IEEE P-1622 Voting Systems Electronic Data Interchange

1
IEEE P-1622Voting SystemsElectronic Data
Interchange

• February 89, 2011 Meeting
• at the US Election Assistance Commission
• Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., P-1622 Chair

2
Welcome

• Call the meeting to order.
• Appoint a secretary.
• Thanks for participating in an issue of national
  import.
• Thanks to James Long of EAC for hosting this
  meeting.
• Thanks for John Wack of NIST for helping to
  organize this meeting.

3
Welcome

• Belinda Collins, Director of NIST Technology
  Services.

4
Welcome

• James Long, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
  Our host.

5
IEEE Matters

• Attendance. In person attendees, make sure you
  sign the attendance list each time.
• Remote attendees, we will take attendance
  periodically. You need to attend at least half
  of the meeting in order to count as attending the
  meeting.

6
IEEE Patent Policy Instructions

• The IEEE-SA strongly recommends that at each WG
  meeting the chair or a designee
• Show slides 1 through 4 of this presentation
• Advise the WG attendees that
• The IEEEs patent policy is consistent with the
  ANSI patent policy and is described in Clause 6
  of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws
• Early identification of patent claims which may
  be essential for the use of standards under
  development is strongly encouraged
• There may be Essential Patent Claims of which the
  IEEE is not aware. Additionally, neither the
  IEEE, the WG, nor the WG chair can ensure the
  accuracy or completeness of any assurance or
  whether any such assurance is, in fact, of a
  Patent Claim that is essential for the use of the
  standard under development.
• Instruct the WG Secretary to record in the
  minutes of the relevant WG meeting
• That the foregoing information was provided and
  that slides 1 through 4 (and this slide 0, if
  applicable) were shown
• That the chair or designee provided an
  opportunity for participants to identify patent
  claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the
  holder of patent claim(s)/patent application
  claim(s) of which the participant is personally
  aware and that may be essential for the use of
  that standard
• Any responses that were given, specifically the
  patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s)
  and/or the holder of the patent claim(s)/patent
  application claim(s) that were identified (if
  any) and by whom.
• The WG Chair shall ensure that a request is made
  to any identified holders of potential essential
  patent claim(s) to complete and submit a Letter
  of Assurance.
• It is recommended that the WG chair review the
  guidance in IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations
  Manual 6.3.5 and in FAQs 12 and 12a on inclusion
  of potential Essential Patent Claims by
  incorporation or by reference.

7
Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform

• All participants in this meeting have certain
  obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy.
  Participants
• Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be
  informed) of the identity of each holder of any
  potential Essential Patent Claims of which they
  are personally aware if the claims are owned or
  controlled by the participant or the entity the
  participant is from, employed by, or otherwise
  represents
• Personal awareness means that the participant
  is personally aware that the holder may have a
  potential Essential Patent Claim, even if the
  participant is not personally aware of the
  specific patents or patent claims
• Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be
  informed) of the identity of any other holders
  of such potential Essential Patent Claims (that
  is, third parties that are not affiliated with
  the participant, with the participants employer,
  or with anyone else that the participant is from
  or otherwise represents)
• The above does not apply if the patent claim is
  already the subject of an Accepted Letter of
  Assurance that applies to the proposed
  standard(s) under consideration by this group
• Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards
  Board Bylaws subclause 6.2
• Early identification of holders of potential
  Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged
• No duty to perform a patent search

Slide 1
8
Patent Related Links

• All participants should be familiar with their
  obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies
  Procedures for standards development.
• Patent Policy is stated in these sources
• IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws
• http//standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/bylaw
  s/sect6-7.html6
• IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
• http//standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/opman
  /sect6.html6.3
• Material about the patent policy is available at
  
• http//standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/mate
  rials.html

• If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA
  Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at
  patcom_at_ieee.org or visit http//standards.ieee.org
  /about/sasb/patcom/index.html
• This slide set is available at https//development
  .standards.ieee.org/myproject/Public/mytools/mob/s
  lideset.ppt

