Anyone know more about this BT "uk identity verification" scheme?

[Ian G Batten]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, David Hansen wrote:
> There is nothing paranoic in noting that we do not have a secret 
> ballot. That is simply a fact that cannot be disputed.

Clearly.

> Nobody has yet managed to tell me what use numbered ballot papers 
> would be in a criminal investigation. I note that the Home Office 
> fail to do so in this memorandum.

I suspect it's more ``we've always done it that way'' than anything
darker.  I certainly _wouldn't_ vote in an election on-line, because
that doesn't even have the ``matching twenty million pieces of paper to
a register involves enough resource it'd be hard to keep secret''
protection, and I cannot believe the civil service would miss the chance
to record all the on-line votes, even if the Labour party didn't think
of it first.

> >>  the packets containing counterfoils and marked ballot papers
> >> should be stored at different secure locations and subject to
> >> enhanced security arrangements to prevent unauthorised access 
> 
> And we all know how much confidence we have in "codes of practice" 
> from the Home Office, especially those with the word "should".

Good point.

ian