1. Internet Voting Resources and Reports
Susan Greenhalgh
EVN Conference March 2016

2. Perceptions can be deceiving
“DOD endorses online voting for the military.”
DOD does not endorse online voting. DoD “does not advocate for the electronic transmission of any voted ballot, whether it be by fax, or via the Internet.” –Pentagon spokesman Lt. Commander Nathan Christensen.
government/election/article html

3. Perception Research
“DOD endorses online voting for the military.”
The DoD’s Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) wrote in a 2013 report to Congress postal mail return of a voted ballot “remains the most responsible method of ballot return…”
FVAP/Reports/evsw_report.pdf

4. Perception Research
“Use of military Common Access Cards (CAC) can resolve security and voter authentication issues of online ballot return.”
/2015/08/06/russia-reportedly-hacks- pentagon- -system/ /

5. Perception Research
“Ballots sent by are not as vulnerable to attackers as a ‘full Internet voting system.”’
NIST report 7551 “A Threat Analysis of UOCAVA Voting Systems”
“ are significantly easier to intercept and modify in transit than other forms of communication.”
vote/uocava.cfm

6. Perception Research
“Estonia has developed a secure and trusted Internet voting system.”
Team of international researchers assessed the security and found exploitable vulnerabilities that could permit state attacker to manipulate the election undetected. g/

7. Perception Research
“Estonia has developed a secure and trusted Internet voting system.” .
ee.facebook.com/ausadvalimised

8. Perception Research
“Encryption can secure an online voting system.”
The Norwegian online voting system suffered a major encryption error and tens of thousands of ballots sent in the clear before it was discovered and corrected. Norway abandoned online voting.
/technology

9. Perception - Research “Encryption can secure an online voting system.”
In the NSW online election last year, researchers found they could defeat the encryption by intercepting a third party script that was introduced into every voter’s browser.  They could then intercept and change every vote before sending it.  Over 66,000 votes were cast before the vulnerability was patched.
tinker.com/blog/teaguehalderman/ ivote-vulnerability/

10. Perception Research
“Online voting systems have been tested for security.”
Internet voting systems in the US are not subject to security testing like other voting systems.  However, the city of Toronto conducted an independent security analysis of three IV systems and found that no system provided adequate protection against the risks inherent in internet voting.
content/uploads/2014/09/Canada security-report.pdf

11. Perception Research
“Online voting systems meet accessibility standards.”
Toronto also evaluated the accessibility of three major online voting system vendors and found none satisfied the WCAG 2.0.
content/uploads/2014/09/Canada accessibility-report.pdf

12. Perception Research
“Online voting will lower cost and increase voter turnout.”
The British Columbian legislature commissioned a report on Internet voting that found that evidence shows that the presumed benefit of lower cost and increased participation were not realized.
content/uploads/2014/10/CA-BC recommendations-final-report.pdf

13. Perception Research
“[X] is supporting (or opposing) Internet voting because online voting will benefit voters on the [left][right].”
The Heritage Foundation and Brennan Center, organizations perceived to be on opposite ends of the political spectrum, both released reports opposing online voting.
integrity-pro-voter-agenda#Introduction he-dangers-of-internet-voting

14. Perception Research
The security challenges of online voting can be solved with blockchain (bitcoin) technology.”
Researchers have published a paper debunking the theory that blockchain will secure online elections.