12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Vote-by-Phone David Flater / Sharon Laskowski National Institute of Standards and Technology

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TGDC Meeting, December 2011 Usability and Accessibility (U&A) Research Update Sharon J. Laskowski, Ph.D.
Advertisements

The Italian Academic Community’s Electronic Voting System Pierluigi Bonetti Lisbon, May 2000.
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Ballot On Demand David Flater National Institute of Standards and Technology
ETen E-Poll ID – Strasbourg COE meeting November, 2006 Slide 1 E-TEN E-POLL Project Electronic Polling System for Remote Operation Strasbourg.
Juan E. Gilbert, Ph.D. Human Centered Computing Lab Prime III Universal Accessibility Juan E. Gilbert, Ph.D. IDEaS Professor Chair Human-Centered Computing.
TGDC Meeting, July 2010 Report of the Auditability Working Group David Flater National Institute of Standards and Technology DRAFT.
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Evaluating risk within the context of the voting process Ann McGeehan Director of Elections Office of the Texas Secretary of State.
Charlie Daniels Arkansas Secretary of State HAVA Compliant Voting Systems Security Considerations General Recommendations to Enhance Security and Integrity.
TGDC Meeting, July 2011 Review of VVSG 1.1 Nelson Hastings, Ph.D. Technical Project Leader for Voting Standards, ITL
Observation of e-enabled elections Jonathan Stonestreet Council of Europe Workshop Oslo, March 2010.
Voting Naked: A Feasible Election System or Just a Recurring Nightmare Presented by: Danita McRae Daniel Bramell.
Chapter Extension 8 Understanding and Setting up a SOHO Network © 2008 Pearson Prentice Hall, Experiencing MIS, David Kroenke.
Voting System Qualification How it happens and why.
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting TGDC Recommendations Research as requested by the EAC John P. Wack National Institute of Standards and Technology
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 Federal Election Report from the UOCAVA Working Group Andrew Regenscheid National Institute of.
Improving U.S. Voting Systems The Voters’ Perspective: Next generation guidelines for usability and accessibility Sharon Laskowski NIST Whitney Quesenbery.
Accessibility and Usability Considerations for Remote Electronic UOCAVA Voting Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of Standards and Technology
Edward Perez, Product Manager Hart InterCivic, Austin, Texas The Future? Many-to-Many or How We Learned to Stop Worrying, and Love Human Restlessness.
TGDC Meeting, July 2011 Overview of July TGDC Meeting Belinda L. Collins, Ph.D. Senior Advisor, Voting Standards, ITL
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 VVSG 2.0 and Beyond: Usability and Accessibility Issues, Gaps, and Performance Tests Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of.
EAC-requested VVSG Research Overview and Status June 2008 Mark Skall Chief, Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division National Institute of.
DATA COMMUNICATION. Data Communication Data communication is the transmission of data from one location to the other. Data can be sent in two ways: directly.
NIST HAVA-Related Work: Status and Plans June 16, 2005 National Institute of Standards and Technology
Making every vote count. United States Election Assistance Commission HAVA 101 TGDC Meeting December 9-10, 2009.
CPS 82, Fall Illustrated History of Voting l l.
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting NIST Research on UOCAVA Voting Andrew Regenscheid National Institute of Standards and Technology
1 The Evolution of Internet Voting By Ka Ling Cheung.
Usability and Accessibility Working Group Report Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of Standards and Technology TGDC Meeting,
The Future of the Home Network By: David Paehlke.
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Accessibility and Usability Considerations for UOCAVA Remote Electronic Voting Systems Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute.
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Auditing concepts David Flater National Institute of Standards and Technology
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Auditability Working Group David Flater National Institute of Standards and Technology r4.
VVSG: Usability, Accessibility, Privacy 1 VVSG, Part 1, Chapter 3 Usability, Accessibility, and Privacy December 6, 2007 Dr. Sharon Laskowski
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Usability and Accessibility Progress and Challenges Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of Standards and Technology
Oct 15-17, : Integratability and Data Export Page 1Next VVSG Training Voting devices must speak (produce records) using a commonly understood language,
TGDC Meeting, July 2010 Report of the UOCAVA Working Group John Wack National Institute of Standards and Technology DRAFT.
Internet Voting Ashok CS 395T. What is “E-voting” Thomas Edison received US patent number 90,646 for an electrographic vote recorder in Specific.
NIST Voting Program Page 1 NIST Voting Program Lynne Rosenthal National Institute of Standards and Technology
TGDC Meeting, December 2011 Overview of December TGDC Meeting Belinda L. Collins, Ph.D. Senior Advisor, Voting Standards
Political Process 3.6 Politics and Government. E- voting Electronic voting systems for electorates have been in use since the 1960s when punched card.
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Roadmap Nelson Hastings National Institute of Standards and Technology
TGDC Meeting, July 2010 Report on Logging Requirements in VVSG 2.0 Nelson Hastings National Institute of Standards and Technology
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Review of UOCAVA Roadmap Nelson Hastings National Institute of Standards and Technology
Next VVSG Training Standards 101 October 15-17, 2007 Mark Skall National Institute of Standards and Technology
1 DECEMBER 9-10, 2009 Gaithersburg, Maryland TECHNICAL GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Commissioner Donetta Davidson.
Election Reform The Open Voting Consortium. Elections are important Voting is how we ultimately control.our government Many elections are decided by just.
EAC-requested VVSG Research Overview and Status June 2008 Mark Skall Chief, Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division National Institute of.
Voting Accessibility Barriers Survey State AT Program & Protection & Advocacy networks -- N = 76, 24 states, 2 territories & 2 national organizations (HAVA.
Creating Accessibility, Usability and Privacy Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) Whitney Quesenbery TGDC Member Chair, Subcommittee.
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting The VVSG Version 1.1 Overview John P. Wack National Institute of Standards and Technology
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Development of High Level Guidelines for UOCAVA voting systems Andrew Regenscheid National Institute of Standards and Technology.
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Path Forward for FY11 UOCAVA Activities Nelson Hastings National Institute of Standards and Technology
Election Assistance Commission 1 Technical Guidelines Development Committee Meeting Post-HAVA Voting System Requirements – Federal Perspective February.
Briefing for the EAC Public Meeting Boston, Massachusetts April 26, 2005 Dr. Hratch Semerjian, Acting Director National Institute of Standards and Technology.
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting NIST-developed Test Suites David Flater National Institute of Standards and Technology
Election Assistance Commission 1 TGDC Meeting High Level VVSG Requirements: What do they look like? February, 09, United States.
Update: Revising the VVSG Structure Sharon Laskowski vote.nist.gov April 14, 2016 EAC Standards Board Meeting 1.
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Report from Workshop on UOCAVA Remote Voting Systems Nelson Hastings National Institute of Standards and Technology
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 VVSG 2.0 and Beyond: Usability and Accessibility Issues, Gaps, and Performance Tests Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of.
TGDC Meeting, July 2011 VVSG 1.1 Test Suite Status Mary Brady Manager, NIST Information Systems Group, Software and Systems Division, ITL
TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Accessibility and Usability Considerations for UOCAVA Remote Electronic Voting Systems Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute.
12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Alternatives to Software Independence Nelson Hastings National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Evaluating risk within the context of the voting process
EVoting 23 October 2006.
CDF for Voting Systems: Human Factors Issues
Control system network security issues and recommendations
Electronic voting – safe or not?
Presented by Vermont Secretary of State Jim Condos
The Italian Academic Community’s Electronic Voting System
Presentation transcript:

12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Vote-by-Phone David Flater / Sharon Laskowski National Institute of Standards and Technology

12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Page 2 12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Tabulation and reporting Vote stations (telephones) connect to Central VBP Server(s) over the public network Paper records may be created at the central election office Data from Central VBP Servers route to tabulation and reporting via a private network (maybe sneakernet)

12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Variables From where can you call? How is the voter authenticated and the ballot style assigned? Which voters can use VBP effectively? How sophisticated, secure, private, reliable are the phones? How secure, private, reliable is the public network? Does a paper ballot necessarily get printed at the VBP server? Page 3 12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting

Polling place vs. home VBP only from staffed locations Voters checked in as usual per polling place procedures Poll worker assigns ballot style and activates the ballot Physical control over the phones, maybe internal wiring Uncontrolled variables: security/privacy/reliability of the public network VBP from anywhere A new form of absentee / remote voting Nightmare scenario: calling on office phone Smartphone apps—Internet voting Page 4 12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting

Security and privacy Public network is an uncontrolled variable no matter where you call from VVSG 2.0 (draft) prohibits use of public network during polling (I B) Current and previous standards required added security VVSG 1.0 (2005): I (Data Transmission), I (Casting Individual Ballots) 2002 VSS: I.6.6.1, I (very similar) Safe to assume that transmission of unencrypted votes over public network was never envisioned Page 5 12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting

Software independence No voter-verifiable record seems possible Auditability of VBP is a new question Page 6 12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting

Accessibility and usability Page 7 12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting HAVA and VVSG envisioned a single voting station (at least one per polling place) that would be usable by everyone Language of HAVA Visual plus audio increases usability for many voters Speculation re combination of VBP and something else to cover all abilities, without requirement for a catch-all accessible voting station Audio-only poses cognitive difficulties Voters who are deaf? Dexterity issues

12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting Options VBP remains non-compliant Challenges similar to Internet voting If Internet voting happens, is VBP then obsolete? Compliance via double standard (c.f. absentee voting) Compliance via compromise VBP from polling places only VBP must encrypt data sent over the public network—adding cost and complexity VVSG must adapt and add requirements as needed (use of public network, phone security, device classification, etc.) Auditability TBD Reinterpreting HAVA is a separate policy question, but would have considerable consequences for the VVSG Restructuring for classes of accessible devices New usability and accessibility requirements Page 8 12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting