- KICTANet - KICTANet

Another wave of cyber attacks against Kenya?
by Brian Munyao Longwe 05 Apr '13

05 Apr '13

Yesterday the website of a legal firm specializing in intellectual property that belongs to a friend was hacked and defaced. I discovered when going to look up some materials on copyright and immediately alerted him, he has since mobilized his web designer/hosting company to deal with the issue. I managed to take a screenshot of the homepage in it's "hacked" state. As you can see the "hackers" claim to be from Saudi Arabia and (as can be expected) are very proud that they have compromised this site. In the background is the logo of Backtrack, which could is a linux distribution designed for information security that consists of a wide range of "hacker" tools. [image: Inline image 1] This incident could be evidence of the beginning of another wave of attacks against Kenyan systems on the Internet. We desperately need an awareness campaign that will alert website owners/operators to the dangers and prompt them to get themselves checked (like the HIV campaign). Best regards, Brian

2 1

Fwd: [ISOC_KE] TechPresident on Kenyan elections
by Ali Hussein 05 Apr '13

05 Apr '13

Ali Hussein CEO | 3mice interactive media Ltd Principal | Telemedia Africa Ltd +254 773/713 601113 "The future belongs to him who knows how to wait." - Russian Proverb Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: > From: Joly MacFie <joly(a)punkcast.com> > Date: April 5, 2013, 5:09:33 AM GMT+03:00 > To: "isoc(a)orion.my.co.ke" <isoc(a)orion.my.co.ke> > Subject: [ISOC_KE] TechPresident on Kenyan elections > Reply-To: joly(a)punkcast.com > > http://techpresident.com/news/wegov/23691/kenya-technology-proved-useful-to… > > Why Were Kenya's Elections Peaceful? Technology Provides Only a Partial Explanation > BY KELLY GILBLOM | Thursday, April 4 2013 > > > Screenshot of the Uchaguzi map of election day events. > When Kenyan presidential candidate Raila Odinga graciously conceded to his opponent, incumbent Uhuru Kenyatta, during a Saturday television broadcast that followed a long court battle, the country breathed a sigh of relief. Fears that Kenya would spiral into crisis, as it did after the 2007 presidential elections, had not materialized. In marked contrast to the terrible violence of the last time, this post-electoral transfer of power was, with the exception of isolated incidents, peaceful. > > In the headquarters of non-profit tech company Ushahidi's Nairobi headquarters, a group of volunteers and tech professionals congratulated themselves. They had spent years working on software that would track incidences of crimes and unrest that occurred as a result of the election — and forming partnerships to get that information into the right hands. > > They believe that their efforts provided Kenyans with an important tool that helped realize their wish for peaceful elections. > > But technology alone was not the reason for peaceful elections in Kenya. "Kenyans wanted peace," said Elliott Wilkes, Kenya technical adviser at Mercy Corps, who worked with Ushahidi to monitor the 2013 elections. > > The technological tools created by Ushahidi and its partners, explained Wilkes, helped them achieve the goal of peaceful elections — but they were not necessarily the deciding factor. > > Significant role of community engagement > > Technology played a minor role in the 2007 and 2008 elections, when claims of vote-rigging stirred old tribal rivalries and led to widespread violence. This year, however, it was a hallmark of the democratic process. > > Private sector initiatives like Ushahidi's 2013 election-monitoring process, Uchaguzi (Swahili for "choice" or "elections"), involved a large network of groups reporting crime and other election-related hang-ups, mapping them online using Ushahidi software and then reporting them to the proper authorities. > > According to Daudi Were, Ushahidi's lead on the Uchaguzi project, there was a significant increase in community engagement this time around, compared to 2007. While he did not cite specific numbers, Were said, "We are happy that people were engaged. I'm not sure if we were surprised about it, we expected a lot of engagement and you know the good thing about Uchaguzi is it meets you where you are." > > Meanwhile, the government created the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) to implement a raft of new technologies aimed at ensuring vote counts were legitimate. > > The IEBC introduced a biometric data system that kept track of voter ID photos and other individualized information. The goal was to prevent people from voting twice or from using the names of deceased or non-existent people to cast a ballot, as some claimed happened in 2007. It also planned to have constituencies submit votes electronically for the first time this year. > > Technology played an important role this election, and Kenya, once again, showed itself to be a leader in tech promotion, said Wilkes. > > Uchaguzi is probably the most important case study of a technology platform that made grassroots efforts more efficient and effective. In the weeks and months heading into the elections, the staff established partnerships with the IEBC, the Red Cross, the police and various first responders. By the time election season began, they were a known entity with high credibility. Rather than have ordinary citizens try to contact the authorities themselves to lodge complaints, Uchaguzi provided them with a single contact point for all issues, ranging from outbreaks of violence to polling booth irregularities. Complaints and concerns were submitted via the website, SMS, phone or email, with Uchaguzi's volunteers trained in the methodology of verifying complaints and then referring them to the appropriate authorities. Thus the NGO workers helped prevent the overload and chaos that stymied emergency response to the 2007-8 violence. > > "Uchaguzi tries to collect as much data from as many people as possible," explained Duade Were. "Once you establish the information as credible, then you escalate to the organization you know that’s responsible for that response. If it’s a law enforcement issue, we take it to the police, if it’s an electoral issue, we take it to the IEBC. If it’s something that requires first responders, we take it to a partner such as the Red Cross." > > Marrying technology to grassroots engagement > > Amongst the experts interviewed for this article, there is wide agreement that by mapping the verified complaints, Uchaguzi was able to pre-empt those who might have made exaggerated claims in order to stir up trouble, as happened in 2007-8. This time, more people were aware there was visual proof of what was going on. And since mobile and Internet access is quite widespread in Kenya, it