) |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,021
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 2, 2018 16:40:57 GMT
For what it's worth that looks an ok result for Labour. It's a very good result for Labour. They haven't polled more than 21% before in the ward. Basingstoke is the only part of Hampshire County where Labour have properly got their act together... |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Mar 2, 2018 16:54:36 GMT
I take it you didn't watch the video I posted on the previous page - which explains why there are inherent security problems with electronic voting. As for the required standard of banks and government, standard internet banking security systems require each user to have their own security device, which has to be individually set up, after following a verification procedure of some kind. Practically speaking, employing this level of security would require a new security device to be issued to the overwhelming majority of voters every time an election comes around. Elections would become several times more expensive and several times more difficult to run. Yes, it could theoretically be built to be mildly more secure than requiring signature and date of birth verification (but only if we're lucky enough that there are no security holes in any of the software running on the vote counting server). But the very nature of the system means that there is no way to verify that the result is correct. And, let's not forget, postal voting is predominantly used by the demographic that is least likely to have ever used the internet. How is a computer-illiterate housebound granny going to cast her vote under your system? Sorry I didn't have time earlier. If you had asked me four years ago whether the systems could be secure I would've said no. Much of the video doesn't relate to today's cloud based systems and the digital transformation work I'm doing with the government. A voting API as part of the government GATEWAY or the CIS system tied into the electoral register would piggy back on much of the new structure and not be a stand alone, unmaintained piece of software. When you talk about secure devices then the most common way of accessing the internet is via a mobile phone and today's phones are now coming with a fingerprint reader as standard that banks accept as a valid login through their apps. It is also the case that separate users on a PC can independently access their banking/gov gateway information with their identity validated. The security point ends up relying on the algorithms the government currently use to identity valid access and identity. The ultimate restriction will be fear and trust of new technology but I've seen that largely overcome elsewhere so it doesn't scare me. How does such technology solve the basic problems e-voting has of being potentially hackable and it being impossible to independently verify the result? |
|
|
|
Post by tonyhill on Mar 2, 2018 17:41:28 GMT
Remarkably there were 220 postal votes cast in Exmouth, and 440 people voted in person yesterday.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Mar 2, 2018 17:45:36 GMT
It's a very good result for Labour. They haven't polled more than 21% before in the ward. Basingstoke is the only part of Hampshire County where Labour have properly got their act together... If it were in most other towns, Kempshott would be easily a marginal. |
|
|
|
Post by dizz on Mar 2, 2018 17:56:01 GMT
It's a very good result for Labour. They haven't polled more than 21% before in the ward. Basingstoke is the only part of Hampshire County where Labour have properly got their act together... They didn't do so badly in Portsmouth South last year (yes I know it's a Unitary).... |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,021
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 2, 2018 18:41:05 GMT
Basingstoke is the only part of Hampshire County where Labour have properly got their act together... we're doing pretty well in Aldershot/Rushmoor too. They 'should' be doing far better there though, especially with the demise of UKIP. No county councillors anywhere other than Basingstoke now in Hampshire, just like in '09 (though two rather than just the one from the town). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2018 19:19:27 GMT
That ward was created in 2004, and the Lib Dem’s did win it 2004 and 2007 though, so it was winnable, albeit a while ago. As Andrew Teale points out in his preview, it has seen massive development in the last 10 years. I drive through it fairly often, and have seen the changes on a monthly basis. DIckens Heath barely existed in 2007, now it's a substantial village in its own right. Don't like it much myself, but hey ho, others do. And of course we should do what work we can anywhere and not write places off on the basis of past history. Otherwise we'd never win wards like Sandhills and Pallion in Sunderland. My sister (a low turnout Tory) lives in the ward - I quite like it myself but can see how it disproportionately attracts Tory minded people. |
|
|
|
Post by beesknee5 on Mar 2, 2018 19:40:11 GMT
]How does such technology solve the basic problems e-voting has of being potentially hackable and it being impossible to independently verify the result? All systems are potentially hackable. SAML 2.0 and TLS connection as required by the government are as safe as can be currently made for a secure connection to make an API call. As are the methods of identifying the user. It's what keeps your tax details and the data connected to your national insurance number safe so you'd best pray its as secure as can possibly be. www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/677911/data-protection-guide-customer-information-system.pdfThere is no reason why data cannot be analysed and cross referenced where it is right and proper to do so, but anyone looking to count pieces of paper would be disappointed. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,137 
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 2, 2018 20:36:09 GMT
They didn't do so badly in Portsmouth South last year (yes I know it's a Unitary).... To be fair, Khunanup does pretty clearly exclude Southampton & Portsmouth from his strictures. Just because he's consistent doesn't make him any less wrong. Those cities remain very much part of the County of Hampshire. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Mar 2, 2018 20:37:17 GMT
