seminar!work:! e-electionsand!e-voting-!!thecaseof ... · ! 3!! 3. typesofelvoting!!...
TRANSCRIPT
SEMINAR WORK:
E-‐ELECTIONS AND E-‐VOTING -‐ THE CASE OF SWITZERLAND
AND FRANCE
STUDENT NAME: Adrian Dulaj STUDENT NUMBER: 09 336 595 COURSE NAME: Masters in European Business DEPARTMENT: Department of SES COURSE CODE: OCEH8V1 SUPERVISOR: Luis Teran DATE OF SUBMISSION: 01 December 2011
1
Table of Content
1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………...2
2. What is E-‐Voting…………………………………………………………………………………..2
3. Types of E-‐Voting…………………………………………………………………………………3
4. Advantages and Disadvantages of E-‐Voting…………………………………………...7
4.1.1 Advantages…………………………………………………………………………..7
4.1.2 Disadvantages……………………………………………………………………...8
5. Basic Requirement for a good e-‐voting system……………………………………....9
5.1 Certification of E-‐Voting Systems in EU………………………………………….10
6. E-‐Voting Places…………………………………………………………………………………..11
7. E-‐Voting in France and Switzerland…………………………………………………….12
7.1.1 7.1. E-‐Voting in France – Presidential Elections in 2007……….12
7.1.2 7.2. E-‐Voting in Switzerland………………………………………………..13
7.1.2.1.1 7.2.1. -‐ The Geneva Internet Voting System………….15
8. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………18
Sources……………………………………………………………………………………………...20
2
1. Introduction
Nowadays, the use of technology and Internet has become very popular, day-‐to-‐
day lots of people are using it worldwide and it has become part of people’s life.
In this paper, I am going to focus on our constitutional right – the vote. Voting is
very important for a society, thus for years, mankind is trying to make it better
and more reliable. In recent years, we have taken a step forward, using IT to
vote. Considering my interest in politics and the positive trends of interest in E-‐
Voting these recent years (where many Governments have already tested and
are using the e-‐Voting), I decided to choose this topic in order to study and give a
wide overview of E-‐Voting in general, as well as specific cases in particular
countries. Moreover, will see how the Governments and Society can profit from
the advantages that this system provides.
2. What is E-‐Voting?
Electronic Voting is an election system, which uses electronic ballots to allow
users/voters to vote and transfer electronically their secret vote in a secure way
to election officials. The term E-‐Voting comprises many different types of voting,
from electronic voting to different types of counting the votes. Here it includes
punch cards, optical scan voting systems, DRE (Direct Recording electronic
voting systems, known as Specialized Voting Kiosks), voting via telephone,
private computer networks and the Internet. In later parts, I will
explain/describe into details each one of the above-‐mentioned voting means.
Moreover, in general voting types can be gathered into two groups based on
their supervisions:
• e-‐Voting which is physically supervised by governmental representatives
with electronic voting machines located at polling stations and
• Remote e-‐Voting where voting is not physically supervised by an
governmental performed and it is performed by internet, tv, mobile
phones etc. (Source: Wikipedia)
3
3. Types of e-‐Voting
Paper-‐based electronic voting systems – also known as punch cards is the first
known electronic voting system. In this voting type, paper is still present
however it is called electronic because it is counted electronically. How does it
function? With the invent of electronic tabulation where the paper cards or
sheets could be marked by hand but counted electronically, it made possible for
the voting papers to be counted electronically, which means much faster than a
traditional way of counting, one by one! This group consists of punch cards, mark
senses and digital pen voting systems.1 Some voting systems in this group are
pretty much the same as DRE Systems. The voters still use a touchscreen,
however here after voting a paper is printed and the election official takes all
these “papers’’ and sends to the centralized counting location where the votes
are counted / scanned using an optically device.
