Panel One Why Audit? Mary Batcher Ernst & Young and Chair of ASA Working Group on Elections.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

OPERATING EFFECTIVELY AT WESD. What is Internal Control? A process designed to provide reasonable assurance the organizations objectives are achieved.

Advertisements

County Canvassing Board Training 2010 Sheryl Moss Certification and Training Manager Office of the Secretary of State (360)

Making Sure Every Vote Counts in the Digital Era: The Need for Standards Mandating Voter-Verified Paper Ballots Sarah Rovito 2007 WISE Intern August 3,

A technical analysis of the VVSG 2007 Stefan Popoveniuc George Washington University The PunchScan Project.

15 The Health Record.

Enhancing Data Quality of Distributive Trade Statistics Workshop for African countries on the Implementation of International Recommendations for Distributive.

Election Observer Training 2008 Elections Certification & Training Program

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.

Trustworthy Elections without Paper Ballots Why vote receipts deserve consideration May 26, 2004 C. Andrew Neff, Ph.D. Chief Scientist VoteHere, Inc.

Electronic Voting (E-Voting) An introduction and review of technology Written By: Larry Brachfeld CS591, December 2010.

ISO 9000 Certification ISO 9001 and ISO

Vote By Mail A County Perspective Dolores Gilmore, Elections Manager

Voting System Qualification How it happens and why.

Photocopies Occasionally need uncontrolled copies

Author: Michał Rajkowski Tutor: prof. dr hab. inż. Zbigniew Kotulski.

12/9-10/2009 TGDC Meeting TGDC Recommendations Research as requested by the EAC John P. Wack National Institute of Standards and Technology

1 The Code of Best Practices and the Board of Directors Professor Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes Yale University School of Management International Institute.

TGDC Meeting, July 2011 Overview of July TGDC Meeting Belinda L. Collins, Ph.D. Senior Advisor, Voting Standards, ITL

TGDC Meeting, July 2011 Update on the UOCAVA Working Group Andrew Regenscheid Mathematician, Computer Security Division, ITL

Election Assistance Commission United States VVSG Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) NIST July 20, 2015 Gaithersburg,

Professional Development Plan Externship Contact Hours Tracking.

Certification of e-voting systems Mirosław Kutyłowski, Poland.

Demystifying the Independent Test Authority (ITA)

TOWARDS OPEN VOTE VERIFICATION METHOD IN E-VOTING Ali Fawzi Najm Al-Shammari17’th July2012 Sec Vote 2012.

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. 1 Part Four: Implementing Business Ethics in a Global Economy Chapter 9: Managing and Controlling Ethics.

NIST HAVA-Related Work: Status and Plans June 16, 2005 National Institute of Standards and Technology

1 Audit Committee & Investors. 2 Sarbanes Oxley & The Audit Committee.

Making every vote count. United States Election Assistance Commission HAVA 101 TGDC Meeting December 9-10, 2009.

California Secretary of State Voting Systems Testing Summit November 28 & 29, 2005, Sacramento, California Remarks by Kim Alexander, President, California.

IEEE P1622 Meeting, Feb 2011 Common Data Format (CDF) Update John P. Wack National Institute of Standards and Technology

Evaluation of Internal Control System

Usability and Accessibility Working Group Report Sharon Laskowski, PhD National Institute of Standards and Technology TGDC Meeting,

1 A Vision for the Testing of Election Systems in a HAVA World Eric Lazarus

Electronic Voting: The 2004 Election and Beyond Prof. David L. Dill Department of Computer Science Stanford University

County Canvassing Board Training 2010 Sheryl Moss Certification and Training Manager Office of the Secretary of State (360)

Briefing for NIST Acting Director James Turner regarding visit from EAC Commissioners March 26, 2008 For internal use only 1.

NIST Voting Program Activities Update February 21, 2007 Mark Skall Chief, Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division.

The Audit as a Management Tool Vermont State Auditor’s Office – April 2009.

