Glass Box Voting

On gmiller’s OSDV blog, which I found from the Facebook group .

[UPDATE]

I’m in favor of unmoderated comments.  Once I figure out how to set this site to do that, I will.

trans·par·ent, [trans-pair-uh nt] adj.

1. transmitting light, able to be seen through with clarity;
2. open, frank, candid;
3. guileless.

In optics context, transparency connotes the unhindered transmission of light. In a broader context, the term implies openness, communication and accountability. When applied to voting technology, Verified Voting describes the term as

election procedures should promote openness along with security; election laws should make it easy for candidates and/or voters to get reliable, manual recounts in close elections or when there is initial evidence of a problem in the election; and most importantly, citizens must be able to freely participate in observing elections.

For a manufacturer of voting equipment, transparency refers to availability of information about the design and testing of the equipment. This can include availability of source code, design documentation, information about test methodology and results, vulnerability analyses, bug databases, and more. Making this information available for public analysis and scrutiny in promoting public acceptance of and trust in the equipment. It can be argued that the major manufacturers currently practice transparency only when it cannot be avoided, and then to the minimum extent possible, and this promotes the current distrust of manufacturers among the voting integrity community.

In The Transparent Society, David Brin points out that “It is hard for recent cave dwellers to transform themselves into smart, honest, and truly independent creatures of light.”