Figure 1. E-‐Voting Types
Source: Secure Electronic Voting
An advantage of using this system is because there is a physical presence of vote,
which in some way ensure the voter that their choice will be counted, however it
does not ensure that it will be counted correctly – the disadvantage of the
system. For example, the Florida elections case in year 2000 in U.S.2 made
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_voting 2 http://www.divms.uiowa.edu/~jones/cards/chad.html
3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_voting
2 http://www.divms.uiowa.edu/~jones/cards/chad.html
4
infamous these systems because the holes in punch cards were not
properly/fully punched (so called “hanging chad”) thus they where unreadable
(as shown in Figure 2).
Other disadvantages of this system may be that the printers that mark the card
may run slowly or run out of the toner, which may result in an incomplete vote.
As well, we all know that in few ballots, there are numerous cases where there is
voted for more then one candidate, thus the tabulation devices do not read more
then one vote!
Figure 2. Hanging Chad’s
DRE Systems (Direct recording electronic voting systems) – is a computer where
voters view ballots on screen and vote using buttons or touchscreens. After
voting, all the votes are stored in removable memory components, and after
election officials take them to a central location for counting; or the other way is
that they are transmitted through modem-‐to-‐modem line, though this last option
is not a lot practiced. Many DRE devices also have the capacity to print a paper
record of the home, however most of them have no corresponding trail, which is
considered to be one the disadvantages of this system. Many critics have been
addressed to this issue, because the votes are just stored in the memory and they
have no trail. Moreover the critics believe that it might be from programmers
possible to manipulate the numbers of vote since there is no trail to the votes.
5
Furthermore, private companies produce the DRE devices so there is a way to
fraud them. Last but no least, the DRE systems costs much more than all other
systems currently in use, thus the economic factor should be considered!
Figure 3. DRE Systems
In the other hand, this system provides a few more advantages compared to
paper-‐based one. First, since they are electronically displayed you can vote for
more than one candidate; screen fonts can be designed larger for the poor
eyesight people or can even play audio for the blind voters. Moreover, since
votes are recorded in memory, it take less time to count them, they are
automatically done.
Brazil is the best case to describe the advantages of this system. Since 2000,
Brazilian voters are able to vote using these machines. In Presidential elections
of the same year – 2000, there were around 135 million voters and the results
where defined for a record time, just 75 minutes after the end of voting! In Brazil,
the ballot box is made of two micro-‐terminals) which are connected by a 5 meter
cable from voting machine to the voting board representative. The micro-‐
terminals have only numerical keyboard in both sides in order not to take any
commands in any case. As well, they have an internal battery, which saves the
votes in case of energy failure. The electronic ballot box of Brazil is used as a
model for countries3.
3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_voting
6
Internet Voting – As computer ownership was increased in late 90’s, people
where using more Internet, thus more opportunities where discovered in the
electronic democracy field as well. Considering that Internet provides a lot of
opportunities, the concept of voting through Internet was introduced. However,
as all new ideas, they where faced (and still are) with critics mainly in the
security issues. That time, critics where taking a parallel between Internet
transaction and Internet voting. The fraud in Internet transaction (payments)
was said to be in the level of 10% of all the transactions, and if this would be
approximately the same in the election, then it would not be possible and
legitimate to vote through Internet. Moreover, in year of 2000, in order to test
these opportunities a Task Force was created in California, U.S. in order to see
the whether in that time conditions was possible to undertake elections through
internet. The task force reported “it this time it would not be legally, practically
or fiscally feasible to develop a comprehensive remote Internet Voting system
that would completely replace current paper process”.
However, officials from Election.com website4, claim that efficient security
measures exist -‐ which make it possible for the public to vote via Internet.
Furthermore, advantages of internet voting where introduced; the observers say
that it will lower the cost, as well, based on public opinion, a widely part of
population, especially the younger ones prefer and are looking forward to the
internet; which in other words will increase the number of participants in
elections.
Later on, I will present into details pros and cons of this system as well as
present the real cases -‐ how Geneva, Switzerland introduced and is using the
Internet voting.
