MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406462372 · doi:10.23962/ajic.i34.18132

South African Electoral Commission’s mobile app for voters: Data privacy and security dimensions

2024· article· en· W4406462372 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Scott Timcke

Bibliographic record

VenueThe African Journal of Information and Communication (AJIC) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research CentreStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsCommissionInternet privacyMobile appsComputer securityPrivacy policyBusinessInformation privacyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLawWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2014, the Electoral Commission of South Africa (also known the “IEC”) launched a mobile app to support voter participation in electoral processes. The app, called IEC South Africa, can be used to verify, update, and confirm a voter’s registration details and voting station. It also provides an interface for special-vote applications and real-time election results. This study conducted a privacy and security analysis of the app, through a compliance review of the IEC’s privacy policy in terms of the South African data protection legislation, followed by an analysis of the app’s APK files, permissions, third-party trackers, and vulnerabilities, including API (application programming interface) calls. The analysis revealed several security and privacy concerns, including inadequately secured API keys, the potential for unauthorised access, and the potential for data breaches. In addition, the presence of advertising and analytics trackers suggested third-party data-sharing, raising concerns about transparency and user consent. The study draws attention to the need for the IEC to take action to address the app’s security and privacy weaknesses. The study also demonstrates the importance of data minimisation, transparent practices, and adherence to privacy policies in order to maintain user trust and security in electoral technology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe African Journal of Information and Communication (AJIC)Same topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207