1. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event E-Voting in the Netherlands The Approaching End of Black Box Voting Dr. Anne-Marie Oostveen

2. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Dutch situation (1) Simple elections: one candidate per election, at most 3 elections at the same time. E-voting introduced without any public debate Nearly 100% of population votes electronically Lots of mystery surrounding voting computers Problem: unverifiable (not transparent), no recount possible What was wrong with paper ballots??

3. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Dutch Situation (2) Black Box Voting: “Any voting system in which the mechanisms for recording and/or tabulating the vote are hidden from the voter, and/or the mechanism lacks tangible record of the vote cast”. Actors: - Ministry of Interior Affairs - Kiesraad (advisory board) - Brightsight (commercial testing institute) - Manufacturers (Nedap, Sdu) - Municipalities - Voters Legislation: - Constitution (Grondwet) - Election Law (Kieswet) - Election Order (Kiesbesluit) - Approval regulations voting machines 1997

4. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Manufacturers Nedap Sdu

5. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Testing / Certification Based on ‘Approval regulations voting machines 1997’ Done by TNO -> TNO-ITSEF -> Brightsight Specifications severely lacking: –No security requirements specified: the entire concept of intentional vote-tampering does not appear at all in the requirements/regulations. –Mostly about the size of buttons, shock resistance and various other electrical and environmental specifcations Certification does not protect elections from anything: protection against manipulation is left up to the manufacturers

6. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event “e-Voting is safe. Trust us” 2004, Minister of Interior: “In contrast to elections using paper ballots, the count of an electronic election cannot possibly be wrong, so there is never a need for a recount”. “The Irish situation is completely different, and so is the software made for Ireland. So all of these Irish security problems with the Nedaps do not apply here”

7. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Wijvertrouwenstemcomputersniet.nl ‘We don’t trust voting computers’ campaign launched, June 2006 Campaign against unverifiable elections Mediawiki website ‘Machines’ vs. ‘Computers’ Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Put all the documents/letters on the net, extensive library (articles, FOIA, legislation, political, links to sisterorganisations, etc) Discussion list, newsletter, meetings (drinks, debate) Becoming legit: foundation, office, staff, fundraising

8. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Mail from Ministry They: “The ministry is taking your campaign very seriously and would like to discuss ways to further increase the level of public confidence in electronic voting”. We: “We hope the ministry does not see us as the problem. If the ministry would just retract some previous statements regarding e-voting, we are very willing to help ensure a proper burial of black-box voting. As it stands, we believe that increasing the level of confidence in e-voting is not in our nor in this country’s best interest”.

9. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event The Nedap hack The foundation manages to borrow a Nedap from a municipality for a month. Nobody knows! However, They suspect we are up to something: Nedap and government sent letters to municipalities warning them to be careful with their Nedaps 4 days later: the foundation buys 2 more Nedaps from a municipality that hasn’t opened these letters yet. Costs: 3000 euros and a cake!

10. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Findings of the hack Reverse engineering project Keys Nedap Chess Nedap PowerFraud Radio emissions (CDA-detector)

11. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Consequences of the hack Broadcast on national TV (4 october) Politicians reactions: shock, horror Press conference in parliamentary news center All over the evening news and the newspapers

12. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event

13. Consequences of the hack Parliamentary debate AIVD (secret service) looks at radio emissions Minister announces an independent committee to revise the entire voting process Nedap gets fixed-up, Sdu’s license suspended Amsterdam and 34 other municipalities back to red pencil

14. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Sdu NewVote decertified

15. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Elections Before and during: OSCE fact-finding mission Cake-delivery by 40 volunteers to all 500 Amsterdam polling stations After: AIVD and the NFI (Dutch Forensic Institute) check dozens of used voting computers.

16. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Secret, secret, secret! Forensic research

17. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Current Situation Committee announced Foundation met up with Commission Next election: 7 March 2007 Sdu NewVote license still suspended Sdu courtcase against the State (last Friday) Remote internet voting is pushed by special interest groups and a majority in parliament, because: advantage for disabled, voting from any place, no counting of votes, modern/high-tech image.

18. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Future Most likely to be with voting computers with a paper trail. Hopefully internet voting will not be implemented, because of technical as well as important social issues: –No increase in turnout –Digital divide –Civic ritual –Coercion/ Vote-buying –Trust/Social Identity

19. The "Electronic Voting: a challenge to democracy?" event Thank you!