An Examination of Vote Verification Technologies: Findings and Experiences from the Maryland Study

Thumbnail Image

Files

ShermanEVT2006.pdf (450.25 KB)

Links to Files

https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/evt06/tech/full_papers/sherman/sherman.pdf

Permanent Link

http://hdl.handle.net/11603/12840

Collections

UMBC Center for Information Security and Assurance (CISA)
UMBC Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Department
UMBC Faculty Collection
UMBC Information Systems Department
UMBC Maryland Institute for Policy Analysis & Research (MIPAR)
UMBC School of Public Policy

Author/Creator

Author/Creator ORCID

Date

2006-04-15

Type of Work

conference papers and proceedings preprints
Text

Department

Program

Citation of Original Publication

Rights

This item is likely protected under Title 17 of the U.S. Copyright Law. Unless on a Creative Commons license, for uses protected by Copyright Law, contact the copyright holder or the author.

Subjects

diebold accuvoteTS
diebold VVPAT
direct recording equipment (DRE)
computer system security
electronic voting systems
information assurance
maryland state board of elections
MIT Selker VVAATT
parallel testing
scytl pnyx.DRE
VoteHere Sentinel
vote verification technology

Abstract

We describe our findings and experiences from our technical review of vote verification systems for the Maryland State Board of Elections (SBE). The review included the following four systems for possible use together with Maryland’s existing Diebold AccuVote-TS (touch screen) voting system: VoteHere Sentinel; SCYTL Pnyx.DRE; MIT-Selker audio system; Diebold voter verified paper audit trail. As a baseline, we also examined the SBE’s procedures for “parallel testing” of its Diebold system. For each system, we examined how it enables voters who use touch screens to verify that their votes are cast as intended, recorded as cast, and reported as recorded. We also examined how well it permits post-election auditing. To this end, we considered implementation, impact on current state voting processes and procedures, impact on voting, functional completeness, security against fraud, attack and failure, reliability, accessibility, and voter privacy.