4 http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ivote/final_report.pdf
7
4. Advantages and Disadvantages of E-‐Voting
Elections are unique and important for many parties including citizens, nation,
political parties, different activism etc. Elections directly affects the lives of
thousand of people, moreover it even changes fate of nations! E Voting as
mentioned above provides a lot of advantages both, for citizen/voters as well as
for election officials in many areas such as more flexibility, secure, convenient
and less costly elections. On the other hand, there exist a few arguments against
the use of electronic voting.
4.1 Advantages
The first of all advantages of this system is that in offers the possibility to
increase the efficiency of the elections. With voting machines citizens may
reasonably be confident that their vote will be counted (despite hanging chads
problems in U.S.). As well, the new voting machines are programmed and design
that based on what is being voted, can reduce the number of answers (ability to
vote only for a person) which will stop common voters faults of voting two
persons ore more and after the vote being excluded or not counted! Moreover,
machines provide the opportunity to enlarge the fonts or even play a sound for a
people with poor eye sights, -‐ it reduces a lot t common mistakes/fault that
happen in paper elections! So, on the others words, it provides convenience;
software can be designed in the way the voters can simply use it with the
minimal time and skills!
Mobility is another very important issue. From my personal experience, I was
very interested to vote in the national elections of my country, however since I
was geographically far, I didn’t have the chance to give my vote! Internet voting
breaks these barriers. Voters can cast their votes from many different places
through different devices, i.e. personal computer, mobile, TV’s etc, which of
course requires Internet connection.
8
Less costs – Compared with the traditional voting system, the e-‐voting reduces
costs a lot which comes from reducing personal, administration fee, materials,
location management etc. In case of voting machines, it may be possible that the
cost of creating/buying them might be high in the beginning but after it is
possible to use them many times -‐ for the other ballots.
Speed -‐ with the Electronic Voting, when voting time is over, computer will
immediately count the votes, and in few minutes after we will the results, which
is much faster the traditional voting systems.
Flexibility – Since this system has not a lot of costs and it has mobility
advantage, it means that it is also possible to vote for many ballots, starting from
public opinions to elections.
Increased Participation: Based on a public opinion that was mentioned above,
with all these advantages of e-‐voting, it will motivate people to vote (especially
the younger generation) who before where not interested to go physically to
vote.
4.2 Disadvantages
Despite advantages the e-‐voting system offers, there exists the opposite side .
Mostly the critics are directed to security issues, as well as other issues with
technology, access to machines/internet etc.
Let’s start with inequality problem. When I refer to inequality, I mean the
contrast that exists between people salaries for example. Not all people are
allowed and can afford access to Internet. Moreover, although designers are
trying to program and design the ballot (Interface) in an user-‐friendly way, still
there are people that don’t know how to use machines/mobiles/internet in
general, especially in leased developed countries.
Secondly, the security issues. With the use of electronic machines, the possibility
of frauds becomes higher. Why? To be straight – public doesn’t have information
of how system work. Companies who build electronic voting machines, although
they are supervised by election officials/government, they do provide
information but in a very basic level, however, the way that the voting program
9
is designed, the way it functions -‐ insufficient information exists. This is more
because they try to protect it and compete with competitors but still it affects the
larger part of the population.
Other disadvantage -‐ voting devices might be attacked from Viruses, for instance
the well-‐known -‐ Trojan virus, can effect from the operating system to a Webb
rowers and the voting system overall. “It might infringe the secrets ballot and
privacy, modify the results and reduce the justice of the elections”5.
Moreover, Prof. Dr. Dimitris Gritzalis in his work “Secure E-‐Voting: New trends
and New Threats” listed other barriers for the E-‐Voting as follows:
• Lack of Common voting system standards across nations
• Time and difficulty of changing national election votes
• Time and cost of certifying a voting system
• Political risk associated with trying a new voting system
• Need for security and election experts etc.
