Breaking the Cycle

1
Breaking the Cycle

• An objective way to rate voting systems according
  to performance attributes, such as
• integrity of outcome (voter confidence)
• Ballot secrecy
• Accessibility
• Engagement of the scientific community to develop
  and test comprehensive solutions

2
(No Transcript)
3
Voting
Systems
Performance
Rating
4
Purpose
expeditiously
develop
useful, objective and substantially comprehensive
performance rating
standards
for US voting systems.
5
P.L. Vora, B. Adida, R. Bucholz, D. Chaum, D.L.
Dill, D. Jefferson, D.W. Jones, W. Lattin, A.D.
Rubin, M.I. Shamos, and M. Yung
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM November 2004/Vol. 47,
No. 11
6
Unique Structure

• Modeled after IETF
• Everything transparent and online
• Decisions two weeks after meetings
• Anyone can join at largehowever, Council
  Groups elect their own members

7
Election Official/Experts
Technology/Security Experts
Advocates Social Scientists
Vendors
8
Advocates and Social Scientists
Stephen Ansolabehere - MIT David Aragon -
Voter March Ren Bucholz - Electronic Frontier
Foundation Lillie Coney - Electronic Privacy
Information Center Frederick Conrad - University
of Michigan Joe Hall - University of
California at Berkeley, School of Information
Management and Systems (SIMS) William Kelleher -
PresidentialElectionReform_at_yahoogroups.com Bob
Kibrick - Verified Voting Eric Lazarus -
Decision Smith Bo Lipari - New Yorkers for
Verified Voting James McCarthy - National
Federation of the Blind Dick Niemi - Department
of Political Science, University of Rochester
Dennis Paull - Commonwealth Institute Rob
Richie - FairVote - The Center for Voting and
Democracy Dan Seligson - Pew Charitable Trusts
Suzanne Taylor - Morrison Institute for Public
Policy, Arizona State University Ellen Theisen
- Voters Unite Daniel Tokaji - Ohio State
University Mike Traugott - Center for
Political Studies, Institute for Social Research,
University of Michigan
9
Ben Adida - MIT Andrew Appel - Princeton
University Karl Auerbach - No Affiliation Josh
Benaloh - Microsoft Research Matt Bishop -
UC Davis Darlene Blake - public policy research
organization Jeremy Bryans - Newcastle Upon
Tyne University Duncan Buell - University of
South Carolina Ron Crane - truthandhope.org
Open Voting Consortium David Dill - Verified
Voting Michael Fischer - Yale University
TrueVoteCT.org Ari Juels - RSA Security
Stanley Klein - TrueVoteMD William Lattin -
TTFN Associates Vincent Lipsio - Lipsio
Enterprises Peter Neumann - SRI International
Avi Rubin - Johns Hopkins University Peter
Ryan - Newcastle Upon Tyne University Ted
Selker - MIT Michael Shamos - Carnegie
Mellon University Jeroen van de Graaf -
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil
Poorvi Vora - George Washington University
David Wagner - UC Berkeley Daniel Wang - San
Diego State Unversity Moti Yung - Columbia
University
Technology and Security Expert
10
Election Officials and Experts
Bill Bryan - Louisiana Department of Justice
Cathy Darling - Shasta County Clerk and
Registrar of Voters (CA) William Gardner - New
Hampshire Secretary of State David Jefferson -
CA Secretary of State's Technical Oversight
Committee Douglas Jones - University of Iowa
Andy Lokken - Ramsey County Elections Ralph
Munro - Former Washington Secretary of State
Freddie Oakley - Clerk Recorder, Yolo County,
CA Ion Sancho - supervisor of elections, Leon
County florida, no party affiliation Warren
Slocum - Chief Elections Officer, San Mateo
County, CA Gene Wittry - Election Commission
Board, Peoria IL
11
Vendors
Alfie Charles - Sequoia Voting Systems David
Chaum - Votegrity Kevin Chung - AVANTE
International Technology Guy Duncan - Election
Systems and Software Arthur Keller - Open
Voting Consortium Neil McClure - Hart
InterCivic Sanford Morganstein - Populex
Corporation Andrew Neff - VoteHere Ian Piper
- Diebold Election Systems, Inc. Howard Van Pelt
- Advanced Voting Systems Richard Vogel -
Vogue Election Systems
12
Election Official/Experts
Technology/Security Experts
Advocates Social Scientists
Vendors
13
Council
(chair) Executive Committee
Federal/Standards Advisors
Members at Large
Council Group
Election Official/Experts
Technology/Security Experts
Advocates Social Scientists
Vendors
Member Executive Committee
14
Council
(chair) Executive Committee
Federal/Standards Advisors
Members at Large
Council Group
Election Official/Experts
Technology/Security Experts
Advocates Social Scientists
Vendors
Area
Integrity
Reliability
Accuracy
Privacy
Operations
Accessibility
Secrecy
Robustness
Example Rating Working Group
Example Model/Overall Working Group
Member Executive Committee
Area Director
Working Group
15
.org
16
(No Transcript)
17
Introduction
University student elections offer a uniquely
focused setting for engaging students
in nationally important, state-of-the-art
security and privacy research/projects and
course work.
18
Competition Timeline

• Judges announced, applications accepted, rules
  detailed (September-October)
• Advance payment to teams with posted designs
  judged to be qualified (January)
• Second payment to teams in the running, on
  completion of election (by May)
• Teams completing second phase awarded
  travel-reimbursed opportunity to compete at
  finals event for prizes in each category (June)

19
Way Forward
Participate, use and help bring resources to the
open performance rating infrastructure we have
built!
Put together sponsorship for VoComp so it can
launch Fall 2006!