Frequently Asked Questions
The OSDV addresses a serious problem in voting technology: the lack of technical guidelines and specifications for determining truly high assurance, high veracity voting devices.
But what does that mean, specifically, about the mission and the activities of OSDV? For answers, here is the current FAQ of full-length answers for for the full list of questions, starting with the "short list" of the dozen most common questions about OSDV.
(For the same questions, with brief answers, see the brief FAQ on OSDV. And for even more info on OSDV, voting technology, voting practices, and more, see the FAQ: Elections, Voting, and Technology.)
What is“digital voting” and why does it need attention from groups like OSDV?
What’s the problem with digital voting today?
Why not leave voting technology to the government? Isn’t it their job to resolve these issues?
What is OSDV doing about these problems, and how?
What does “open source” mean with regard to digital voting?
Is OSDV an open-source software project?
Are you producing some kind of standard?
Aren’t there other groups doing similar things?
How can I learn more or become involved?
Q: What is is “digital voting” and why does it need attention from groups like OSDV?
A: Digital voting pertains to the existing and increasingly common use of computers as part of general and special elections. Despite some controversy over the practice, a large and increasing number of state and local elections bodies in the United States are employing technology for various parts of the voting process – in some cases with “end-to-end” solutions. The results have been mixed, in that this technology [a] does not completely or properly address many problems with purely manual/paper voting, and [b] also creates new problems that increasingly undermine public confidence in U.S. elections.
Despite a great deal of Federal (and increasingly State) policy, procedure, and guidelines on such usage, problems persist because they have their root in technology matters. To increase public confidence in a system that should be by and for the people, groups like OSDV are facilitating open and public endeavors to resolve the problems. In fact, if these problems can be wrested from political wrangling, they are fundamentally tractable, and OSDV is doing its part to identify, address, and propose ways to resolve the technology issues.
Q: What’s the problem with digital voting today?
A: Digital voting systems have raised significant public concern in two areas: reliability and integrity. Reliability concerns center on the ability of digital voting systems to correctly perform their functions. Reliability problems include attested voter reports of accidental vote flipping, inaccurate vote recording, lack of clear confirmation of ballot data, and more. Integrity concerns center on the possibility that flaws in systems and software could lead to unreliable operation, as well as increase vulnerability to fraud in which malefactors tamper with voting data to affect election results.
These concerns apply to all digital voting components: not just systems that voters use to cast ballots, but also systems that scan paper ballots, tabulate votes cast in precincts, and record precinct results and convey them upstream to produce consolidated election tallies and results, etc.
Q: Why not leave voting technology to the government? Isn’t it their job to resolve these issues?
The government is interested, and does have a role to play, along with the private sector, not-for-profit, and the citizenry at large. By itself, the US government cannot move quickly to address voting technology, because of the basic nature of elections as conducted in the US: federal agencies (such as the Election
Assistance Commission) define policy and guidance, within the mandate of legislation (such as the Help America Vote Act), while local and county election commissions conduct elections with federal guidance, state funding, and volunteer labor.
Barring fundamental changes to this system, there will continue to be thousands of organizations conducting elections without or without voting technology as, and how, they see fit given local conditions, funding, and whatever voting system products are available in the marketplace. Non-governmental organizations like OSDV can play a key role in rapidly developing demonstrations of how the needs of election commissions can be better met with bettering applied technology, without trying to change the ways US elections are conducted.
Government action is required, but the beauty of our Democracy is it is a system of public participation, and sometimes, the Government wants or needs to look to the private sector for assistance. This can take the form of request for public comments, hearings, or letting contracts for services. Sometimes, the Government simply looks to private sector efforts and chooses to adopt the work instead of trying to recreate it. Furthermore, Government has its processes, policies, and procedures, and these are not always compatible with the dynamics, mobility, or pace of progress familiar to the private technology sector – whether in commercial efforts (witness the rise and success of Google® or YouTube™ for instance) or non-profit efforts (witness the work and accomplishments of the Mozilla Foundation for instance.) While the government, including the Election
Assistance Commission and the Federal Election Commission, has a concerted interest in voting technology, private sector efforts, albeit non-profit can advance their causes without the burdens of government bureaucracy.
Q: What is OSDV doing about these problems, and how?
A: OSDV is a collaborative, open community engaged in two related activities intended to make OSDV a resource for practical tools to be used by state and local election officials across the U.S.:
Proposed Standards: Developing technology guidelines and other tools to aid in the development, evaluation, and use of computing technology in conducting elections; Using real systems and real voting procedures to demonstrate the use of these guidelines and tools to show how high-assurance computing can be used as part of a high-confidence election process.
Real Working Prototypes: Developing a demonstration test-bed of high assurance digital voting systems and services built on these guidelines, publicly and freely available for demonstration, education, and research purposes and even suitable for mock or real polling or elections.
All guidelines, recommendations, and demonstration software are being developed in a completely open and collaborative manner to demonstrate how transparency can work to create the confidence that is vitally needed at the root of our election system.
Q: What does "open source" mean with regard to digital voting?
A: In the case of OSDV, “open source” has the literal meaning that all efforts and results (guidelines, tools, software, etc.) are conceived, designed, and produced in a transparent, open, collaborative, meritocratic, peer-reviewed and non-proprietary fashion. OSDV employs a development process that is open to anyone who is able and willing to “get the work done” of developing or reviewing OSDV work product.
Q: Is OSDV an open-source software project?
A: OSDV is actually that and more. A portion of OSDV activities will include the development of demonstration software, demonstration activities, and demonstration systems using that software, in order to show how OSDV guidelines can be used in practice for acquiring, certifying, and using computing systems as part of an election process. Such demonstration software will be open-source software.