5. Basic Requirements for a good e-‐voting system
Any electronic voting system should meet the below mentioned criteria’s in
order to be reliable as set by Internet Policy Institute6:
• Authentication – only eligible and authorized voter should be able to vote
through that particular system
• Uniqueness – voters are allowed to vote only once
• Accuracy – all votes should be correctly recorded and counted
• Integrity – in no way, votes should not be modified, forged, or deleted
without the detection
• Auditability – the votes should have audit trail, which means that it
should be possible to verify that all votes have been correctly counted and
that for that to be proofed by a reliable records
5 https://files.nyu.edu/tsc223/public/ElectronicVoting.pdf 6 Report of the National Workshop on Internet Voting
10
• Secrecy and Non-‐Coercibility – no one should know how an individual
voted, nor no one should be able to prove how they did vote in order to
reduce the risk of coercion (vote-‐selling)
• Transparency – The election process should be transparent to the voters.
Voters should be able to have a general knowledge and understand the
voting process/mechanism. It increases the voting confidence of the
public for the particular voting type.
• Creditability – election systems should be testable and meets specific
criteria’s, so that the election officials have a confidence in them.
• Simplicity and Flexibility – As mentioned in above parts as well, the
program should be design in a way to be simple and understandable for
the users/voters. It should also provide opportunities to vote for the
people with disabilities. Furthermore, it should be flexible and allow a
variety of ballot questions format.
5.1 Certification of e-‐voting systems in EU
In 2004 the “Legal, operational and technical standards for e-‐voting” where
adopted by the Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe. Since then the
Council of Europe members states agreed to hold biennial meetings in order to
“keep in touch” about their experiences of e-‐voting since the adaption of the
Recommendations. At the 2008 Biennial Review meeting, it was suggested that
certification of e-‐voting system (with recommendations) and the transparency of
electronic elections demanded more attention.
For this reason the work in the certification of e-‐voting system began and the
present guidelines where elaborated during the meeting of the council from
November 2009 and May/June 2010. With this documents, they recommend the
member state to introduce a certification process, which means that the e-‐voting
system should be review in a process of confirmation that they are in compliance
with requirements and standards set by the council in 2004. This is done
through different measures from testing and auditing to formal certification, and
in the end as a result a report or a certificate is given.
11
Figure 4. Theoretical model of possible formal certification process
Source: http://www.coe.int/t/dgap/democracy/Activities/GGIS/E-‐
voting/Evoting%202010/Biennial_Nov_meeting/Guidelines_certification_EN.pdf
6. E-‐Voting Places
Voting at polling places: It provides the highest security compared to other
electronic forms because it happens physically, and the department can provide
the reliable, no virus, easy handled voting machines at places. Furthermore, the
voters are authenticated.
Voting at home via computer: means that individual can vote from their home,
however it’s hard to predict or prevent the other/third person from viewing or
12
taking part in voting process. As well, it is more difficult to secure the voter’s
computer from the attack of hackers or viruses.
Voting anyplace with mobile devices: The voters who vote through their laptop,
mobile, PDA or any other device, in any place that is convenient for the voter, but
that is connected to internet. The important issue in this group is that network
where voter get’s access to Internet. It is crucial to make sure that is not
monitored or hacked by any ‘’attackers”.
7. E-‐Voting in France and Switzerland
In this section, we will see how the real e-‐voting cases in Switzerland, United
States and in France, how did they adapt and the benefits, consequences and
remarks of the system.
7.1. E-‐Voting in France – Presidential Elections in 2007
Since introduced E-‐Voting in France has been met with a criticism and
opposition. This was proved that although with a record number of voters, there
was a strong opposition in Presidential Elections in 2007.
In France, electronic voting machines were first authorized in 2004 but they
were first used in general elections of 2007. First round had a record of voters -‐
37.6 million or 85% voter turnout. But, the remote Internet voting in France was
used years earlier. In 2003 French citizens living in U.S. were allowed to vote
and elect their representative to the Assembly of the French Citizens Abroad
(Conseil Supérieur des Français d’étranger (CSFE)). Actually, over 60% of the
electorate did choose to cast their vote over the Internet7.