was easy to share the map, which also provided a forum for constructive engagement. Thus the Internet went a long way toward increasing transparency, which in turn played an important role in preventing a recurrence of violence. > > Mercy Corps and others confirm that old-fashioned grassroots efforts are what provided the groundwork for a peaceful outcome, while technology was a useful tool that helped further that goal. Grassroots initiatives included face-to-face engagement with community leaders and the deployment of volunteer monitors to be physically present in voting constituencies on the day of the elections. The NGOs also invested effort in nurturing long-standing partnerships with a large cross-section of groups. But the IEBC electronic poll books that housed voters' biometric data suffered widespread technical failures on election day, leading the commission to ditch them altogether. > > The failure of the biometric voter identification system did provide Odinga with credible reason tochallenge the results, but the IEBC insisted the system was always intended to supplement old-fashioned vote counts, rather than replacing them. While some Kenyans said they were left feeling disillusioned with the electoral process, nearly everyone interviewed for this article, including Odinga supporters, seemed to believe the voting results were credible. Since Kenyatta received more than 50 percent of the vote, the country was able to avoid a potentially divisive runoff election. Perhaps most importantly, Odinga challenged the results in the court system, rather than on the street, and heaccepted the court's decision calmly. > > Grassroots efforts also proved valuable when Ushahidi had to shut down an alert system, when a glitch caused it to send and resend similar alerts. > > Because people knew about the scope and scale of the Uchaguzi project ahead of time, this one technical failure did not cause citizens to lose faith in the platform altogether, according to its founders. And while election day saw about 15 people killed in isolated skirmishes on the coast, there were no other major violent events. > > "They say that technology is only 10 percent of the story — a very important 10 percent — yet if all these other things are required for proper deployment, that's what we've been working on," said Daudi Were. > > As Sara Jerving reported for techPresident in February, technology was supplemented by creative engagement projects, such as street theater aimed at raising awareness about violence and its causes in Kibera, a sprawling Nairobi slum that was a hotbed of internecine violence in 2007-8. > > Streamlining communication > > In 2007-8 the government did deploy security forces to quell criminal activity, even as neighborhood watch groups formed to supplement police efforts. But back then there was little cohesion or coordination between the putative peace makers. Meanwhile tech platforms like Ushahidi's crowd-mapping efforts were disorganized and still in their most nascent stages. > > "One of the key challenges in 2007 was that everything was so fragmented. Everyone was doing their own thing, there weren't really any collective efforts taking place," said Were. > > He said that Ushahidi's goal during these elections was to correct the big gaps in communication and bring all interested parties together on one platform so they could benefit from one another's efforts. > > Were said: "It's always hard to measure something that didn't happen, but the fact that we didn't have a big humanitarian, a big security crisis this time I think speaks to the partnerships that were developed and how effective they were in working together." > > A report by a research team at Nairobi's iHub showed just how much Ushahidi used scale to its advantage this time around. It contacted at least half a dozen aid agencies and NGOs ahead of time to serve as on-the-ground foot soldiers during the elections. > > Aid and NGO workers sent in reports to a team of more than 200 trained volunteers at the Uchaguzi situation room in Nairobi and also served as eyewitnesses to verify almost 5,000 reports sent in by regular citizens via SMS or email. Complaints ran the gamut from logistical problems at polling stations to concerns about potential outbreaks of violence. > > Another group was deployed to geo-locate the report and map it, while a team of translators ensured that those who could not speak English were heard, too. A technology team kept the servers from crashing and fixed unexpected glitches when they occurred. An analysis and research team then filtered the raw data into a visually appealing and useful form and other volunteers reported violence, crime, hate speech and logistical issues to authorities as needed. > > "Civil society enlightens citizen(s) on their rights and responsibilities while the technology community develops tools to ease daily life processes. Bringing the two together for an election-monitoring project amplified citizens' voices, enabling the world to gauge the Kenyan election atmosphere and mood of the nation," the report said. > > Increased credibility of government institutions > > But private-sector efforts, such as Uchaguzi, are not the only ways technology was used to advance Kenya's election process. > > While it is unclear exactly why the IEBC's technology efforts failed during the elections, experts say the fact that Kenya invested significant effort in modernizing its election process is a big deal. For ordinary citizens, seeing that their government was committed to transparency went a long way toward increasing the trust they placed in their institutions. > > The government also invested major effort over the past few years in restoring the credibility of the courts and police. The payoff was illustrated on March 30, when the Supreme Court handed down its decision about the election results. On Twitter, Kenyan 'netizens talked about remaining peaceful, with many saying they had voted for Odinga, but now supported Kenyatta because he had legitimately been elected president. > > "Only five years ago, Raila and many Kenyans rightly regarded the courts as corrupt. The courts were also regarded as handmaidens of the government of the day," said James Gathii, a law professor at Loyola University, who is writing a book on the Kenyan judiciary and is also a native Kenyan. > > Gathii added, "Today, the progress made in transforming the judiciary is paying tangible dividends. Violence has been avoided." > > Kelly Gilblom is an American freelance journalist based in Nairobi. > > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - > _______________________________________________ > isoc mailing list > isoc(a)orion.my.co.ke > http://orion.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/isoc

1 0

Re: [kictanet] Opinion Technology, transparency, and the Kenyan general election of 2013
by Dick Omondi 05 Apr '13

05 Apr '13

Now that we have a court decision that clears the matter of the presidency, perhaps it is now time to remove the emotions of the decision, turn away from politics and get down to the core issues in real institutional management and those surrounding the processes and the people around the IEBC lest we sit back and get through another four years and put together another unit in the last year of the 5 and go back to the same merry go round. ________________________________ From: kictanet To: Dick Omondi Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Sent: Sat Mar 30 21:40:14 2013 Subject: Re: [kictanet] Opinion Technology, transparency, and the Kenyan general election of 2013 Thank you Ali. I appreciate your comments. Shukran. On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke> wrote: Wariga Thanks for sharing. I enjoyed the read. I want to however object to the words:- '...the election results show that technology has failed them.' I humbly submit that what failed us in this case is a mix of partisan politicking, a knack for jostling to see how each proponent could manipulate the process for their own benefit and lastly the failure of the IEBC leadership to accept and tell Kenyans to our faces that the most expensive technology ever bought for elections in Kenya (and Probably Africa) was designed to fail before it landed in the country. I would replace the sentence '...the election results show that technology has failed them.' with the sentence '...the election results show that leadership has failed them.' The saving grace is that we have a sober Supreme Court and we thank God for them. Ali Hussein CEO | 3mice interactive media Ltd Principal | Telemedia Africa Ltd +254 773/713 601113 "The future belongs to him who knows how to wait." - Russian Proverb Sent from my iPad On Mar 29, 2013, at 11:05 PM, Warigia Bowman <warigia(a)gmail.com> wrote: I thought you guys might enjoy this piece. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/03/2013329135519365308.html Take a look, and tell me what you think. :-) Warigia _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhussein.com The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. -- Dr. Warigia Bowman Assistant Professor Clinton School of Public Service University of Arkansas wbowman(a)clintonschool.uasys.edu ------------------------------------------------- View my research on my SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=1479660 -------------------------------------------------- This email and any file(s) transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Unauthorised distribution, copying, use or disclosure of the contents to any other person is prohibited. Airtel Networks Kenya Limited does not accept any legal liability for the contents of this message. If you have received this email in error please notify the Systems Administrator, mailadmin(a)ke.airtel.com. This email and any file(s) transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Unauthorised distribution, copying, use or disclosure of the contents to any other person is prohibited. Airtel Networks Kenya Limited does not accept any legal liability for the contents of this message. If you have received this email in error please notify the Systems Administrator, mailadmin(a)ke.airtel.com.

9 19

Measurement lab in Kenya
by Ory Okolloh 04 Apr '13

04 Apr '13

* Dear listers, A few weeks ago, Measurement Lab Research Consortium (M-Lab) launched one of its first locations in Africa, in partnership with KENET Kenya, Google Africa, and many other industry and academic partners. M-Lab is a collaborative effort working to provide an open, global, publicly available source of data on network performance. To accomplish this M-Lab takes a completely open approach, managing a purpose-built global server platform designed specifically for network measurement. Researchers deploy open-source measurement tools on this platform, and each time a test is run using one of these tools, data is collected. Currently M-Lab makes over 700 terabytes of raw, rich measurement data available to anyone who’s interested. M-Lab’s presence in Kenya (and also South Africa) mean that this data is now being collected on African networks, giving a new and valuable source of information about the health and performance of African infrastructure. A more public launch will happen in a few weeks, for now I'm hoping to drive some initial research ahead of that and invite you to look into<http://measurementlab.net/data>the data, and to access it here <https://storage.cloud.google.com/?arg=m-lab&pli=1#m-lab>. If you’re interested in learning more about M-Lab, please visit measurementlab.net. Finally, M-Lab has a full time staff dedicated to answering questions and promoting research. Please don’t hesitate to contact them with any questions: http://measurementlab.net/contact Best, Ory *

2 2

Internet - Slow
by Edith Adera 04 Apr '13

04 Apr '13

Listers, I wonder if I'm the only one who's experiencing slow Internet since yesterday - both official and personal connection. Anyone knows what's going on? Edith

17 27

Lots of buzz as mobile phone in Kenya turns 40 years
by Grace Mutung'u (Bomu) 04 Apr '13

04 Apr '13

See attached picture. -- Grace L.N. Mutung'u (Bomu) Kenya Skype: gracebomu Twitter: @Bomu Website: http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/profile/GraceMutungu

1 0

CORRECT ATTACHMENT FOR KENYATTA UNIVERSITY JOBS
by charles nduati 04 Apr '13

04 Apr '13

Hi Listers, Here are the correct attachments for the Kenyatta University Job adverts sent earlier Regards, Charles CHARLES N. NDUATI DIRECTOR, REVENUE GENERATION AND ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT -KENYATTA UNIVERSITY MOBILE:254-722728815 EMIAL:[email protected],[email protected],

1 0

Ethical Issue - content gifts to replace corporate gifts?
by John Kieti 04 Apr '13

04 Apr '13

People, Some of you might have struggled with ethical concerns around receiving corporate gifts or bluntly bribes from suppliers or other people courting you in a corporate sense. From a corporate governance sense such gifts can pause challenges. Read an article here - http://mpull.blogspot.com/2013/03/content-is-it-new-corporate-gift.html and am beginning to wonder, does is become easier or more acceptable if the gift is content? Am curious to hear thoughts from ICT professionals here - esp. those in offices. Regards -- My Blog - www.gmeltdown.com ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' The ordinary just won't do

1 0

Re: [kictanet] kictanet Digest, Vol 70, Issue 201 - Re: Opinion Technology, transparency, and the Kenyan general Election
by Aquinas Wasike 03 Apr '13

