RE: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED

["John Ross" <ross@secstan.com>]

Sorry meant to copy this on the list

-----Original Message-----
From: John Ross [mailto:ross@secstan.com] 
Sent: 05 November 2007 15:19
To: 'David RR Webber (XML)'
Subject: RE: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED

Hi Dave,

We are probably getting wire crossed here,  

Holistic approaches demonstrating that EML is flexible and can be applied to
a whole range of solutions is indeed important, so is providing
interoperability across solutions and multichannel support.

The main issue I was pointing out was that, we need to improve the
verifiability of electronic electoral systems.  One aspect of that is being
able to prove the authenticity of the information in the system and support
third party trusted verification services (external witnesses).  

The big criticism levelled at all the Internet/IVR system in the UK pilots
was that there was no external verifiability and hence the systems as a
whole were a black box, with votes going in, results coming out and no for a
third party to verify what happened in between. So we have to find was of
improving on that.

JR

-----Original Message-----
From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info] 
Sent: 05 November 2007 13:22
To: John Ross
Cc: 'John Borras'; 'eml'; 'Lori Steele'; 'Craig Burton'; 'Zelechoski,Peter'
Subject: RE: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED

John,

FYI - background info' - a bill was just introduced in the US senate that
seeks to ban all DRE's from 2012.

That's why I'm saying you need a holistic approach here that shows the
completeness of the standard - and the applicability to a whole range of
solutions - otherwise you run the risk of being labelled a dsig/cert
electronic only technology...

Auditing is about alot more than just dsig's.

DW

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED
> From: "John Ross" <ross@secstan.com>
> Date: Mon, November 05, 2007 3:56 am
> To: "'David RR Webber (XML)'" <david@drrw.info>,  "'Zelechoski, Peter'"
> <pzelechoski@essvote.com>
> Cc: "'John Borras'" <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>,  "'eml'"
> <election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>,  "'Lori Steele'"
> <lori@everyonecounts.com>,  "'Craig Burton'" <craig@everyonecounts.com>
> 
> Throwing in my ten cents here.
> 
> From the experience of the UK pilots, verifiability is one of the most
> important area where the current electoral systems need to be enhanced, if
> we can demonstrate verifiable audit records using electronic signatures,
in
> my view that will help improve the verifiability of the whole process.  So
I
> think peter's proposal is more about improving verifiability and having
> trust is the auditing capability of the systems. 
> 
> JR
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info] 
> Sent: 04 November 2007 18:18
> To: Zelechoski,Peter
> Cc: John Borras; eml; Lori Steele; Craig Burton
> Subject: RE: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED
> 
> Peter,
> 
> Agreed - we need both.  I just would not lead with the DSig stuff - as
> that's very "tech' head" stuff.  I think the average voter cares more
about
> being able to trust the software behind the voting systems - and that it
can
> be independently checked...
> Also dsig is better positioned as authentication of the voting source -
> where the particular ballot originated from.
> 
> Time of course will tell on all this - I'm seeing we need to tell the
> complete story - open standards with vote authentication together.
> 
> DW
> 
> "The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)
> 
> 
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: RE: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED
> > From: "Zelechoski, Peter" <pzelechoski@essvote.com>
> > Date: Sun, November 04, 2007 12:51 pm
> > To: "David RR Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info>
> > Cc: "John Borras" <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>,  "eml"
> > <election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>,  "Lori Steele"
> > <lori@everyonecounts.com>,  "Craig Burton" <craig@everyonecounts.com>
> > 
> > David -
> > 
> > I think you missed the point.  Interoperability is one key item we must
> > demonstrate.  HOWEVER, in the US (and elsewhere I would argue) the
> > validation of the authenticity of a message is a major factor that we
> > must also demonstrate.  Definitely, for the VVSG, the security aspects
> > demand that we demonstrate this.
> > 
> > - Peter 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info] 
> > Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 10:26 AM
> > To: Zelechoski, Peter
> > Cc: John Borras; eml; Lori Steele; Craig Burton
> > Subject: RE: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED
> > 
> > Peter,
> > 
> > I would not bet the farm on DSig for VVSG verification - by far the best
> > factor IMHO is that the specifications are open public and therefore
> > independently verifiable with conformance suites that can valid the
> > ballots and records and counts.
> > 
> > Having multiple vendors show interoperability makes that point most
> > eloquently of course.
> > 
> > ; -)
> > 
> > DW
> > 
> > "The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)
> > 
> > 
> > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > Subject: RE: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED
> > > From: "Zelechoski, Peter" <pzelechoski@essvote.com>
> > > Date: Fri, November 02, 2007 4:32 pm
> > > To: "John Borras" <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>,  "eml"
> > > <election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>,  "Lori Steele"
> > > <lori@everyonecounts.com>,  "Craig Burton" <craig@everyonecounts.com>
> > > 
> > > John, et al. -
> > >  
> > > This looks fine.  I think it is worth singling out the use of digital
> > > signatures as a high level demonstration of EML's ability to fulfill
> > the
> > > requirement for VVSG to verify all messages.
> > >  
> > > - Peter
> > > 
> > > ________________________________
> > > 
> > > From: John Borras [mailto:johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk] 
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 9:59 AM
> > > To: eml; Lori Steele; Craig Burton
> > > Subject: Re: [election-services] OASIS Demo for NASS / NASED
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Peter
> > >  
> > > Thanks for these thoughts, a very good starter for our discussions.
> > > However before we get to this level of detail I think it would be very
> > > useful to agree the objectives of the proposed Demo to focus our minds
> > > on what we are trying to achieve before we descend into the weeds.
> > > Below are my thoughts, not in any particular order of importance, and
> > > I'd welcome agreement or otherwise on these please.
> > >  
> > > - to show how EML can be used in a multi-channel e-voting ballot
> > > involving several suppliers
> > > - to localise the Demo in such a way as to ensure the ballots are
> > > understandable to the American participants and conform to their usual
> > > voting practices
> > > - to show how EML can meet the requirements of the draft EAC Voluntary
> > > Voting System Guidelines 
> > > - to show how the EML TC and the IEEE 1622 committee are collaborating
> > > to deliver consistent outputs and interoperable solutions
> > > - to demonstrate how EML can support multi-lingualism eg English,
> > > Spanish, (others?)
> > > - to help the audience better understand the scope, breadth,
> > flexibility
> > > and advantages of using EML
> > > - to identify any weaknesses in v5 that need to be addressed in future
> > > releases.
> > >  
> > >  
> > > John
> > > 
> > > 
> > > "Zelechoski, Peter" <pzelechoski@essvote.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > 	At the OASIS Demo this week, John asked us to think about doing
> > > a demo in the US -- most likely at the NASS / NASED Conference that is
> > > scheduled to take place in Washington DC this coming February.
> > > 	I am attaching a draft outline for discussion amongst our TC. 
> > > 	- Peter 
> > > 	<<NassNasedKeyDemoPoints.ppt>> 
> > > 	
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 	To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
> > > that
> > > 	generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your
> > > TCs in OASIS
> > > 	at:
> > > 	
> > > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ________________________________
> > > 
> > > Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Try it now
> > >
> > <http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTEydmViNG02BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTcxOTAEc
> > > 2VjA21haWwEc2xrA3RhZ2xpbmU> .
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php