Robert krimmer reduced
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Robert krimmer reduced

on

  • 300 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
300
Views on SlideShare
300
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Robert krimmer reduced Robert krimmer reduced Presentation Transcript

  • The EuropeanPerspective onPros and Consin E-VotingSystems shutterstock/Montage: E&LE-Voting Conference Robert KrimmerCopenhagen, June 17th, 2010
  • What is it with Electronic Voting that makes it so interesting and of high dispute at the same time?June 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 2
  • Development1. Face-to-Face Society Rome, Athens, Vikings, italian/german city states Swiss Landsgemeinde2. Territorial Society French Revolution, United States,3. Global Society Information, CommuniCation und Transaction world-wide over the InternetJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 3
  • HistoryFour Stages of Election Administration Development1. Turn of 20th Century: Development of first election automation machines – Werner von Siemens, Thomas Edison2. After Second Worldwar: First ideas of nationwide instant electronic voting3. 1970‘s: Development of Electronic Direct Recording Machines, legally bindingJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 4
  • 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 emergingJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 5
  • Definition Electronic Voting is using electronic means (information and communication technologies/ICT) in at least the casting of the voteJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 6
  • Forms of Elections Place Controlled Uncontrolled (Polling Station) (At Home) Optical Scanners Medium Paper Polling Station Postal Voting Electronics EVM Internet Voting Kiosk VotingJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 7
  • Status QuoMap © Modern Democracy Magazine 2/2009June 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 8
  • 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 secretJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 9
  • How does E-Voting Work? Who? What? Voter Vote (Identification) (Ballot Casting) How?June 10 X IP-Addresses, Message Content Sequence, Time E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 10
  • How does E-Voting Work?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 castingJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 11
  • 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 ProfileJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 12
  • Recommendation of theCouncil 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/democracyJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 13
  • Recommendation of theCouncil 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 monitoringJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 14
  • 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#PP0037June 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 15
  • Why E-Voting? Voter Administration Politicians Increasing voter Count quicker and Inclusion mobility more reliableSupport for the voter in casting the vote Improve voter register Innovation Increase accessibility Reduce costs on the Change in the for handicapped long run electorate voter (+/-)June 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 16
  • Where?Status Quo in EuropeAUSTRIA FRANCE• Three non-binding remote • National discussion, mainly for voting tests 2003, 2004, 2006 citizens living abroad• Feasibility report on e-voting • Test election in 2003,• Student Union Election 2009 Law first half 2006ESTONIA • Use in 2009• First binding Remote Internet GERMANY voting in national election (2% • E-Voting Machines were in use of voters voted online) (presentation Dr. Wiesner)• Only one test beforehand • Over 40 remote electronic• 106.000 voters in local voting tests (binding and election Oct 2009 non-binding)June 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 17
  • Where?Status Quo in EuropeIRELAND PORTUGAL• Bought e-voting machines for • 2004 EU Election and 2005 whole country Parliamentary election non-• 2004 had to postpone use binding tests (local & remote) because of lack of trust in • Big evaluation effort system SPAINNETHERLANDS • Several tests and evaluation• Had nearly full coverage with thereof local e-voting machines • MadridParticipa with• Internet voting for citizens networked kiosk machines abroad • E-Voting part of 2004 e-gov• Challenge Paper voting law for basque autonomyJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 18
  • Where?Status Quo in EuropeSWITZERLAND BELGIUM• Three pilots for remote • First E-Voting Machines in electronic voting 1991• Many non- and legally binding • Extended 1994 to 22%, 1999 tests 44%• Basle introduces for voters • Strategy report abroad• Berne, St.Gallen discussing FINLAND • Trial with Internet VotingNORWAY Machines in Polling stations• Pilot Scheme 2011 • Repeated on paper after court rulingJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 19
  • E-Voting Readiness Index Model Information Society Context National Context Individual eGovernment application Level eGovernment application Technologica l eVOTING eVOTING Diffusion Legal Political Context Context The E-Voting Readiness Index Contextual Model, Ronald SchusterJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 20
  • 10,00 12,00 14,00 16,00 18,00 20,00 Juni 10 Austria Belgium Bulgaria Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Political Context Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia 21 Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Scored Political Context Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States VenezuelaVoting and Participation Center for Electronic Competence Center
  • 10,00 12,00 14,00 16,00 18,00 6,00 8,00June 10 Austria Belgium Bulgaria Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland Legal Context France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Scored Legal Context PortugalE-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States22 Venezuela
  • 10,00 12,00 14,00 16,00 4,00 6,00 8,00June 10 Austria Belgium Bulgaria Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France InfoSoc Context Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Scored InfoSoc Context PortugalE-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States Venezuela23
  • 10,00 15,00 20,00 25,00 30,00 35,00 0,00 5,00June 10 Austria Belgium Bulgaria Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany E-Voting Context Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Scored E-Vote ContextE-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark Portugal Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States24 Venezuela
  • 0,00 10,00 20,00 30,00 40,00 50,00 60,00 70,00 80,00 Austria BelgiumJune 10 Bulgaria Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta ERI - Scored Dimensions Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania RussiaE-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States Venezuela25 Legal InfSoc E-Vote Political
  • E-Voting Readiness 2008Cockpit for DenmarkJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 26
  • 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 transferJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 27
  • ContactSEE YOU AT EVOTE2010, 21-24 July 2010Robert KrimmerManaging DirectorE-Voting.CCCompetence Center forElectronic Voting and ParticipationPyrkergasse 33/1/2A-1190 Viennar.krimmer@e-voting.ccwww.e-voting.ccJune 10 E-Voting Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark 28