Attendees: Allan Eustis, Brit Williams, David Flater, John Crickenberger, Mat Masterson (EAC), Nelson Hastings, Paul Miller, Sharon Laskowski
Reliability and Accuracy Benchmarks (David Flater):
Current state of the Benchmarks research paper by Paul Miller and David Flater was forwarded to the subcommittee. This was prepared in response to the direction of the TGDC at the last plenary meeting - namely to attempt to gather what data/guestimates we could about different volumes of usage of different devices so as to come up with an estimate for what the benchmark for reliability and accuracy should be in at least the correct order of magnitude. From NASED feedback, no given number is going to be correct for the usage in every possible jurisdiction. Part of the direction that was taken was that different severities would be assigned to different types of failures in a manner that was not entirely different than what was done in the 1990 voting system standards.
[NOTE: David Flater asked why the scoring standard in the 1990 standard was taken out of the 2002 revision that described what a relative failure is and assigned different weights depending on what kind of failure it was. Brit Williams said there was not a major show stopping reason it was deleted. He noted that Appendices were not par of the 1990 VSS.]
is going to talk to other members of NASED to confirm numbers and approach.
Assuming the process comes out favorably, the draft will be changed to
expand the single benchmark into a collection of benchmarks that are tailored
to individual types of equipment.
there is an attempt to answer what constitutes a typical volume for these
different types of equipment, understanding that each jurisdiction will
understand different what "typical" means. There's a breakdown
of how many errors/failures a precinct can tolerate on Election Day. Failures
are classified differently depending on whether personnel present can
easily remedy situation versus calling in specialized assistance.
Next Step: Paul Miller will confirm or modify numbers based on discussion with NASED members. David will get material prepped for inclusion into draft VVSG.
Ongoing Maintenance of Draft (David Flater):
David is still catching up with changes discussed at plenary meeting. Including such changes as:
adjourned at 11:45 a.m.
to the Help America Vote Act of 2002, the TGDC is charged with directing
NIST in performing voting systems research so that the TGDC can fulfill
its role of recommending technical standards for voting equipment to the
EAC. This teleconference discussion served the purposes of the CRT subcommittee
of the TGDC to direct NIST staff and coordinate its voting-related research
relevant to the VVSG 2007. Discussions on this telecon are preliminary,
pre-decisional and do not necessarily reflect the views of NIST or the
policy / security notice / accessibility statement