The EVM Rigmarole

The current EVM challege makes a travesty of security testing.  It is surprising that nobody from the IT security arena is speaking up.  If the charges levelled by the opposition are true, one can be sure that a compromised machine will never be brought to the challenge.  If the EVMs were dumb terminals connected to a central server, then testing the server might suffice.  In the current distributed scenario each single machine needs to be tested for integrity.  How will the challenge ensure this?

I do not know whether EVMs were custom made to EC's specifications or just generic machine purchased off the shelf?  In either case, did the EC get the source code and security features examined by any experts?  How would the EC know if the motherboard or the stored program was changed in a set of machines by unscrupulous maintenance people?

In my humble opinion the correct way of ensuring correct functioning of EVMs should be as follows:

1. There should be a single executable running on all EVMs and its source code should be with the EC and also in the public domain.
2. Each political party should be given a copy of the compiled executable code.
3. All EVMs should have an USB port and connecting a pen drive should trigger a program to prompt the user to enter filename for comparison with the stored executable.
4. Each party should give its booth workers an USB with the correct executable and a couple of random files.
5. A willing worker at any booth should get an opportunity to test the machine by inserting the USB and comparing a few random files and the correct file with the resident executable.

This, of course, is only indicative and not exhaustive.

Views of IT experts are invited in the matter.

Expenses on Social and Electronic Media

Suddenly there is a spate of news items saying that the Election Commission will be closely monitoring expenses by political parties on Social Media (SM.)  They all seem to suggest that these expenses are huge and some parties may be resorting to tech-enabled publicity and interactions to evade a scrutiny of their overall expenses.  Certain sections of the society may even be taken in by these insidious suggestions thinking that high-tech must indeed be expensive.

And yet large sections of the society which obviously include the reporters from print and electronic media, know how amazingly inexpensive this media is!  In fact most of these services are free.   And though you may have to pay for hosting a website and development of a few apps, the aggregate cost of these over a period of five years will be much less than a single helicopter trip to a corner of the country for addressing people plus the cost of organizing the meeting and bringing hordes of people there.  I am sure that it cannot be anybody's case that even if you use free services of Facebook, Google+, YouTube etc. a certain percentage of market capitalization of these giants must be reckoned as the actual expenditure.  Needless to add that this is only in a lighter vein.

Apart from being extremely cost effective, use of SM is environment friendly too.  I cannot forget the litter throughout our colony in Lucknow after the municipal elections last time.  The streets were full of discarded envelopes, colorful pamphlets, banners etcetera.

In fact I firmly believe that use of Social Media and Electronic Media (SMEM)can substantially bring down electioneering costs.  This can lower the entry barrier just enough to bring in competition from people who today cannot think of entering politics.  And, in turn, this can lead to cleansing of politics.

I would even go so far as to suggest that use of SMEM should be made mandatory and funded by the government.  And Election Commission must scrutinize very thoroughly the expenses of those who choose not to use SMEM or use them only perfunctorily.