Online voting: a legal perspective

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

Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. September 16, 2015 How can we make sure the Chesapeake Bay Restoration really works?

Standards for e-Enabled Elections: The work of the OASIS Election & Voter Services Technical Committee John Borras Chair Technical Committee

How and what to observe in e-enabled elections Presentation by Mats Lindberg, Election Adviser, Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)

1 The Evolution of Voting Systems Paul DeGregorio Vice Chairman Donetta Davidson Commissioner The U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

US CMS Elections Procedures Alexei Safonov (Texas A&M) Dick Loveless (Wisconsin)

NC Voting Systems How do S.L and HAVA impact the voting system in your county and what duties must you quickly perform?

TGDC Meeting, December 2011 Overview of December TGDC Meeting Belinda L. Collins, Ph.D. Senior Advisor, Voting Standards

NIST Voting Program Barbara Guttman 12/6/07

TGDC Meeting, Jan 2011 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Roadmap Nelson Hastings National Institute of Standards and Technology

Copyright 2010, The World Bank Group. All Rights Reserved. Recommended Tabulations and Dissemination Section B.

NIST Voting Program Activities Update January 4, 2007 Mark Skall Chief, Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division.

1 DECEMBER 9-10, 2009 Gaithersburg, Maryland TECHNICAL GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Commissioner Donetta Davidson.

VVPAT Building Confidence in U.S. Elections. WHAT IS VVPAT ? Voter-verifiable paper audit trail Requires the voting system to print a paper ballot containing.

Finance Training Preparing for the Audit PVP Council November 13, 2015.

Creating Accessibility, Usability and Privacy Requirements for the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) Whitney Quesenbery TGDC Member Chair, Subcommittee.

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.

Election Assistance Commission 1 TGDC Meeting High Level VVSG Requirements: What do they look like? February, 09, United States.

EIA approval process, Management plan and Monitoring

EVoting 23 October 2006.

Electronic voting – safe or not?

Finance Training Preparing for the Audit

Ronald L. Rivest MIT NASEM Future of Voting December 7, 2017

Improving Reliability of Direct Recording Electronic Voting Systems

Air Carrier Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS)

The Impact of Information Technology on the Audit Process

Performance improvement observations

Presentation transcript:

Panel One Why Audit? Mary Batcher Ernst & Young and Chair of ASA Working Group on Elections

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines Recommendations of Technical Guidelines Development Committee to EAC (8/07) Public Comment (currently) Revisions More Public Comment Adoption by EAC

Software Independence Must be able to verify that the vote recorded is correct. Software is very powerful which means it is also very complex. Current technology is not capable of detecting all errors in software. Therefore, voting systems must be software independent so that audits do not have to trust that the software is correct.

Implications Cannot rely on testing voting equipment to guarantee accuracy. Need to be able to audit and the audit must not depend on an assumption that the machine vote is correct as recorded. Need to have independent voter verified records available for vote audits. Voter must verify that the electronic record is correct by examining a copy that is maintained separately from the voting system’s software.

What to Expect From an Audit Expect errors – everyone finds some discrepancies. Most errors are minor and have no impact on the overall accuracy. Errors can be fixed and system improved.

What to Expect (or, the Auditor is Your Friend) Election auditing is new. As with any system audited for the first time, expect to find problems. Goal is to find and fix problems through the initiative of the people managing the system – not wait until errors blow up or are found externally. Just as in financial audits, the results of an audit can be discussed with election officials before they are released publicly. Election officials will then have an opportunity to describe the problem solutions they are putting in place (or may have already put in place).

Restoring Voter Confidence There has been widespread coverage of flawed elections. It is important to note that most errors are exactly that – errors. They are not malicious efforts to alter election outcomes. Nevertheless, voter confidence is shaken when problems are revealed. We need independent audits that are completely open and transparent so that the voters can see the level of effort people within the system are taking to get the count right and fix any systemic problems that are found.