03 Apr '13

Forgive me for the long post that I am just about to make! I would like to chip in with my comments to the on-going discussion about IEBC and Technology. The IEBC shortfalls were not about technology. It was about people and process and the risk mitigations put around the whole effort! Some of you are aware that we were mentioned several times as a player around the technology failures. This is not to placate our position. We had no position to defend as our systems were fully and properly delivered and performed 100% to expectation. We are very proud of our work at IEBC. Yes, it was a massive IS (Information Systems) effort where literary tonnes of cash (yes, I say this with some form of sarcasm as we did not need to spend in the manner we did) was availed. The fiasco surrounding the BVR voter registration procurement (Biometric & AFIS - to avoid double registration/dead voters) has been well documented and written about. Our previous elections (2007) were marred by a resultant election violence catalysed by a claimed election fraud/theft that is said to have been caused by claims that the then manual voter registration system was porous and may have been manipulated allowing double registration in some areas and even ballot box stuffing in many others. So all this spending was in an attempt to avoid a repeat of this. On 9th November 2012 in an email conversation with some colleagues who I know are also active on this list I said and I quote ".......I must say that IEBC now remains the single largest threat to the security and safety of Kenya in the way they are managing this very sensitive matter. This is my personal opinion; it is not the opinion of LANTech (my employer) which is currently engaged in a business transaction with IEBC. I would say very frankly that their level of preparedness is appalling!" Still earlier on, on 30th October I had expressed the very same similar sentiments where I said, ".....I wonder whether IEBC will not use this as an excuse to scuttle any hope for the Kenyan Diaspora to vote. I must say that the level/state of preparedness by IEBC is shocking to say the least. It is a classic case of how not to! Some of us who are doing some work there are just shocked at how things have been left to the very last minute and with this you can be sure that a lot of stuff will fall through their fingers. We pray for Mother Kenya!". As it happens both my predictions have come to pass. There numerous goofs were mostly self-inflicted, few others quite external and even others very expected on a project of this nature in which you will expect that they will anticipate and take corrective action or plan for risk mitigation. Let us say that the main and biggest self-inflicted risk was procuring the systems very late into the calendar of the already known election date (I will not also go into the details of vested interests which was well reported about). For example the BVR Kit should have been procured and delivered by May 2012 to allow for 90days voter registration period. In the end the voter registration was only conducted in 30days deep into the election calendar and other milestones on the calendar were equally reduced. Even then Kenyans were very eager and more than 14.5m of us registered to vote! And we must do away with this practise of registration for elections when they are nigh. Voter registrations should be a continuous exercise (as our new constitution states) and even then anybody with an ID, having registered by the Registrar of Persons (as an adult Kenyan) should by default have a right to vote. The registration of persons should not be any business of IEBC as you will see in my other discussion that I will start asking for the Ministry of Immigration to stop the current tender for the AFIS/Civil Registration systems and instead take over the systems just newly procured by IEBC. The IEBC enjoyed massive goodwill both locally and multi-lateral partners who ensured that it had all the resources (fiscal) and otherwise to run the elections. This is probably where the expectations were not matched evenly with the delivery (call it reality). It may seem that the IEBC was lacking in that other resource that may not have been anticipated or planned i.e. its human resource capacity to deliver on the expectations. The 2013 Elections were the most complicated ever with 6 different seats being voted/vied for at the same time. This was akin to running six different elections in parallel. This is a huge logistical exercise by any measure! Thus the decision and rightly so to use technology as an enabler to deliver the election. If we analyse the Technology dimension, the ICT infrastructure at IEBC was discredited and archaic having been largely inherited from the old ECK. No clean voter database existed. It had to be recreated afresh with a fresh voter registration exercise, the reason for procuring the BVR voter registration system (worth close to Kshs. 9b as reported in some circles - US$105m). Then the EVID system (Electronic Voter Identification System/poll-books) and other technology that went largely un-reported. Even though the EVID system was supposed to be leading-edge, in reality it isn't. This was supposed to identify you at the polling station and then immediately update the database that you have indeed accessed your polling station where you registered/are supposed to vote and that you have cast your ballot. This was the "closest" we would come to electronic voting (as envisaged by the Kriegler commission) which was not possible because of the reality of the communication infrastructure challenge and the general level of literacy of the voting population which may not be at a high enough level to allow for a seamless electronic election voting. As we are all aware, these poll-books failed massively, sinking close to $40m down the drain! I would say that the risk mitigation applied was in the form of manual forms 34 & 36 that we are now familiar with. Talking about the process dimension of the election, IEBC would have had to apply a mix of in-house and external persons to conduct the elections including taking the route of sub-contracting and outsourcing to conduct most of its core mandate i.e. conducting elections. Internally it needed to have the requisite skilled people to manage the out-source/sub-contract operations while ensuring contracted services are delivered. This would