Slide 2
9
Call for Potentially Essential Patents

• If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of
  the holder of any patent claims that are
  potentially essential to implementation of the
  proposed standard(s) under consideration by this
  group and that are not already the subject of an
  Accepted Letter of Assurance (LOA)
• Either speak up now or
• Provide the chair of this group with the identity
  of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as
  soon as possible or
• Cause an LOA to be submitted

Slide 3
10
Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings

• All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted
  in compliance with all applicable laws, including
  antitrust and competition laws.
• Dont discuss the interpretation, validity, or
  essentiality of patents/patent claims.
• Dont discuss specific license rates, terms, or
  conditions.
• Relative costs, including licensing costs of
  essential patent claims, of different technical
  approaches may be discussed in standards
  development meetings.
• Technical considerations remain primary focus
• Dont discuss or engage in the fixing of product
  prices, allocation of customers, or division of
  sales markets.
• Dont discuss the status or substance of ongoing
  or threatened litigation.
• Dont be silent if inappropriate topics are
  discussed do formally object.
• --------------------------------------------------
  -------------
• See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual,
  clause 5.3.10 and Promoting Competition and
  Innovation What You Need to Know about the IEEE
  Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition
  Policy for more details.

Slide 4
11
Overview of the IEEE-SA Process

• Malia Zaman
• Program Manager
• Voting Systems Electronic Data Interchange
  Committee
• P1622 Working Group Meetings
• Feb 8-9, 2011

12
A New Beginning for P1622

• P1622 is important work.
• We welcome the involvement of all stakeholders.
• IEEE is proud to be associated with this effort.
• Developing a standard to support voting systems
  in the U.S. is critical.
• Together, IEEE, NIST, and other stakeholders must
  see the standard through to completion.

13
In this Presentation we will cover

• Overview of the IEEE-SA Process
• Project Approval Process
• Development of Draft Standard
• Sponsor Balloting Process
• myBallot/myProject Access/Membership Services
• Standards Board Approval Process
• Resources

14
IEEEA Global Organization

• IEEE is a non-profit organization for
• scientific and educational advancement
• IEEE is made up of international
  technical professionals
  living around the world who are fostering
• technological innovation and
• excellence for the benefit of humanity

15
IEEE Standards Association

• Oversees development of standards within IEEE
• Global Membership
• Over 7 000 individual members
• Over 127 corporate members
• Approximately 20 000 participants
• Broad Standards Portfolio
• Approximately 1 000 active standards
• Approximately 400 standards in development
• Governed by volunteers
• An independent organization
• Participants come together to develop
• standards with many constituents

16
IEEE-SA Governance Structure
Board of Governors (BOG) Legal fiduciary,
strategy, policy, finance, Bus Dev,
International, Appeals, Awards
ISTO
Standards Board (SASB) Standards Process SCC
Oversight
Corporate Advisory Group (CAG) Corporate Program
Strategy Sponsor
Sponsors Societies (Computer Society), Committee
(EASC), Standards Coordinating Committees (SCCs)
,CAG, etc.
Standards Working Groups/ Projects
17
IEEE Standards Development

• Five principles guide standards development
• Ensuring integrity and wide acceptance for IEEE
  standards
• IEEE standards reflect the standardization
  principles as
• stated by the WTO

18
Societies and Technical Sponsor Committees

• IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems
• Society (AES)
• IEEE-SA Board of Governors (BOG)
• IEEE Broadcast Technology Society (BTS)
• IEEE Computer Society (C)
• C/SAB Standards Activities Board
• P1622 Voting SystemsElectronic Data
  InterchangeWorking Group
• IEEE Consumer Electronics Society (CES)
• IEEE Communications Society (COM)
• IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility
• Society (EMC)
• IEEE Industry Applications Society (IAS)

• IEEE Microwave Theory and Techniques
• Society (MTT)
• IEEE Nuclear and Plasma Sciences
• Society
• IEEE Nanotechnology Council (NTC)
• IEEE Power Energy Society (PE)
• IEEE Power Electronics Society (PEL)
• IEEE Robotics and Automation Society (RAS)
• IEEE Reliability Society (RS)
• IEEE-SASB Coordinating Committees (SASB)
• IEEE Vehicular Technology
• Society (VT)

