1 / 14

Electronic Voting

Linh Nguyen. Electronic Voting. Voting Technologies The Florida 2000 Election Direct Recording Electronic Devices (DREs) ‏ - Diebold Touch-Voting Security and Ethical Issues The Future of Voting. Electronic Voting. Linh Nguyen. Voting Technologies.

duane
Download Presentation

Electronic Voting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Linh Nguyen Electronic Voting

  2. Voting Technologies The Florida 2000 Election Direct Recording Electronic Devices (DREs)‏ - Diebold Touch-Voting Security and Ethical Issues The Future of Voting Electronic Voting Linh Nguyen

  3. Voting Technologies Electronic Voting Punch Card Optical Scan Paper Ballot Lever Machine Linh Nguyen

  4. Paper Ballots • Oldest voting technology • Voters record their choice by placing a mark in a box next to the candidate’s name • Ballots are dropped into a sealed ballot box • Votes are counted manually • Widely used today in rural areas Linh Nguyen

  5. Direct Recording Electronic Devices (DREs)‏ • Electronic versions of the lever machines • Different interfaces: push button, touch screen, key pads • Full-faced or paginated ballot designs • Voters record their choices by pushing a button or touching the screen next to the candidate’s name or issue • Not possible to vote twice for the same office Linh Nguyen

  6. The Florida 2000 ElectionControversies and discriminations Controversies There were a number of overseas ballots missing postmarks or filled out in such a way that they were invalid under Florida law Some 179,855 ballots were not counted in the official tally 57,700 voters were incorrectly listed as felons on a “scrub list” and their votes were not counted. One Florida count’s hard-to-use ballot may have unfairly decided the presidency. Discriminations the African Americans voter against the vote stealers Black people turned the presidential vote but it was stolen Many African Americans did not cast ballots Linh Nguyen

  7. The outcomes before and after the recount Before the recount, the votes for President in FLORIDA as follows : Bush: 2,909,176 Gore: 2,907,451 Margin: 1,725 votes in Bush’s favor After the recount, the votes for President in FLORIDA as follows:Bush: 2,912,790 Gore: 2,912,253 Bush wins Florida by 537 votes George W. Bush, thus, wins all 25 of Florida's Electoral Votes and the presidency with the result Tung Le PRESIDENT Electoral Votes States Won Vote % Votes • BUSH 271 30 48.8% 50,456,169 GORE 266 21 48.8% 50,996,116

  8. IEEE Standardization Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Responsible for many of the internet protocols in use today Discussion stymied by political maneuvers Conflicts between pro-security and pro-industry groups Whether voting software is stored on read-only media Whether electronic voting should produce a verifiable paper trail Systematic disenfranchisement of pro-security group Misinformation about voting privileges Prevention of admission of new members before key votes Proposals from pro-security group often ignored Linh Nguyen

  9. Diebold Touch-Voting The design goals To create a and voting system that is to the entire voting population correct secure accessible Linh Nguyen

  10. Diebold Touch-Voting Implementation Proprietary Software Inherited code from Global Election Systems, formerly I-Mark Systems, which it acquired in September, 2001 Interface Hardware AccuVote-TS touch-screen terminal “Smart” voter access card reader Accessible Design Simple touch-screen interface Multi-language Voice-directed for the blind or illiterate Third-party OS Windows CE platform Linh Nguyen

  11. Diebold Touch-Voting Analysis of Source Code “Our analysis shows that this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts” – Analysis of an Electronic Voting System Unauthorized privilege escalation Incorrect use of cryptography Vulnerabilities to network threats Poor software development processes No assurance that the output is correct Linh Nguyen

  12. Future of Voting Ethics Software used by an electronic voting system manufactured by Sequoia Voting Systems has been left unprotected on a publicly available server, which raised people concern about the possibility of tampering. The software, made available at ftp.jaguar.net, is stored on an FTP server owned by Jaguar Computer Systems, a firm that provides election support to a California county. Company like Diebold Election Systems aware of security flaws in its e-voting software for years but sold the faulty systems to states anyway. Linh Nguyen

  13. Future of Voting Empowerment or Disappointment? Voter confidence in current system waning IEEE standardization efforts stalled Foremost electronic voting software maker below par Linh Nguyen

  14. Thank You Linh Nguyen

More Related