Robert krimmer reduced

The European Perspective on Pros and Cons in E-Voting Systems

E-Voting Conference Robert KrimmerCopenhagen, June 17th, 2010

shutterstock/Montage: E&L

June 10 2

What is it with Electronic Voting

that makes it so interesting

and of high dispute at the same time?

E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark

Development

1. Face-to-Face SocietyRome, Athens, Vikings, italian/german city states

Swiss Landsgemeinde

2. Territorial SocietyFrench Revolution, United States,

3. Global SocietyInformation, CommuniCation und Transaction

world-wide over the Internet

June 10 3E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark

June 10

History

Four Stages of Election Administration Development

1. Turn of 20th Century: Development of first election automation machines – Werner von Siemens, Thomas Edison

2. After Second Worldwar: First ideas of nationwide instant electronic voting

3. 1970‘s: Development of Electronic Direct Recording Machines, legally binding

4E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark

June 10

History (II)

4. New Millennium

- Debates get serious; Countries with full coverage of electronic voting machines

- first multi-national recommendations/standards available and discussed in practice

5. Recent

- Internet voting used in national elections (Estonia)

- NEDAP Voting machines banned (Ireland, Netherlands, Germany)

- First experiences with observation of e-voting

- Methodologies for observation thereof emerging

5E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark

Definition

Electronic Voting is using electronic means (information and communication technologies/ICT)

in at least the casting of the vote


June 10 77

Forms of Elections

Polling Station Postal Voting

Place

Medium

Controlled

(Polling Station)

Uncontrolled

(At Home)

Paper

Electronics EVM Internet Voting

Kiosk Voting

Op

tic

al

Sc

an

ne

rs


Status QuoMap © Modern Democracy Magazine 2/2009


How does E-Voting Work?

In General, E-Voting is based on the separation of

• Unique identification of the voter, and

• The casting of the vote, and keeping it secret


June 10 10


Sequence, Time

Who?

Voter

(Identification)

What?

Vote

(Ballot Casting)

IP-Addresses, Message Content

How?

XXE-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark


How to keep the voter anonymous?

• Electronic Voting Machines: having separate machines/application for identification & vote casting

• Remote Electronic Voting: Cryptographic Algorithms to establish Anonymity either

(1) before

(2) during

(3) or after vote casting


International Standards onE-Voting

• Council of Europe Recommendation on E-Voting

• OASIS Election Markup Language (EML)

• Gesellschaft für Informatik / Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik Protection Profile


June 10 13

Recommendation of the Council of Europe (I)

Development:

• Task to develop legal, operational and technical standards for e-voting

• With consideration of the Member States different electoral systems

• 30th September 2004: Adoption of the Recommendation Rec(2004)11 by the Commitee of Ministers of the Council of Europe

• http://www.coe.int/democracy


June 10 14

Recommendation of the Council of Europe (II)

Council of Europe 2004:

• Task to develop legal, operational and technical standards for e-voting

• Legal standards: Common legal standards complying with the principles of universal, free, equal and secret suffrage

• Operational standards:Covering all phases of the electoral process

• Technical requirements:Towards accessibility, interoperability, security of the vote and monitoring


Protection Profile

• Technical Standard for Security Requirements for E-Voting

• Developped by German Informatics Society

• It is a certified protection profile

• Follows Common Criteria Methodology

• Common Criteria is an internationally agreed and accredited methodology for certification of IS

• http://www.bsi.de/cc/pplist/pplist.htm#PP0037


Why E-Voting?

Voter Administration Politicians

Increasing voter

mobility

Support for the voter in

casting the vote

Increase accessibility

for handicapped

voter

Count quicker and

more reliable

Improve voter register

Reduce costs on the

long run

Inclusion

Innovation

Change in the

electorate

(+/-)


June 10 17

Where? Status Quo in Europe

AUSTRIA

• Three non-binding remote

voting tests 2003, 2004, 2006

• Feasibility report on e-voting

• Student Union Election 2009

ESTONIA

• First binding Remote Internet

voting in national election (2%

of voters voted online)

• Only one test beforehand

• 106.000 voters in local

election Oct 2009

FRANCE

• National discussion, mainly for

citizens living abroad

• Test election in 2003,

Law first half 2006

• Use in 2009

GERMANY

• E-Voting Machines were in use

(presentation Dr. Wiesner)

• Over 40 remote electronic

voting tests (binding and

non-binding)


June 10 18


IRELAND

• Bought e-voting machines for

whole country

• 2004 had to postpone use

because of lack of trust in

system

NETHERLANDS

• Had nearly full coverage with

local e-voting machines

• Internet voting for citizens

abroad

• Challenge Paper voting

PORTUGAL

• 2004 EU Election and 2005

Parliamentary election non-

binding tests (local & remote)