19
IEEE Sponsors Role of the Sponsor

• Organization within IEEE that assumes
  responsibility for a particular standards idea
• Takes responsibility for the technical content
  of the document and provides oversight
• Responsible for determining the scope and
  nature of the technical content
• Not a financial sponsorship
• IEEE already has a large number of Sponsors
• There are the various societies within the IEEE
• Within those societies, there are often many
  committees that are active in standards
  development

20
IEEE Standards Development Process Flow
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
Project Approval Process
Develop Draft Standard
IEEE-SA Standards Board Approval Process
Sponsor Ballot
Publish Standard
21
IEEE Standards Development Project Authorization
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
IEEE-SA Standards Board Approval Process
Project Approval Process
Develop Draft Standard
Sponsor Ballot
Publish Standard

• A potential working group or study group gathers
  to work on the Project Authorization Request
  (PAR), up to six months before a PAR needs to be
  submitted.
• With the support of the sponsor, submit a PAR to
  IEEE-SA Standards Board (SASB) for an approval to
  start the project.
• PAR is reviewed by New Standards Committee
  (NesCom) and based on its recommendation, IEEE-SA
  Standards Board (SASB) approves/disapproves the
  project

22
IEEE Standards Development Draft
Development
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
Develop Draft Standard
IEEE-SA Standards Board Approval Process
Project Approval Process
Sponsor Ballot
Publish Standard

• Working group (WG) is created/maintained under
  policies and procedures (PP) of the sponsoring
  committee
• WG officers are designated to start the
  development of the standard
• Write the draft of the standard
• Submit finalized draft for Mandatory Editorial
  Coordination (MEC) to ensure conformance with
  IEEE requirements.

23
IEEE Standards Development Sponsor
Balloting
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
Sponsor Ballot
IEEE-SA Standards Board Approval Process
Project Approval Process
Publish Standard
Develop Draft Standard

• A ballot group is formed using an electronic
  balloting system called myProject/myBallot .
• Composition of that balloting group cannot
  change when the ballot is initiated.
• A sponsor ballot is initiated with the draft, to
  be reviewed, commented, and voted by the ballot
  group.
• Needs 75 return response rate from the ballot
  group, and needs 75 affirmative(approved) votes
• WG reviews all the approved and disapproved votes
  with comments submitted by the ballot group.
• Make a reasonable attempt to resolve all negative
  votes
• Add or revise materials as suggested
• Submit responses to the comments
• Recirculate the revised draft standard and
  comments out to the ballot group .

24
Creating a Web Account and MyBallot/myProject
Access/Membership Services

• Accessing the myProject system requires an IEEE
  Web Account https//webapps1.ieee.org/WebAccount
  /Registration
• MyBallot /MyProject Link
• https//development.standards.ieee.org/my-site/hom
  e
• Membership Services
• http//standards.ieee.org/membership/index.html

25
IEEE Standards Development Approval
Process to Publication
Idea!
Maximum of 4 years
IEEE-SA Standards Board Approval Process
Project Approval Process
Develop Draft Standard
Sponsor Ballot
Publish Standard

• Submit the final draft standard to Standard
  Review Committee (RevCom).
• RevCom reviews the submitted documents and
  materials, and makes a recommendation to IEEE-SA
  Standards Board for an approval of the draft
  standard.
• IEEE-SA Standards Board reviews the
  recommendation and approve the draft standard.
• Publish Standard
• Complimentary copies sent to the WG.

26
Resource Links
Additional Information http//standards.ieee.org/
develop/index.html
27
Comments/Questions

28
For more information

• Contact
• Malia Zaman
• Program ManagerTechnical Program
  DevelopmentPhone 1 732 562 3838
• Email m.zaman_at_ieee.org

29
IEEE

• Sue Vogel, Director of Technical Committee
  Programs, IEEE Standards Association.