So, after the E-‐Elections in 2003, the debate over the e voting and its future
began. A report published by “Forum des Droits sur l’Internet in 2003”8
recommended that this systems of voting (Remote Internet Voting) could be 7 http://www-‐cs-‐faculty.stanford.edu/~eroberts/cs181/projects/2006-‐07/electronic-‐voting/index_files/page0005.html 8 http://www.tiresias.org/research/guidelines/evoting_projects.htm
13
used only by French citizens abroad, whereas the electorate in France should
able to vote through polling place e-‐voting (i.e. DRE). Furthermore, the report
argued that this system offers:
• Increased opportunity for political participation
• Simplifies the voting process etc.
However, the debate in 2007 proved the opposite. Most of the political parties in
elections of 2007 where against using electronic voting for these reasons:
• Lack of Security
• The ease of use
• Cost of the machine
Despite many trials and projects, the first round of presidential elections had
many malfunctions, and for this reason in 2008 an online petition in
Ordinateurs-‐de-‐vote.org was lunched for voting in traditional way and in time
more than 80,000 signatures where collected. Still, since then, the France
government officials are working in Internet elections are are preparing to lunch
internet voting in near future9!
7.2. E-‐Voting in Switzerland
The Swiss E-‐Voting initiative was introduced in 2002 with creating of all
necessary legal basis and recommendation. In its “Report on the electronic vote,
opportunity, risks and feasibility” the Federal Council 10mentions that:
• E-‐Voting should be easy, practical and safe as possible
• It should under no circumstances penalize citizens who have no access to
electronic method
• The technical infrastructure should be reliable
• The system should allow verifying votes
• The system should help prevent abuse, count all votes and of course
protect secrecy
9 http://www.ordinateurs-‐de-‐vote.org/ 10 http://www.ge.ch/evoting/english/doc/rapports/EN_RD_639_and_Annex.pdf
14
In order to clarify whether this system can be used, the pilot experiments were
carried in the canton of Geneva, Neuchatel and Zurich. In September 2004,
Geneva introduced e-‐voting system for a cantonal and federal ballot. It may be
considered a success – turnout of the election reached 56.4%11.
The Switzerland’s objective for E-‐Voting is not to replace the postal voting, but to
serve as a way to increase the voter’s turnout, which in years was declining.
Figure 5. The voter’s turnout in years in Switzerland
7.2.1. -‐ The Geneva Internet Voting System
Internet voting system is more a sociological task before being a technical one.
As of official representative responsible for Geneva Internet Voting, the social
issues are issues that need to be first solved:
• Acceptance of virtual voting system in the voting channel
• Creation of trust in the system
• Define procedures that minimize human error and manipulations
11 http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.law.harvard.edu/files/Gerlach-‐Gasser_SwissCases_Evoting.pdf
The original idea was to give a wide platform in order to cast votes
in referendum and elections and also to give an electronic signature for
initiatives, referendum and candidate proposals. For the moment all pilot
project are only concerned on voting in referendum and elections.
The Switzerland’s objective of E-Voting is not to replace the actual ballot
or postal voting, but to serve as an additional channel which might increase
voter’s turnout that become lower and lower since decades (Figure 2), with
the exception on singular critical vote (for example entry in the EU).
Figure 2: Voter turnout 1919-2007
With the introduction of postal voting in the 90ies the Swiss government
tried to reverse the voting behavior giving a new method that make voting
more easily accessible. And also very important the concept of distant-
polling has been introduced so that E-Voting will not appear as an absolute
revolution.
The main categories of people that could be interested on this project
are young people that are more interested in the use of Internet but with
a below-average participation and also all people that are not able too cast
their vote for different physical reason, for example physically handicapped
individuals or the community of Swiss expatriates.
This last community represented by OSA2 demanded the possibility to
be able to cast their vote electronically for the 2011 federal election at the
lasts. The number of Swiss voters abroad is significant, in 2006 there were
approximately 650 thousand Swiss residents abroad and 111 thousand of
2Organisation of the Swiss Abroad
5
15
The idea was to create an accessible system that does not oblige voters to
purchase any infrastructure beyond PC and Internet access. Voters who wished
to vote online where not required pre-‐registering with the state first because it
discourages them. The Geneva University was chosen to conduct legal and social
political studies. As well, after the social issues, one should focus in technical
issues.
