Upload
chloe-kathlyn-blankenship
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Open Voting Solutions
Critical Analysis
America’s Voting Systems
Presenter: David RR Webber, CTO
http://openvotingsolutions.com
What Change has Occurred, What Changes are Needed?
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
2
Critical Analysis
Agenda
• What Changes have Occurred?
• Lessons Learned
• Challenges and Needs
• Current Risks and Threats
• Opportunities and the Way Forward
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
3
Critical Analysis
What Changes have Occurred?
Who drove the change?
What were their objectives?
How was democracy served?
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
4
Critical Analysis
Facilitation of Change
• The Florida “hanging chad” election was the trigger for the introduction of computerized voting and tabulation systems
• HAVA – Help America Vote Act was vehicle for appropriating $4B to help States acquire computer systems
• EAC – Election Assistance Commission given oversight and facilitation role
• Result – private industry was given free rein and huge $ incentives and they took full advantage
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
5
Critical Analysis
Changes in Voting Process
• Prior to computer systems adoption process was managed by citizens and appointed officials and overseen by the political parties, citizen groups and the legal process
• After computer systems introduction control of vote gathering and tabulation was handed over to private corporations
• Oversight through the EAC and State officials challenged by their lack of computer knowledge
• International standards not adopted
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
6
Critical Analysis
Buying driven by expedience
• Objections over the impacts on democracy ignored
• Voter access used as blanket justification
• Format of EAC and funds distribution rules encouraged States to substitute haste for good practice and due diligence
• Blind faith in the infallibility of computer technology and lack of knowledge and experience by decision makers
• Fundamental failure to realize that voting is not like a cash register in a store or a banking ATM.
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
7
Critical Analysis
What is wrong today?
• Voters have no way to check how computer recorded their actual votes – seeing “inside” the computer is impossible – so voting is now an act of faith in the machine
• Scanners or touch screens simply do not use enough voter verification to confirm how they interpret voters intentions – and record them - the result is digital equivalent of “hanging chads”
• Absolutely need hand cast paper ballots to restore verification and audit trail of real voter ballots
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
8
Critical Analysis
What else is not there?
• Open public reporting of computer records
• Recently California SOS began publishing election results using open public record formats on the internet – no other State does thishttp://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ca_elect_results/result_example.htm
• Ability for State election officials to manage the computer equipment and voting ballots configuration and election day operations – instead this is all done by paid staff of private corporations
• Results tabulation on election day that can be independently counted and double checked
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
9
Critical Analysis
Resulting Situation
• A lot of money was spent for over priced ill conceived solutions that were poorly validated
• Control of the voting process is in the hands of private companies
• Inspection, auditing and verification of election results is deeply challenged
• Serious errors have occurred and false election results returned as a consequence
• Democracy worldwide has suffered because of American failure and inability to provide leadership
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
10
Critical Analysis
Lessons Learned?
• Technology is not a solution by itself
• Need citizen oversight and operational transparency
• Means to verify each operation and results must be designed-in
• Voter Bill of Rights and open public standards are essential
• Systems become obsolete much faster than predicted
• Democracy needs better voting systems that can be fully trusted
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
11
Critical Analysis
Technology alone is not the answer
• Unfettered use of technology does not deliver the desired solutions
• There is always yet another wonder solution being offered by techno-vendors – aka snake oil
• Simple and transparent wins over complexity, obfuscation and encryption
• Open public standards are demanded so that systems are interchangeable and interoperable
• Low costs and maintainability are essentials
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
12
Critical Analysis
Oversight and Transparency
• All aspects of the system setup and use must be open and verifiable by regular appointed election staff
• Vigilance is needed to make sure systems operate as expected and required
• Systems used need to be checked both before and after election day
• Election results must be independently crosschecked and reported in open public recording formats
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
13
Critical Analysis
Voter Bill of Rights
• There are internationally recognized standards for electronic voting processes that protect voters rights
• These establish the formal process from announcement of the election to completion and declaration of the results
• Public inspection and citizen involvement is absolutely a key inviolatable need for these processes
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
14
Critical Analysis
Democracy needs better voting systems
• On every continent we look today we see countries where elections are being compromised and sham democracy enacted
• The results are always that citizens are living worse and unfulfilled lives
• Every year America pays a huge price in dealing with the effects and results of such inequities
• These effects include: population disease threats, terrorism, refugees, military intervention, costs of trade and goods, aid costs, and drug trafficking
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
15
Critical Analysis
Challenges and Needs
•How do we create trusted solutions?
