<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Scratch &amp; Vote in the Press</title>
	<atom:link href="http://benlog.com/articles/2006/08/09/scratch-vote-in-the-press/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://benlog.com/articles/2006/08/09/scratch-vote-in-the-press/</link>
	<description>security, privacy, transparency.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 07:51:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: ITIF&#8217;s eVoting report: point-by-point &#171; All About Voting</title>
		<link>http://benlog.com/articles/2006/08/09/scratch-vote-in-the-press/comment-page-1/#comment-116913</link>
		<dc:creator>ITIF&#8217;s eVoting report: point-by-point &#171; All About Voting</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:56:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benlog.com/articles/2006/08/09/scratch-vote-in-the-press/#comment-116913</guid>
		<description>[...] I was not aware of many of the alternatives brought up by the paper. I have not evaluated them so I can neither praise nor damn them. They include: audio verification of votes, various two-machine proposals, and a few cryptographically secure proposals: VoteHere and Scratch &amp; Vote [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I was not aware of many of the alternatives brought up by the paper. I have not evaluated them so I can neither praise nor damn them. They include: audio verification of votes, various two-machine proposals, and a few cryptographically secure proposals: VoteHere and Scratch &amp; Vote [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