In Geneva, many it companies were mandated to develop aspects of the
application, and audit its security. A website was created to inform citizens and
provide them a contact with voting platform – www.ge.ch/evoting. Ergonomic
test helped to define the user interface.
Figure 6. – Demo of Internet Voting in Geneva
The Geneva parliament was also involved in the procedure in order to give a
hand to the improvement of the system. Moreover cantonal and federal
16
lawmakers have developed a set of rules specific of Internet voting. Some of
them are mentioned below:
1. Visually impaired voters should be able to vote online
2. The electronic voting application must be clearly separated from the
state’s other IT applications.
3. Systematic fraud, systematic vote hijacking on the internet and systematic
identity theft shall be impossible
4. Voters should be provided a way to ensure that they are voting on the
State’s official website and should be informed that their ballot has been
properly cast and stored in the electronic ballot box
5. Stored votes should be totally anonymous… etc
The development of this system of Internet voting in Geneva has relied as much
as possible in the Recommendation Act (2004) mentioned above by the Council
of Europe! So, as we can see, many parties are need to be involved in the
procedure in order to have a reliable voting system.
Open Source of the Internet voting
The open source of the system is an delicate issues of the e-‐voting in general. It
can be seen as a barrier of this system if the source code is not provided or very
partly provided for the public or other institution to understand and valuate it.
But in Geneva it is different. Geneva always had an opinion that state must own
the intellectual property of its internet voting system. So this means that either
that state uses software whose source are public –open source or it acquires the
intellectual the source. For now, more then 80% of the software in Geneva is an
open source, and the rest is own by the state. Moreover Geneva law opens the
code for any interest, review or scientific research to citizens, experts etc.
The security approach in Geneva
The key issue of security for Geneva officials is the securing the data. They
propose that three parties must be taken into account:
-‐ The voter’s PC
17
-‐ The Internet
-‐ The State’s IT System.
The Geneva team instead of focusing to them as a three different entities, they
focus on the common factor of all three: The data
First, the voter’s PC – this is the weakest part of the system with regard to the
security issues. The risks are managed by sending a signed java applet to the
voter’s PC but without installing it there. All through voting session this applet
protects PC from the malicious software that could attack the PC. Secondly, on
the Internet the data here is protected by java applet encryption, which is
generated by quantum generator. Last, but not least the state’s IT system is a
very complex system, which after all, filters all requests and commands so that
only ones who are compatible with a voting procedures are processed.
The ID Card – In Geneva, before every voting, voters receive by post a voting card
(single use), which is their numerical ID. This card as well carrier voters number
and a PIN code. In order to vote the individual has to give to the system two
shared secrets: birthdate and a municipality of origin, as well as the PIN Code. So
far, the system has shown success.
Figure 7. The ID card used for Internet voting in Geneva (with PIC code hidden in the down-‐left
side)
2322
THE ID ISSUE
Dealing with ID management on the internet raises a fundamental question: how do I know that you really are who you say you are ?In the physical world, this answer is easily provided. A passport, an ID card or a driver’s license settle the question. To obtain an ID from the state, one has to come in person and provide a pre-existing
of one’s birth. At that moment, let’s call it “time zero”, our parents created our identity and the state gave it a material existence.
In the cyberworld, there can be as many “time zeros” as one de-cides ; everyone can assume as many names, genders and ages as they wish. Therefore, the central question becomes : is it acceptable to fully dematerialize the digital ID ?
the extensive checks performed in the physical world to ascertain
the browser, which can be compromised.
