OPINION
Research analysts at Biometric
Research Laboratory (BRL) are keen to outline some of the most important
criterions when implementing electronic voting (e-voting) systems.
BRL is the research group at
Namibia Biometric Systems (NBS), which conducts applied research in the
implementation of biometrics-based solutions for both government and commercial
applications.
Implementing e-voting
technology is more complex than most governments anticipate and therefore
neglects vital requirements such as comprehensive research and consultations.
In addition, electoral commissioners too often assume that e-voting systems are
secure, while other electoral stakeholders often have greater distrust in
technologies. Thus, electoral commissioners need to take security concerns
extremely seriously. The security of e-voting and e-counting systems is
critical to ensuring public confidence and overall electoral integrity.
It is important to realise
that numerous security flaws have been detected in voting and counting machines
in many countries. Public debate on and scrutiny of the security of such
technologies has increased.
E-voting and e-counting
systems are inherently less transparent than the use of paper ballots, where
all steps of the voting and counting process are observable. If an e-voting or
e-counting system is to be trusted by electoral stakeholders, it is important
that the security challenges presented by the use of the technologies are
understood and addressed.
Testing and Source Code
Review: This is vital in ensuring that the e-voting system functions correctly
and generates accurate results based on the votes cast. All key electoral
stakeholders must conduct this so that they will trust and accept the results.
E-voting is unlike other
electronic transactions, the voter cannot check afterward that his or her vote
was recorded correctly. For example, with electronic banking, people can check
their statements to see if any incorrect transactions were made and can have
mistakes corrected.
The need for a secret vote
denies the possibility for this level of transparency. More often, governments
are not aware of the need to test the e-voting machines and what tests can be
performed. The test must include acceptance testing, performance testing,
stress testing, security testing, and usability testing and source code review.
Historically the source code for e-voting was seen as proprietary in nature,
exclusively owned by the supplier and not provided for any independent review.
Certification: In addition to
comprehensive testing of e-voting machines prior to Election Day, it is good
practice to have these systems certified prior to Election Day. The purpose of
certification is similar to testing in that it determines whether the e-voting
machines operate effectively. The difference is that an independent expert or
organisation conducts certification.
Election Day: Election staff
must ensure that sufficient resources are in place at every polling station to
receive and properly operate e-voting equipment on Election Day. The resources
must include sufficient personnel including technicians and procedures to
address any issues that may arise with the operation of the electronic
equipment on Election Day.
Observers must assess whether
all procedures are appropriately followed in the setup, operation and closing
of electronic voting equipment at the polling station, whether the technologies
are usable and accessible for all voters and whether sufficient measures are
taken to ensure election security.
Dr Risco Mutelo studied Biometric Engineering at the New Castle
University in United Kingdom.
New Era
No comments:
Post a Comment