Reve{a,i}ling the risks: A phenomenology of information security

Techne: Research in Philosophy and Technology

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 194-206

  Pieters, Wolter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Electronic voting; Information security; Phenomenology; Risk; Trust

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952042266     PISSN: 01617249     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Alvarez, R.M. and T.E. Hall 2004. Point, click & vote: the future of Internet voting. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
2. Asquith, H.H. 1888. "The Ballot in England." Political Science Quarterly, 3(4): 654-681.
3. Gonggrijp, R., W.-J. Hengeveld, A. Bogk, D. Engling, H. Mehnert, F. Rieger, P. Scheffers, and B. Wels. 2006. Nedap/Groenendaal ES3B voting computer: a security analysis. Available online: http://www. wijvertrouwenstemcomputersniet.nl/images/9/91/Es3b-en.pdf, consulted June 15, 2010.
4. Hansson, S.O. 2004. "Philosophical perspectives on risk." Techné, 8(1): 10-35.
5. Hansson, S.O. 2005. "The epistemology of technological risk." Techné, 9(2): 68-80.
6. Heidegger, M. 1982. The question concerning technology, and other essays. Harper Perennial.
7. Ihde, D. 1990. Technology and the lifeworld. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
8. Ilharco, F.M. 2002. Information Technology as Ontology: A Phenomenological Investigation into Information Technology and Strategy In-the-World. PhD thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Information Systems. Available online: http://www.lse.ac.uk/ collections/informationSystems/pdf/theses/Ilharco.pdf, consulted June 15, 2010.
9. Jasanoff, S. 1998. "The political science of risk perception." Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 59: 91-99.
10. Latour, B. 2004. Politics of nature: how to bring the sciences into democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Lowe, G. 1996. "Breaking and fixing the Needham-Schroeder public key protocol using FDR." In Tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis of systems, number 1055 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin: Springer, 147-166.
12. Luhmann, N. 1988. "Familiarity, confidence, trust: problems and alternatives." In: Gambetta, D., ed., Trust: Making and breaking of cooperative relations, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
13. Luhmann, N. 1995. Social Systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
14. Luhmann, N. 2005. [1993.] Risk: a sociological theory. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
15. Mohen, J. and J. Glidden 2001. "The case for Internet voting." Communications of the ACM, 44(1): 72-85.
16. Nickel, P.J. 2009. "Trust, staking, and expectations." Journal for the theory of social behaviour, 39(3): 345-362.
17. Oostveen, A.M. and Van den Besselaar, P. 2004. "Security as belief: user's perceptions on the security of electronic voting systems." In Prosser, A. and R. Krimmer, eds., Electronic Voting in Europe: Technology, Law, Politics and Society, Volume P-47 of Lecture Notes in Informatics, Bonn: Gesellschaft für Informatik, 73-82.
18. OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. 2007. The Netherlands parliamentary elections 22 November 2006: OSCE/ODIHR election assessment mission report. Available online: http://www.osce.org/item/23602. html, consulted June 15, 2010.
19. Park, J.H. 1931. "England's controversy over the secret ballot." Political Science Quarterly, 46(1): 56-81.
20. Pieters, W. 2006. "Acceptance of voting technology: between confidence and trust." In Stölen, K., W.H. Winsborough, F. Martinelli and F. Massacci, eds., Trust Management: 4th International Conference (iTrust 2006) Proceedings, number 3986 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer, 283-297.
21. Pieters, W. and R. van Haren. 2007, "Temptations of turnout and modernisation: e-voting discourses in the UK and the Netherlands." Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 5(4), 276-292.
22. Pieters, W. 2008, La volonté machinale: understanding the electronic voting controversy. PhD thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.
23. Pieters, W. 2009, "Combatting electoral traces: the Dutch tempest discussion and beyond." In E-Voting and Identity: Second International Conference (VOTE-ID 2009) Proceedings, number 5767 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin: Springer, 172-190.
24. Pieters, W. and L. Consoli. 2009. "Vulnerabilities and responsibilities: dealing with monsters in computer security." Journal of information, communication and ethics in society, 7(4): 243-257.
25. Smits, M. 2002. Monsterbezwering: de culturele domesticatie van nieuwe technologie. Amsterdam: Boom.
26. Smits, M. 2006. "Taming monsters: The cultural domestication of new technology." Technology in Society, 28(4): 489-504.
27. Tijmes, P. 1992. "Martin Heidegger: techniek als metafysica." In Achterhuis, H., ed., De maat van de techniek, Baarn: Ambo, 65-97.
28. Verbeek, P.P.C.C. 2005. What things do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. Pennsylvania State University Press.
29. Woolgar, S. and D. Pawluch 1985. "Ontological gerrymandering: the anatomy of social problems explanations." Social Problems, 32(3): 214-227.
30. Xenakis, A. and A. Macintosh 2005. "Procedural security and social acceptance in E-voting." In Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'05), IEEE Computer Society.