While open source is not the only way to ensure veracity in digital voting technology or to build high assurance systems, open source activities and software comprise perhaps the most straightforward approach to creating a well vetted, transparent, publicly reviewable, and accessible technology for voting systems. We see open sourcing as one means to produce something incredibly important to Democracy – a voting system for the 21st century’s digital society that is built by the people for the people.
Q: Does the OSDV seek to open-source its work in order to replace current vendor efforts to produce digital voting technology?
A: Not at all! On the contrary, it is the hope and intent of OSDV to advance the cause of digital voting technology and where appropriate, to partner with makers of digital voting products. OSDV’s technology transfer goals can be met only if voting technology advances are actually used in elections with voting system products. Adoption of OSDV results by voting system vendors should enable the vendors to reduce the incredible cost and effort of R&D, and allow them to focus on the two most important aspects of their business: building world class devices, and providing world class customer service, support, and maintenance for them. To be very clear: the OSDV will never produce commercial software or systems, but it will produce specifications, technology, and reference implementations that can serve as a model and a technology base for them.
Q: Is OSDV trying to define how these electronic voting systems should be built, or how they should work?
A: Yes on "define" and no on "should". OSDV will offer a reference model
for voting systems that is consistent with guidelines and
specifications for how high-confidence voting systems can be built and
used. To that extent, the OSDV intends to advance publicly vetted,
peer-reviewed, open-source draft standards for digital voting
technology. However, only government organizations have a mandate to
define how such systems should be built and used. Led by the Election
Assistance Commission and with other government
bodies including the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the government can define and mandate such standards, as well as processes for how systems shall
be certified as meeting such standards.
The OSDV has no capacity (or desire) to mandate “standards” and we are not a recognized “standards setting” body. Although the OSDV intends to conduct its development of specifications in a manner very similar to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF – www.ietf.org), only time will tell if the work of the OSDV achieves such widespread recognition, respect, approval, trust, and above all, adoption as to approach the level of a draft or de-facto standard.
It is equally important to point out that there are a number of vendors of a variety of kinds of systems and software used in elections, and they are and should remain responsible for the manufacturing, support, and service of these commercial products. That said, as a matter of course in the work of OSDV over the long term, a logical step once the primary work of establishing guidelines for the acquisition and certification of voting computing systems is stable and settled, is to build reference models and implementations of demonstration digital voting systems may be conceived, prototyped, or even produced to the level of actual usability. And here, one point can be clearly made: OSDV will not engage in the production, maintenance, enhancement or distribution of commercial software, hardware or systems for voting; such is outside the charter and mission of OSDV.
Q: If OSDV is not trying to define how electronic voting systems should be built, or operate, then what is the specific work of OSDV?
A: OSDV is primarily chartered with identifying, proposing, and demonstrating guidelines and standards for what is currently missing in the process of building, acquiring, certifying, and using computing devices that automate parts of an election process. OSDV activities include developing a demonstration system that will show what high-assurance voting systems can be like, how to assess their reliability and integrity, and how the systems should be used to maintain integrity in practical usage.
Other OSDV activities include developing technical guidelines intended to assist elections officials in defining requirements for assurance of reliability and integrity, common means for assessing products’ assurance. OSDV aims to provide consistent (applicable to any jurisdiction or precinct) and clear guidance, relevant to both sides of this vendor—customer relationship, as to minimum and maximum requirements for enabling election officials to perform the vital tasks of assessment, procurement, and certification of voting systems.
Q: Are you producing some kind of standard?
A: We expect that our work will result in draft standards for assessing the assurance of voting system products and the veracity of their use. We expect that that such draft standards will be useful input for the relevant government standards bodies. We hope that our reference implementations will be subjected to peer-review in order to aid potential standardization. However, if standards emerge as a result of our work, that will happen because of wide-spread adoption – that is, a de-facto standard, like anything that is adopted en masse. If OSDV work product gains wide-spread acceptance, of course, we will support its formal adoption where appropriate. We may pursue certification of OSDV work product with the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, but such EAC certification would not mandate a standard.
Election officials may choose to use part of OSDV technology guidelines, recommended procedures for the use of technology in elections, or any other work product of OSDV, all of which is public property, freely available for voluntary use. Since OSDV is not any form of advocacy or lobbying organization, we will never advocate to any government regulator the adoption of OSDV work product as a standard.
Q: Aren’t there other groups doing similar things?
A: No. Many are advocacy groups, and a few are technology groups like OSDV, but working on complementary technology issues.
There are a great many public interest groups focused on elections, voting, and technology issues. Most of them are very different from OSDV in that they are advocacy groups focused on voting, including some with emphasis on machines, while others have broader agendas. OSDV is not an advocacy group. Specifically, OSDV is a pending non-profit pursuant to 501(c)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Unlike 501(c)(4) or 501(c)(6) entities, we are not any form of advocacy or lobbying organization. What OSDV does we have in common with advocacy groups is the goal of secure, unbiased, and verifiable elections. Clearly, improper use of technology can work against this goal.
OSDV is primarily focused on developing and demonstrating technology and tools for use by those involved in assessing, deploying and auditing digital voting systems, and elections using them. There are other organizations working on technical issues related to voting, such as common data structure for ballots, application software for marking ballots, and alternative voting techniques. In a very few cases, a technology group may be both building new digital voting technology, and advocating that their work become a standard in replacement of current vendor approaches and/or current methods of conducting elections– something we do not subscribe to.
What makes OSDV different is that we work with the election world as it is, not adopting any position of advocacy or policy of change, staying focused on improving technology applied to the performance of elections.
Q: How can I learn more or become involved?
A: Contact us here! and let us know how you’d like to get involved. Also, download a copy of our manifesto, Lectio Reformo, which should provide some insight into our principles and plans.