Remarkably there were 220 postal votes cast in Exmouth, and 440 people voted in person yesterday. Those were the figures I was most anxious to see, thanks. I guess the total number of potential postal votes , i.e the electors on the local authority's postal vote register, would be at least double the actual recorded postal votes -a 50% turnout on the postal vote register would be pretty good. If that proved to be right, then the votes cast in person would equal the pv register, which was what I had said I thought might be the case. If anything I am surprised the postal voted turnout wasn't higher. I suppose the fact that this was a compact town centre ward played a part- a really rural ward would be much higher, I imagine. |
|
|
|
Post by aintree92 on Mar 2, 2018 20:51:07 GMT
we're doing pretty well in Aldershot/Rushmoor too. They 'should' be doing far better there though, especially with the demise of UKIP. No county councillors anywhere other than Basingstoke now in Hampshire, just like in '09 (though two rather than just the one from the town). Labour does very well in Aldershot Town and holds three (North Town, Aldershot Park and Wellington) of the five wards on Rushmoor, however in Farnborough they only hold one of eight with Cherrywood Ward. The Rushmoor Labour Group of eleven is one of the largest in the south east. In the Hampshire County seat of Aldershot South the Tories only beat Labour by three votes to win the division. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,021
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 2, 2018 21:47:42 GMT
To be fair, Khunanup does pretty clearly exclude Southampton & Portsmouth from his strictures. Just because he's consistent doesn't make him any less wrong. Those cities remain very much part of the County of Hampshire. I did not say either Hampshire or the County of Hampshire (of which Portsmouth and Southampton clearly are) I said Hampshire County which in this part of the world is shorthand for the area administered by Hampshire County Council. Of course I shouldn't have to explain this because with my deliberate form of words it should have been blatantly obvious... |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,137
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 2, 2018 21:50:53 GMT
Just because he's consistent doesn't make him any less wrong. Those cities remain very much part of the County of Hampshire. I did not say either Hampshire or the County of Hampshire (of which Portsmouth and Southampton clearly are) I said Hampshire County which in this part of the world is shorthand for the area administered by Hampshire County Council. Of course I shouldn't have to explain this because with my deliberate form of words it should have been blatantly obvious... It was obvious but still wrong. If you mean the area currently administered by Hampshire County Council, then that's what you ought to write. 'Somerset County' would not be an acceptable abbreviation for the five districts (minus BANES & North Somerset) around here. Besides, Portsmouth and Southampton should naturally still be under the control of the County Council anyway.  |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,021
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 2, 2018 21:57:51 GMT
They 'should' be doing far better there though, especially with the demise of UKIP. No county councillors anywhere other than Basingstoke now in Hampshire, just like in '09 (though two rather than just the one from the town). Labour does very well in Aldershot Town and holds three (North Town, Aldershot Park and Wellington) of the five wards on Rushmoor, however in Farnborough they only hold one of eight with Cherrywood Ward. The Rushmoor Labour Group of eleven is one of the largest in the south east. In the Hampshire County seat of Aldershot South the Tories only beat Labour by three votes to win the division. At the risk of repeating myself, and bearing in mind in addition to what I've already said Labour held a division in Aldershot before last May which was on less favourable boundaries than the new Aldershot South, Labour 'should' be doing better in Rushmoor. And to think that reaction was provoked by me being complementary about the Labour group in Basingstoke & Deane...  |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,021
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 2, 2018 22:01:31 GMT
I did not say either Hampshire or the County of Hampshire (of which Portsmouth and Southampton clearly are) I said Hampshire County which in this part of the world is shorthandfor the area administered by Hampshire County Council.Of course I shouldn't have to explain this because with my deliberate form of words it should have been blatantly obvious... It was obvious but still wrong. If you mean the area currently administered by Hampshire County Council, then that's what you ought to write. 'Somerset County' would not be an acceptable abbreviation for the five districts (minus BANES & North Somerset) around here. Besides, Portsmouth and Southampton should naturally still be under the control of the County Council anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 2, 2018 22:05:54 GMT
Labour does very well in Aldershot Town and holds three (North Town, Aldershot Park and Wellington) of the five wards on Rushmoor, however in Farnborough they only hold one of eight with Cherrywood Ward. The Rushmoor Labour Group of eleven is one of the largest in the south east. In the Hampshire County seat of Aldershot South the Tories only beat Labour by three votes to win the division. At the risk of repeating myself, and bearing in mind in addition to what I've already said Labour held a division in Aldershot before last May which was on less favourable boundaries than the new Aldershot South, Labour 'should' be doing better in Rushmoor. And to think that reaction was provoked by me being complementary about the Labour group in Basingstoke & Deane... If you will argue in obvious bad faith, this is to be expected. Yes, Labour did better in Aldershot in 2013 than 2017. This is because Labour did better nationwide in 2013 than 2017. I suspect the dropoff in Aldershot was probably worse than nationwide, but there are more obvious reasons than organisation for that. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,137
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 2, 2018 22:06:42 GMT
It was obvious but still wrong. If you mean the area currently administered by Hampshire County Council, then that's what you ought to write. 'Somerset County' would not be an acceptable abbreviation for the five districts (minus BANES & North Somerset) around here. Besides, Portsmouth and Southampton should naturally still be under the control of the County Council anyway. Your "part of the world" isn't a million kilometres from mine, you know. I guess this means the name Hampshire County Cricket Club is a reference to the fact that The Rose Bowl is located within the Borough of Eastleigh, else they'd have to rename themselves 'Hampshire County, Southampton and Portsmouth Cricket Club'. |
|