This does not mean that online authentication has to be complex. Before every ballot, Geneva voters receive by post a single use voting card, which is their numerical ID with time-limited validity. This card carries the voter’s number and PIN code. To validate their votes, citizens must also give the system two shared secrets: their birth date and municipality of origin. This is a implementation of the strong online authentication rule that relies on the combination of two out of the three following items: something you know ( in this case, your birth date and municipality of origin ), something you have ( your voting card with PIN code ) and something you are ( which
18
8. Conclusion
In this seminar work, I have presented detailed and understandable the subject
of the e voting in general. We have been introduced to types of e-‐voting,
advantages and disadvantages and focused in the real cases as well. All though,
there are different types of e-‐voting, i.e. DRE systems or Internet voting, still the
results in the end are things that matters. In most of the cases, the results are
positive, however a further improvements need to be done. Even though, some
countries have different opinions/preference on which e-‐voting type to choose,
still each one of them has their benefits. I recall the case of DRE in Brazil, which is
very used and serves like a model these days for other countries, and in
Switzerland they are not practiced; in opposite Swiss are known for their
Internet voting experiences, i.e. in Geneva. In my opinion, after all what has been
mentioned above, what needs to be done for other governments that want to
use any types of the e-‐voting is that they should:
• Make public research which way of e-‐voting would be more convenient
for the citizens
• Understand their financial and IT capacities
• When chosen, take a supervision from countries/cities which are pioneer
in any way of e-‐voting (i.e. Geneva)
• Try to rely as mush as possible on the Recommendations Report (2004)
of the European Council etc.
19
Appendix – The system architecture of the Geneva Internet Voting
Source: http://www.ge.ch/evoting
20
Sources:
Prof.Dr. Dimitris Gritzalis, 2002 [Secure Electronic Voting: New Trends, New
Threats]. Available on: http://www.terena.org/activities/tf-‐
csirt/meeting7/gritzalis-‐electronic-‐voting.pdf; Accessed on:03.Nov.2011
Wikipedia 2011: Electronic Voting. Avaiable on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_voting; accessed on: 29.Oct.2011
Califronia Internet Voting Task Force, 2000 [A report on the feasibility of
Internet Voting in 2000]; available on:
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ivote/final_report.pdf; accessed on:
10.Nov.2011
Tsun Shao Chen, 2003 [Electronic Voting]; avaiable on:
https://files.nyu.edu/tsc223/public/ElectronicVoting.pdf; accessed on:
10.Nov.2011
Internet Policy Institute, March 2001 [Report on the National Workshop:
Issues and Research Agenda]; available on:
news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/voting/nsfe-‐voterprt.pdf; accessed on:
19.Nov.2011
Directorate General of Democracy and Policial Affairs, 2011 [Certification of
E-‐Voting Systems: Guidelines for developing processes that confirm compliance
with prescribed requirements and standards]; available on:
http://www.coe.int/t/dgap/democracy/Activities/GGIS/E-‐voting/E-‐
voting%202010/Biennial_Nov_meeting/Guidelines_certification_EN.pdf,
accessed on: 18.Nov.2011
Standford 2006/07 [Electronic Voting]; available on: http://www-‐cs-‐
faculty.stanford.edu/~eroberts/cs181/projects/2006-‐07/electronic-‐
voting/index.html; accessed on: 04.Nov.2011
21
Tiresias, 2011 [Countries with E-‐Voting Projects]; available on: 1 http://www.tiresias.org/research/guidelines/evoting_projects.htm, accessed on: 06.Nov.2011 State Council Report of the Republic and Canton of Geneva, July 2007 [Electronic Voting]; available on: http://www.ge.ch/evoting/english/doc/rapports/EN_RD_639_and_Annex.pdf; accessed on: 23.Nov.2011 Jan Gerlach, Urs Gasser 2009 [Three case studies from Switzerland: E-‐Voting]; available on: 1 http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.law.harvard.edu/files/Gerlach-‐Gasser_SwissCases_Evoting.pdf; accessed on: 20.Nov.2011 Republic and Canton of Geneva [The Geneva Internet Voting System]; available on: http://www.ge.ch/evoting/english/doc/passport_evoting2010.pdf, accessed on: 05.Nov.2011