be risk transference at work. An election is a massive exercise in its very nature. IEBC knew that at the election period itself, it would require close to 400,000 people working for the few days to the run-up to the elections and few days after (say a week). This is a huge logistical process and part of the discussion would have been to allow the BVR and EVID equipment suppliers to also recruit and train the head count that will be used for this period as part of the ways of managing this process. This would have probably ensured that these gadgets worked and not the excuses that the batteries failed or password were forgotten. >From the above, we see that the mitigation actions that should have been taken would not only be qualitative but also quantitative. A mix of technical and social actions should have been deployed. The human factor "failed" this election and one would say that the technology integration to the whole election exercise failed except the case of the BVR Voter registration which mercifully went well/successfully and only due to the Kenyans own desire to register and not necessarily that the IEBC did anything spectacular about it (as we have seen the voter registration systems were delivered very late in the day!). So then we see the need for a hybridisation of not only the management practise but also the actions taken to mitigate the risks. The human element in the whole exercise failed to adequately weld together all the various elements to deliver a flawless election. We are now discussing that technology failed when it is actually that the people tasked with ensuring the integration of all the systems together largely did not make this happen. What I am now concerned about is what we do with this huge investment in information technology (close to US$ 150m in value). This is huge spend. We must find a way in which this investment must be deployed in other departments e.g. the Civil Registration Bureau for a complete new and clean civilian database and hence issuance of a new 3rd generation ID card that should ideally serve as your voter's card at any time that an election may be called. I hope that this has not been a boring post. Regards Aquinas ----------------------------------------------------------------- Aquinas Wasike Chief Executive Officer LANTech (Africa) Limited PO Box 6384 - 00200 11th Floor, Pension Towers Loita Street Nairobi, Kenya Mobile: +254 722 511120 DL : +254 20 2245476 Fax : +254 20 316747 Email: aquinasw(a)lantech.co.ke Website: www.lantech.co.ke ----------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: kictanet [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of kictanet-request(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2013 7:05 PM To: Aquinas Wasike Subject: kictanet Digest, Vol 70, Issue 201 Send kictanet mailing list submissions to kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to kictanet-request(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]> You can reach the person managing the list at kictanet-owner(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of kictanet digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Opinion Technology, transparency, and the Kenyan general election of 2013 (Jotham Kilimo Mwale) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:03:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Jotham Kilimo Mwale <jokilimo(a)yahoo.com<mailto:[email protected]>> To: "S.M. Muraya" <murigi.muraya(a)gmail.com<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Opinion Technology, transparency, and the Kenyan general election of 2013 Message-ID: <1364745829.35382.YahooMailNeo(a)web122004.mail.ne1.yahoo.com<mailto:[email protected]>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" @Brian - well said in your response to @Walu and also in the article. Ours is a manual voting system, and in 2013 some processes (voter registration and identification, results transmission and tallying) were enhanced (not replaced) by deploying technology. This technology failed (voter identification and RTS) on voting day thus removing the enhancement but, in my opinion, not affecting the integrity of the manual voting system. Others saw it differently, hence the petitions. Detailed Supreme Court judgement may shed light on this. @ Muraya - the high voter turn out in 2013 can be attributed to several factors, chief among them that it was a fresh register compiled only 3 months to the election. Chances are the people who registered intended to vote and even if one accounts for natural attrition, chances of well over 90% turnout should not raise any eyebrows. This was not the situation in 2002, 2007 and 2010 when an old register was updated but the dead over the years were never/rarely removed. ? Jotham? ________________________________ From: S.M. Muraya <murigi.muraya(a)gmail.com<mailto:[email protected]>> To: jokilimo(a)yahoo.com<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2013 3:56 PM Subject: Re: [kictanet] Opinion Technology, transparency, and the Kenyan general election of 2013 Even as conspiracy theories (continue to) abound, let us note age old wisdom stating: "Every matter/case must be established by two or three witnesses" Over 3 elections/witnesses exist as to how many votes were probably cast on March 4th, 2013. Looking at Nairobi votes, (i) the presidential, (ii) governor and (iii) senator -- total votes cast were?over 1.3 million (over 72% voter turnout) in all 3 races. If voter turnout in Nairobi has averaged 50% in past elections (2002, 2007, 2010 - referendum), this was an over 40% increase.... On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe(a)gmail.com<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: @Walu > >A forced marriage is very different from a marriage between consenting partners. I venture to say that the "marriage" between Kibaki and Raila was forced. > >The "marriages" in this election were consensual. Night and day difference. > >As for the RTS system - I beg to differ. Not matter how much we may WANT the electronic system to have been there as a parallel verification system the truth (and the fact) is that RTS was merely for transmission of PROVISIONAL results (as clearly indicated in practically all official specifications for the RTS). As per the Supreme Court the real vote was the paper ballot count along with the various checks and balances. > >Nevertheless your reasoning is spot on in terms of one of the ways in which technology *can* be used to enhance the vote. Hopefully if anything comes out of this dialogue, some of these points will be included in the design of future systems intended to support the election. > > >Best regards, > > >Brian > > > > >On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu(a)yahoo.com<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >@Brian, >> >>Coalition Govt will be with us forever.?? Our current govt, Jubilee is a coalition between TNA and URP.? So expect "nusu-mkate" politics to be with us for a while and it is not necessarily a bad thing.? Even UK, Germany, Israel and many other mature democracies have these types of governments.? Perhaps we just need to learn how to manage them. >> >> >>@Rigia, >>Nice piece on the technology and election processes.? But it misses one fundamental that most analysts, legal counsel and I dare say the Supreme court may have missed.? The fact that the Results Transmission System (RTS) is not just useful in "speeding-up" the announcement of results but its fundamental and more useful role is by acting as a PARALLEL verification mechanism.? >> >> >> >>What this means is that once the tallying has been done and announced at the LOCAL Polling station, those very (Presidential) results are supposed to be instantly transmitted to the NATIONAL Level and thereof made public to the wider national community. In essence the "local" data is no longer just local but becomes "global", and any attempt to modify the same at a later stage,? by way of agreement, error or outright corruption will require a good amount of explanation. This is because what was Transmitted and displayed electronically is expected to match the physical election Forms 34 as they arrive at the National level, 2-3days later. >> >> >> >>Remember, just because all agents did sign the election documents >>(Form34) maybe good but it is not sufficient evidence that what was >>countersigned is indeed what was announced (each signatures has a >>price?).? It is much stronger and a better? check if what has been >>countersigned manually is cross-checked against another parallel >>system - the Results Transmission System. One may then ask, what if >>the RTS is also compromised? i.e. Agents collude with the Returning >>Officer to sends fictitious results instanteneously over the RTS?? >>This is unlikely to happen because as our outgoing President, Mwai >>Kibaki once rightly put it, you need Intelligence to rig elections >>:-).? Most of this "intelligence" only occurs after a period of time >>(1-2-3days) later when 60-70-80% of the results at various polling >>stations is locally? known? but remains globally or nationally unkown >>(awaiting physical arrival of Form36) . It will not be very >>intelligeny to start rigging an election, when you are yet to gather the general trend(intelligence) of the results since one can easily over-rig and get caught :-). So you can bet your salary that instantly transmitted results are likely to be more reliable/correct results as compared to the physical ones that will arrive 3days later.? >> >> >> >>Put differently "instantaneous" transmission of? results at the >>polling stations distributes widely what is otherwise "local" >>knowledge and DENIES potential election riggers the opportunity and >>the time to leverage on this type of intelligence. The Results >>Transmission System ensures that no single candidate enjoys the >>monopoly of local knowledge (Results at? Polling Station that are not >>yet in the national public domain) and thus eliminates the temptation >>to abuse the same to their advantage. Knowledge is indeed power and >>local knowledge is even more powerful - I should add.? If politician's >>Agents knew that Polling results were no longer "local" but widely >>known across the country - courtesy of the instantaneous Results >>Transmission System - then the temptation to sign against >>fictitious/edited result figures will be greatly reduced.? Indeed this >>fact alone, will diminish any Politician's desire to even begin to >>compromise Agents at the Polling station since it is futile to do so upon knowing that the Results are already "out and about" in the public domain.? >> >> >> >>So my prayer for 2017/18 is that as an ICT community, we must ask and indeed demand that IEBC ensures that as a minimum tech-input to the elections, the Results Transmission System must work.? >> >> >>Lets Enjoy our Easter and the Jubilee years ahead. >> >> >> >>walu. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>________________________________ >> From: Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe(a)gmail.com<mailto:[email protected]>> >>To: jwalu(a)yahoo.com<mailto:[email protected]> p >>Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]>> >>Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2013 11:11 PM >> >>Subject: Re: [kictanet] Opinion Technology, transparency, and the >>Kenyan general election of 2013 >> >> >> >>Since I have developed a reputation for saying the unpopular things that people think but are either too shy or too conflicted to talk about I will make a simple point that I have observed over the past few years. >> >>While the coalition government was lauded as a reasonable way of dealing with the electoral debacle that we faced in 2007, the truth is that for the past 5 years there have been some very strange and unusual dynamics at work in the operations and makeup of Government departments and agencies. A massive plus has been the much higher levels of scrutiny and accountability. But I would like to suggest that the benefits have been outweighed by the disadvantages. >> >>A good example, and one that I would like to use here is the IEBC - it is no secret that the two principals had to "share out" the various positions that needed to be filled both a commissioner as well as senior management. This has been the pattern for almost all appointments and recruiting exercises across Government. >> >>I venture to say that this approach has been counterproductive and aside from yielding teams that can work together in planning, policy, strategy and implementation within their departments/agencies has yielded a replica of the competitive, antagonistic, selfish and almost vindictive tension that has been evident between the two principals since day one. >> >>It is my sincere hope that the next government will be marked by a complete change in attitude, with more of a genuine team-based dynamic in terms of setting and achieving organizational goals. >> >>My two cents, >> >>Brian >> >> >> >> >>On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Dick Omondi <Dick.Omondi(a)ke.airtel.com<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>Now that we have a court decision that clears the matter of the presidency, perhaps it is now time to remove the emotions of the decision, turn away from politics and get down to the core issues in real institutional management and those surrounding the processes and the people around the IEBC lest we sit back and get through another four years and put together another unit in the last year of the 5 and go back to the same merry go round. >>>________________________________ >>> From: kictanet >>>To: Dick Omondi >>>Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions >>>Sent: Sat Mar 30 21:40:14 2013 >>> >>>Subject: Re: [kictanet] Opinion Technology, transparency, and the >>>Kenyan general election of 2013 >>> >>>Thank you Ali. I appreciate your comments. Shukran. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>>Wariga >>>> >>>> >>>>Thanks for sharing. I enjoyed the read. I want to however object to >>>>the words:- >>>> >>>> >>>>'...the election results show that technology has failed them.' >>>> >>>> >>>>I humbly submit that what failed us in this case is a mix of partisan politicking, a knack for jostling to see how each proponent could manipulate the process for their own benefit and lastly the failure of the IEBC leadership to accept and tell Kenyans to our faces that the most expensive technology ever bought for elections in Kenya (and Probably Africa) was designed to fail before it landed in the country. >>>> >>>> >>>>I would replace the sentence '...the election results show that >>>>technology has failed them.' with the sentence >>>> >>>> >>>>'...the election results show that leadership has failed them.' >>>> >>>> >>>>The saving grace is that we have a sober Supreme Court and we thank God for them. >>>> >>>> >>>>Ali Hussein >>>>CEO | 3mice interactive media Ltd >>>>Principal | Telemedia Africa Ltd >>>> >>>> >>>>+254 773/713 601113 >>>> >>>> >>>>"The future belongs to him who knows how to wait." - Russian Proverb >>>> >>>>Sent from my iPad >>>> >>>>On Mar 29, 2013, at 11:05 PM, Warigia Bowman <warigia(a)gmail.com<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>I thought you guys might enjoy this piece. >>>>> >>>>>http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/03/201332913551936530 >>>>>8.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Take a look, and tell me what you think. :-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Warigia >>>>> >>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>> >>>>>kictanet mailing list >>>>>kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>>>> >>>>>Unsubscribe or change your options at >>>>>https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhus >>>>>sein.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. >>>>> >>>>>KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. >>> >>> >>>-- >>> >>>Dr. Warigia Bowman >>>Assistant Professor? >>>Clinton School of Public Service >>>University of Arkansas >>>wbowman(a)clintonschool.uasys.edu<mailto:[email protected]> ------------------------------------------------- >>>View my research on my SSRN Author page: >>>http://ssrn.com/author=1479660 >>>-------------------------------------------------- >>> >>>This email and any file(s) transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.? Unauthorised distribution, copying, use or disclosure of the contents to any other person is prohibited.?Airtel Networks Kenya Limited does not accept any legal liability for the contents of this message.? If you have received this email in error please notify the Systems Administrator, mailadmin(a)ke.airtel.com<mailto:[email protected]>. >>>This email and any file(s) transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.? Unauthorised distribution, copying, use or disclosure of the contents to any other person is prohibited.?Airtel Networks Kenya Limited does not accept any legal liability for the contents of this message.? If you have received this email in error please notify the Systems Administrator, mailadmin(a)ke.airtel.com<mailto:[email protected]>. >>>_______________________________________________ >>>kictanet mailing list >>>kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]> >>>https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>> >>>Unsubscribe or change your options at >>>https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail >>>.com >>> >>>The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. >>> >>>KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. >>> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>kictanet mailing list >>kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]> >>https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >>Unsubscribe or change your options at >>https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.co >>m >> >> >>The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. >> >>KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors >>online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >kictanet mailing list >kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]> >https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > >Unsubscribe or change your options at >https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40g >mail.com > >The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > >KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jokilimo%40yahoo.com The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

10 13

ICT Value to the Counties
by robert yawe 03 Apr '13

03 Apr '13

Hi, I was hoping that now that we have a new dispensation that traffic flow on Uhuru Highway will have been handed back to the traffic lights unfortunately this is not the case and the police keep competing with the traffic lights. Can we take this up as the first campaign by KICTANET to show that we are truly committed to seeing technology applied to improving the lives of Kenyans beginning with the long suffering drivers in the County of Nairobi? Regards Robert Yawe KAY System Technologies Ltd Phoenix House, 6th Floor P O Box 55806 Nairobi, 00200 Kenya Tel: +254722511225, +254202010696

4 7