EAC - Voluntary Voting System Guidelines

Name : | Jordi Puiggali
Organization : | Scytl Secure Electronic Voting
Post Date : | 9/9/2005
General Comments
Comment : | Selecting a voter-verifiability solution Among all the voter-verifiability solutions, perhaps the best-known consists in attaching a printer to every DRE. The printer is used to produce a physical record of the vote (i.e., a paper ballot) after the voter has selected the desired voting options in the DRE. The voter can then visually check that the printed options match those she has just selected on the DRE, and the paper record can be later used in a parallel recount independent from the electronic record given by the DRE. Adding a printer to the DRE represents an obvious and (at least in theory) simple solution to the voter-verifiability issue. Still, as any other method, adding a printer to the DRE presents both advantages and drawbacks. On the one hand, printers and physical paper ballots have the capability to generate confidence and also offer the possibility of an independent parallel recount. On the other hand, this method shows poor usability, is not accessible for blind and visually impaired voters, and is prone to mechanical problems and high maintenance costs. In any case, regardless of the balance between the advantages and drawbacks of printers, it is important to note that there are other types of voter-verifiability solutions. This article does not intend to judge printers as a voter-verifiability solution but rather to provide a comprehensive list of factors that should be taken in consideration when comparing and rating different voter-verifiability solutions. The article also presents a new and alternative voter-verifiability solution that is not based on printed paper ballots. Comparisons of the different voter-verifiability solutions should be based on a set of objective criteria. We propose the following list of 13 factors, classified in three basic categories (security, usability and implementability):