•Provide better access for everyone
•Promote more transparent democracy globally
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
16
Critical Analysis
Creating Trusted Solutions
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
17
Critical Analysis
Providing Voter Access
• Military Voters
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
18
Critical Analysis
Promoting Transparent Democracy
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
19
Critical Analysis
Current Risks and Threats
• The 14 “Swing States” are highly vulnerable to computer voting issues
• Repeat of winners being determined by the Courts, not the voters
• Weakening of position of President by questions over the result legitimacy
• Democratic process in America being fundamentally undermined
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
21
Critical Analysis
Opportunities and the Way Forward
• Providing better democratic processes
• Solving the technology impasse
• Building tools to enable more democracy worldwide
• Change we can believe in
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
23
Critical Analysis
Solve Technology Impasse
• Public Open Source – Provides peer review and validation
• Anonymous Recording and Counting of Voting Ballots– Technology techniques so that
• A) candidate information is not exposed to software inspection
• B) voter privacy is ensured
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
24
Critical Analysis
EML Transactions Summary
Communicating specific result details on candidates and electionsEML 520 - result
Results of election contest(s) and countsEML 510 - count
Documents access to voting records and reasonEML 480 – audit log
Group of votes being transferred for countingEML 460 – votes group
Actual record of vote castEML 440 – cast vote
Used for voter authentication during a voting processEML 420 – voter authentication
Used to register voters for an electionEML 310 – voter registration
Details of actual voters for an electionEML 330 – voter election list
Notification to voter of an election, their eligibility and how to voteEML 340 – polling information
Describes the actual ballot to be used for an electionEML 410 – ballot
Contest and candidates detailsEML 230 – candidate list
Used to nominate candidates or parties, consenting or withdrawingEML 210 – candidate nomination
Information about an election or set of elections. It is usually used to
communicate information from the election organizers
EML 110 – election event
PurposeDocument Name
Standard record structures to hold election information, ballot details and voting records
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
25
Critical Analysis
Example - EML 230 Candidate List<EML Id="230" SchemaVersion="5.0">
<TransactionId>OK-2007-09-1</TransactionId> <CandidateList> <Election> <ElectionIdentifier Id=“Oklahoma 2007" /> <Contest> <ContestIdentifier Id="State Governor" /> <Candidate>Brad Henry</Candidate> <Candidate>John Wayne</Candidate> <Candidate>Bill Okapi</Candidate> <Candidate>Jane Smith</Candidate> </Contest></Election></CandidateList></EML>
Example of an XML formatted file
26
Open Voting Solutions
Critical Analysis
Supporting the 5 Phases of an Election
• Ballot Preparation, Candidate & Proposal Details
• Voting & Accessibility Handling on Election Day
• Counting & Tabulating
• Declaration of Results
• Distribution and Archiving
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
27
Critical Analysis
Concept of Operations
28
Open Voting Solutions
Critical Analysis
Ballot Preparation
From:
The official printed paper ballot
To:
Computerized ballot definition
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
29
Critical Analysis
Computerized Ballot DefinitionAfter printed paper ballot is scanned, election staff can check the scanned ballot image
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
30
Critical Analysis
What‘s behind the scanned ballot image?
• Makes definitions straightforward and intuitive
process• Keeps definitions anonymous and secure
<column ID="1" offset="193"> <checkbox ID="1" top="46">1</checkbox> <checkbox ID="2" top="95">0</checkbox> </column> <column ID="2" offset="191"> <checkbox ID="1" top="200">0</checkbox> <checkbox ID="2" top="251">1</checkbox> </column> <column ID="3" offset="545"> <checkbox ID="1" top="46">1</checkbox> <checkbox ID="2" top="95">0</checkbox> </column> ………
Row / Column offsets XML
Simple Columns of checkboxes for each Contest
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
31
Critical AnalysisDefining the Contests <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> -<EML Id="410" SchemaVersion="5.0“- xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" - xmlns:ns1="urn:oasis:names:tc:ciq:xsdschema:xNL:2.0“- xmlns:ns2="urn:oasis:names:tc:ciq:xsdschema:xAL:2.0" - xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:evs:schema:eml"> <TransactionId>2007-04-01</TransactionId> <MessageLanguage>en-US</MessageLanguage> <ManagingAuthority> <AuthorityIdentifier>Connecticut</AuthorityIdentifier> <AuthorityAddress /> <ResponsibleOfficer> <Responsibility>Election Board</Responsibility> <Name PartyType="Employee" Code="CT-100" /> </ResponsibleOfficer> </ManagingAuthority> <IssueDate>2006-05-04T18:13:51.0Z</IssueDate> <Ballots> <EventIdentifier Id="Official_Ballot" DisplayOrder="1"> <EventName>State Election</EventName> <EventQualifier Id="CT-2007-1">CT-2007-Wilton</EventQualifier> </EventIdentifier> <EventDescription> <Message /> </EventDescription> <Ballot> <ReportingUnitIdentifier Id="Wilton">Town of Wilton</ReportingUnitIdentifier> <Election> <ElectionIdentifier Id="2007-01"> <ElectionName>State Election Officers</ElectionName> <ElectionGroup Id="CT-01">Connecticut</ElectionGroup> <ElectionCategory>State</ElectionCategory> </ElectionIdentifier> <Description> <Message /> </Description> <Contest DisplayOrder="11" Completed="no"> <ContestIdentifier Id="CT-2007-1"> <ContestName>Governor and Lieutenant Governor</ContestName> </ContestIdentifier>
Election Details Entry Software
Ballot ItemsDefinition
Output
32
Open Voting Solutions
Critical Analysis
Voting Process
• Open Poll Procedures• Vote and Scan process• Accessible Voting• Close Poll & Print – precinct totals
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
33
Critical Analysis
Ballot Vote & Scanning Process
• Voter goes to voting station – enters selections
on paper ballot
• Proceeds to scanner station – and scans in
ballot…
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
34
Critical AnalysisBallot Choices Review
Voter Choices Shown in Blue
Summary of allselections
Voter can optionallyscroll withmouse device toverify whole ballot
Copyright © 2006/ 2007, Open Voting Solutions
Open Voting Solutions
35
Critical Analysis
Summary – OpenScan Approach
• Empowers election authorities to control, inspect, verify,
audit and manage voting systems.
• Dramatically lowers the cost of voting systems by using
COTS hardware and free, public open source software.
• Adheres to open source principles and EML
specifications to create transparency and verifiable
elections.
• Creates trustworthy technology-enabled election
solutions using paper ballots.