• Big evaluation effort

SPAIN

• Several tests and evaluation

thereof

• MadridParticipa with

networked kiosk machines

• E-Voting part of 2004 e-gov

law for basque autonomy


June 10 19


SWITZERLAND

• Three pilots for remote

electronic voting

• Many non- and legally binding

tests

• Basle introduces for voters

abroad

• Berne, St.Gallen discussing

NORWAY

• Pilot Scheme 2011

BELGIUM

• First E-Voting Machines in

1991

• Extended 1994 to 22%, 1999

44%

• Strategy report

FINLAND

• Trial with Internet Voting

Machines in Polling stations

• Repeated on paper after court

ruling


E-Voting Readiness Index Model

National

Context

Technologica

l

Diffusion

Political

Context

eGovernment application

eVOTINGeGovernment application

eVOTING

Legal

Context

Individual

Level

The E-Voting Readiness Index Contextual Model, Ronald Schuster

Information Society Context


Political Context

Juni 10 Competence Center

Center for Electronic

Voting and Participation

21

10,00

12,00

14,00

16,00

18,00

20,00

Au

stri

a

Be

lgiu

m

Bu

lga

ria

Cy

pru

s

Cze

ch

Re

pu

bli

c

De

nm

ark

Est

on

ia

Fin

lan

d

Fra

nc

e

Ge

rma

ny

Gre

ec

e

Hu

ng

ary

Ire

lan

d

Ita

ly

Latv

ia

Lit

hu

ania

Lu

xe

mb

ou

rg

Ma

lta

Ne

the

rla

nd

s

Po

lan

d

Po

rtu

ga

l

Ro

ma

nia

Ru

ssia

Slo

va

kia

Slo

ven

ia

Spa

in

Sw

ed

en

Swit

zerl

an

d

Un

ite

d K

ing

do

m

Un

ite

d S

tate

s

Ve

ne

zue

la

Scored Political Context

Legal Context

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

14,00

16,00

18,00

Au

stri

a

Be

lgiu

m

Bu

lgar

ia

Cyp

rus

Cze

ch R

ep

ub

lic

De

nm

ark

Esto

nia

Fin

lan

d

Fran

ce

Ge

rman

y

Gre

ece

Hu

nga

ry

Ire

lan

d

Ital

y

Latv

ia

Lith

uan

ia

Luxe

mb

ou

rg

Mal

ta

Ne

the

rlan

ds

Po

lan

d

Po

rtu

gal

Ro

man

ia

Ru

ssia

Slo

vaki

a

Slo

ven

ia

Spai

n

Swe

de

n

Swit

zerl

and

Un

ite

d K

ingd

om

Un

ite

d S

tate

s

Ve

ne

zue

la

Scored Legal Context


InfoSoc Context

4,00

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

14,00

16,00

Au

stri

a

Be

lgiu

m

Bu

lgar

ia

Cyp

rus

Cze

ch R

ep

ub

lic

De

nm

ark

Esto

nia

Fin

lan

d

Fran

ce

Ge

rman

y

Gre

ece

Hu

nga

ry

Ire

lan

d

Ital

y

Latv

ia

Lith

uan

ia

Luxe

mb

ou

rg

Mal

ta

Ne

the

rlan

ds

Po

lan

d

Po

rtu

gal

Ro

man

ia

Ru

ssia

Slo

vaki

a

Slo

ven

ia

Spai

n

Swe

de

n

Swit

zerl

and

Un

ite

d K

ingd

om

Un

ite

d S

tate

s

Ve

ne

zue

la

Scored InfoSoc Context


E-Voting Context

0,00

5,00

10,00

15,00

20,00

25,00

30,00

35,00

Au

stri

a

Be

lgiu

m

Bu

lgar

ia

Cy

pru

s

Cze

ch

Re

pu

bli

c

De

nm

ark

Est

on

ia

Fin

lan

d

Fra

nce

Ge

rman

y

Gre

ec

e

Hu

ng

ary

Ire

lan

d

Ita

ly

Latv

ia

Lith

ua

nia

Lu

xe

mb

ou

rg

Ma

lta

Ne

the

rla

nd

s

Po

lan

d

Po

rtu

ga

l

Ro

ma

nia

Ru

ssia

Slo

vak

ia

Slo

ve

nia

Sp

ain

Sw

ed

en

Swit

zerl

an

d

Un

ite

d K

ingd

om

Un

ite

d S

tate

s

Ve

ne

zue

la

Scored E-Vote Context


ERI - Scored Dimensions

0,00

10,00

20,00

30,00

40,00

50,00

60,00

70,00

80,00

Au

stri

a

Be

lgiu

m

Bu

lgar

ia

Cyp

rus

Cze

ch R

ep

ub

lic

De

nm

ark

Esto

nia

Fin

lan

d

Fran

ce

Ge

rman

y

Gre

ece

Hu

nga

ry

Ire

lan

d

Ital

y

Latv

ia

Lith

uan

ia

Luxe

mb

ou

rg

Mal

ta

Ne

the

rlan

ds

Po

lan

d

Po

rtu

gal

Ro

man

ia

Ru

ssia

Slo

vaki

a

Slo

ven

ia

Spai

n

Swe

de

n

Swit

zerl

and

Un

ite

d K

ingd

om

Un

ite

d S

tate

s

Ve

ne

zue

la

E-Vote

InfSoc

Legal

Political


E-Voting Readiness 2008Cockpit for Denmark


Summary

• E-Voting technology is to support the people

• E-Voting needs proper discussion and experience

• Denmark has good starting conditions

• At one point in time e-voting will not be avoidable

• Proper education and qualification of- polling station officers- technical operators- observers- voters� experts needed, incl. knowledge transfer


Contact

SEE YOU AT EVOTE2010, 21-24 July 2010

Robert Krimmer

Managing Director

E-Voting.CC

Competence Center for

Electronic Voting and Participation

Pyrkergasse 33/1/2

A-1190 Vienna

[email protected]

www.e-voting.ccJune 10 28E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark

Date post:	18-Dec-2014
Category:	Documents
Upload:	christian-wernberg-tougaard
View:	153 times
Download:	3 times

Robert krimmer reduced

Documents