Clarification of AVANTE’s position on Election and Voting System Integrity
(Rev. A June 18, 2007)
AVANTE International Technology, Inc., Princeton Junction, New Jersey 08550
In recent weeks, AVANTE found itself being cited as an unwilling participant of a national debate on voting system integrity . In this paper, we will clarify and explain the company’s positions.
On the escrowing and disclosure of all source codes used in elections:
AVANTE entered into the voting business in 2000. We introduced the first voter-verified paper record for electronic voting systems in March 2001. Since then, it has been a long journey with limited success.
A main objective of AVANTE participating in the voting industry, besides business profitability, was to introduce a better voting system enhancing not only integrity and accuracy, but also the transparency of the process. For example, AVANTE pioneered electronic voting systems with a voter verified paper record that provides for one-to-one verification and authentication of each electronic ballot cast with a corresponding paper record.
The difficulty in source code escrow and disclosure is more related to the word “ALL” in State election codes and some new Federal election codes being proposed. It is made particularly more difficult when all voting systems must comply with the various accessibility requirements included in Federal election codes such as HAVA and Section 508.
This conclusion and interpretation is corroborated by some of the most respected election integrity proponents including Bev Harris of “Black Box Voting” and open source proponents such as Alan Dechert of “Open Source Consortium” where similar requirements are proposed in Holt’s Bill. Of course, the academics involved in election integrity basically all agree with the goals of disclosure, but also explain that the implementation can only be achieved over a period of several years.
When one is required to provide voting accessibility such as multiple languages in both displayable and voice-assisted formats anytime under the voter’s control, it becomes dramatically more difficult. If one were to provide “independent” reading back of the paper records or marked ballots, the only possibility is to use third party synthesized voices that require another few years of development time and would definitely end with inferior systems when finished. Those that have tried Microsoft’s speech engines will agree that doing it well in English is not all that easy let alone trying in other alternate languages.
When a vendor develops its system based on open source operating system such as Linux, it may be possible to provide more of the required source codes of the overall voting system. But if one dares to be true to the stated election codes, it is currently not possible to provide 100% of ALL source codes. This is not possible for DRE with or without voter-verified paper records. It is equally impossible for optical scan systems or ballot marking devices.
Of course, there may be a chance that the New York State legislature may have the same intent, as do other states, that what is really required is “ALL” of the source codes developed by the voting system providers but not “ALL” of the source codes from third parties.
On AVANTE’s willingness to serve New York State with a good voting system that meets the New York State Election Codes of Source Code Escrow
As a NJ company, we have received more business and had more success in New York State than in NJ. More than half of NY State used AVANTE ballot marking devices with outstanding success in 2006. We are grateful for the opportunities to serve. Where possible, AVANTE will jump through any barriers to provide all source codes within the company’s control.
AVANTE was the first to initiate talks with Microsoft to provide their source code. We have also worked with all other component providers to make source code available. However, even if Microsoft agrees to provide source code beyond their current approach of online inspection, all of the voting companies will be far from achieving even 50% of all source code. Vendors would have to find all compilers source codes. If Intel and AMD processors have embedded codes in their microprocessor that are not open, we will have to get them. There are a host of other embedded components mentioned by Bev Harris and Alan Dechert as well.
We understand that some activists in New York State are pro optical scan systems. However, they may be misled that the optical scan systems manufacturers have all of their source codes available. Some Japanese microprocessors and other embedded components may have source codes that are difficult to get as well. The New York Election Codes requires all source codes that cover not only the scanner unit but also the election management systems that generate, print, tabulate as well as consolidate complex ballots. Here, almost every system in the market today uses the Microsoft operating systems and SQL-Server databases.
For the optical scan system to be a viable solution, it must couple with a “ballot marking device” solution. Some may think that the Windows CE operating system, that many optical systems use, is open source and thus enables some of the current ballot-marking devices to meet escrow requirements. But, Windows CE being open source is far from being true. Microsoft has only agreed to made part of the operating system source codes available, NOT ALL.
AVANTE has made and explained the same points to the elected officials and legislature of NY State. We made these points out of deep respect by being truthful. There is no intent to slight the State Election Codes. If any of the statements made by some staff members caused confusion, we apologize for this misunderstanding.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).