30
Review Agenda

• Today
• Ratify goals for the meeting.
• Common data format (CDF) and discussion of
  requirements.
• Discussion of use case strategy.
• CDF requirements from an election analysis
  perspective.
• Presentation on OASIS EML.
• Wednesday
• Election system manufacturer presentations.
• Agreement on issues.
• Schedule next meeting.
• Adjourn.

31
Goals for the Meeting

1. Endorse and build upon the use case strategy for
   developing a CDF.
2. Decide which existing data format to utilize as
   the basis for CDF development.
3. Determine scope of a CDF for standardization.
4. Agree on timeline, next steps, and schedule next
   meeting.

32
P-1622 WG Status and Overview

• WG created a draft in 2007 that never proceeded
  to ballot.
• SCC 38 voted to reconstitute P-1622 for review of
  draft and revision or redraft as necessary.
• P-1622 has a new PAR (Project Activity Request).
• P-1622 also wrote a new PP document.
• At this meeting tomorrow, we will decide how to
  proceed with standard drafting process.

33
15 minute break

• Resume at 1030am.

34
CDF Overview and Requirements

• Introduction to a CDF John Wack, NIST.
• EAC CDF requirements James Long, EAC.
• TGDC perspective on CDF standard timeline
  Patrick McDaniel, IEEE Rep to the TGDC (Technical
  Guidelines Development Committee).

35
Use Case Strategy

• Use cases drive requirements.
• Requirements drive data formats.

36
UOCAVA Use Case

• Joel Rothschild, FVAP.
• John Wack, NIST.

37
Post-election Tabulation AuditingUse Case

• Neal McBurnett.

38
Other Use Cases

• Blank ballot export.
• Remote ballot printing. (new)
• Import of remotely printed ballots for canvass.
• Automated testing of voting systems.
• Interoperability of voting systems components and
  devices.
• Other suggestions?

39
Blank Ballot Export

• Important for UOCAVA.
• Data mapping address and jurisdiction to ballot
  style.
• Descriptions of ballot measures, contests and
  candidates.
• Information on presentation and layout.

40
Remote Ballot Printing

• Print ballot with voters selections or print
  blank ballot where voter hand-marks selections.
• Ballot in local jurisdiction format or in FWAB
  format.
• Issue Local or statewide contests.
• Also print Voters Declaration/Affirmation.
• Follow FWAB instructions (even if not using FWAB).

41
Import Remotely Printed Ballotsfor Canvass

• Also an interoperability issue.
• Useful for UOCAVA.
• Relates to above use case.

42
Automated Testing of Voting Systems

• Black-box testing vs. code review.
• Standard test cases and files vs. randomly
  generated test cases and files.
• Test cases and files that cover the space of
  alternatives.
• Interaction of test cases and code path analysis.
• Generating test decks for Logic and Accuracy
  Testing.
• Beyond black box testing. Why not have testing
  using constraints and specifications and based on
  knowledge of source code paths and boundary
  conditions?

43
Interoperability of Voting Systems Components and
Devices

• Equivalence of the output of a re-export with the
  previously imported file.
• Retention of data provenance information,
  important for auditing.
• Supporting ancillary systems and services (e.g.,
  third-party blank ballot printing, auditing)
• Consider an Interop for Voting Systems.

44
Use Case Discussion

• Other proposed use cases?
• Priority for use case development.
• Volunteers?

45
Lunch (on your own)

• Return at 115pm.

46
Use Case Discussion (contd)

• Other proposed use cases?
• Priority for use case development.
• Volunteers?

47
CDF Requirementsan Election Analysis Perspective

• Kim Brace, President, Election Data Services.

48
Presentations on OASIS EML

• Technical overview David Webber, OASIS EML.

49
15 minute break

• Resume at 330pm.

50
Presentations on OASIS EML (contd)

• Initial technical analysisof EML suitability for
  UOCAVA use case Carmelo Montanez-Rivera, NIST.

51
Discussion on OASIS EML

• Comments and questions.

52
Wrap Up for Day One

• IEEE.
• UOCAVA.
• OASIS EML.
• Tomorrow
• Vendor presentations.
• Agreements on how to proceed.
• Think about what role you want to play.

53
Adjourn

• Return back here at 9am Wednesday morning.