EIIElection Integrity Index
How well does the legal framework defend against vote-altering attacks?
Dimensions
Citizen Verifiability
12.5% · 1/8| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1Public verification artifactDoes law mandate a downloadable public package containing certificates, device records, and result signatures? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 4.2End-to-end verifiability permittedDoes law permit (or require) per-voter cryptographic receipts that prove inclusion without revealing the vote? | 0/50.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 4.3Voter-verifiable paper trailIs voter-verifiable paper record (VVPAT or hand-marked paper) legally required? | 1/1100.0% | This section explicitly requires voters to personally mark (kennzeichnet persönlich) the ballot and place it in an official envelope, creating a hand-marked paper ballot as a voter-verifiable record. The ballot then serves as the physical record of the voter's choices through the entire chain of custody. “Wer durch Briefwahl wählt, kennzeichnet persönlich den Stimmzettel, legt ihn in den amtlichen Stimmzettelumschlag und verschließt diesen, unterzeichnet die auf dem Wahlschein vorgedruckte Versicherung an Eides statt zur Briefwahl” | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 4.4Citizen re-tally rightCan any citizen — not just parties — legally re-tally from published precinct data? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
Custody Hardware
0.0% · 0/8| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1Hardware tamper standardAre tamper-evident or tamper-responsive hardware standards mandated? | 0/50.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 2.2Network isolation mandateIs internet/Wi-Fi/cellular connectivity legally prohibited on vote-casting equipment? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 86 of the BWO (Bundeswahlordnung) concerns public announcements and internet publication of election information. It addresses when and how election results and notices may be published online, with requirements for data integrity and deletion timelines. The section does not address vote-casting equipment, network isolation, or any technical specifications for voting machines. This section is entirely unrelated to the criterion concerning internet/Wi-Fi/cellular connectivity prohibitions on voting equipment. | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 2.3Custody documentationIs full chain-of-custody documentation required and publicly available? | 0/10.0% | The section requires documentation of ballot box and material transfer in electoral records of both sending and receiving electoral boards. However, it does not establish that this documentation is publicly available or address a complete chain of custody from initial receipt through final counting. The requirement is limited to transfer points in specific low-turnout scenarios. “Die Übergabe der Wahlurne und der Wahlunterlagen ist in den Wahlniederschriften des abgebenden und des aufnehmenden Wahlvorstands zu vermerken.” | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 2.4Tamper criminal penaltyAre there explicit criminal penalties for unauthorized device access? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section of the German Federal Electoral Law (BWahlG § 21) addresses the nomination of party candidates through member assemblies and representative assemblies. It contains procedural requirements for candidate selection, including secret ballots, notification requirements, and oversight mechanisms. The section does not address criminal penalties for unauthorized device access or any hardware tampering issues, which fall entirely outside its scope. | § view source 2026-06-07 |
Post Election Audit
33.3% · 3/9| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1Mandatory auditIs a post-election audit legally required for every election? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 3.2Audit methodWhat audit method is mandated? | 2/540.0% | The section addresses recounting of ballot papers (Nachzählung von Stimmzetteln) and requires public notification of recounts, which represents a hand recount audit mechanism. However, it does not mandate a fixed percentage or automatic recount threshold—recounts appear to occur only when concerns about regularity arise (§76 Abs. 1), making this discretionary rather than a mandatory fixed-percentage audit. “Im Falle einer Nachzählung von Stimmzetteln macht der Kreiswahlleiter die Nachzählung durch Aushang am oder im Eingang des Sitzungsgebäudes bekannt.” | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 3.3Audit triggers beyond mandatoryDoes law trigger additional audits on close margins or sworn challenges? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 3.4Public observation of auditAre parties, media, and citizens granted observer access to the audit? | 1/1100.0% | The section explicitly grants public access (jedermann = everyone) to the polling place during the voting process and the determination and verification of election results, which encompasses audit and result verification activities. This satisfies the requirement for observer access by parties, media, and citizens. “Während der Wahlhandlung sowie der Ermittlung und Feststellung des Wahlergebnisses hat jedermann zum Wahlraum Zutritt, soweit das ohne Störung des Wahlgeschäfts möglich ist.” | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 3.5Binding forceAre audit results legally binding on the final certified result? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
Software Verifiability
0.0% · 0/9| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1Source code disclosureIs voting system source code legally accessible? | 0/50.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 1.2Reproducible builds requirementMust the binary that runs in production be reproducibly buildable from public source? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 1.3Pre-election binary commitmentIs the running binary cryptographically committed (hash published) before polls open? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 1.4Election definition publicationAre ballot contests, layouts, and tabulation rules signed and published before polls open? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 1.5Post-election integrity checkDoes law grant a right to verify the actual running binary matches the committed one? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
Transparency Observation
0.0% · 0/8| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1Domestic observer rightsAre party and civil-society observers given full procedural access? | 0/10.0% | Section 61(7) addresses public observation of voting procedures by allowing presence of 'other eligible voters' (andere Wahlberechtigte), but does not explicitly grant rights to party observers or civil-society observers as specific categories. The provision is limited to general eligible voters and does not establish comprehensive procedural access for organized observer missions or provide detailed observer credentials and access procedures. “Die Öffentlichkeit der Wahlhandlung sowie der Ermittlung und Feststellung des Wahlergebnisses soll noch Möglichkeit durch die Anwesenheit anderer Wahlberechtigter gewährleistet werden.” | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 6.2International observer accessAre OSCE/EU/IFES international observers admitted by default? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 6.3Precinct-level results publication speedAre precinct-level results legally required to be published within 24h of poll close? | 0/50.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 18 of the BWahlG addresses party nomination procedures, participation declarations, and the Federal Electoral Commission's verification of party status. It contains no provisions regarding precinct-level results publication timelines or transparency requirements for election results. | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 6.4Public election event logIs a public, signed, append-only election event log legally required? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
Vendor Independence
0.0% · 0/4| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5.1Multi-vendor capabilityDoes law permit multiple certified vendors to operate in the same election? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 5.2Open protocol standardsAre vote-format / device-protocol standards open and publicly documented? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 5.3Contract duration capAre vendor contracts capped in duration, preventing perpetual lock-in? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
| 5.4Source-code escrowIs source-code escrow with the state required as a condition of certification? | 0/10.0% | No matching sections in corpus. | no FTS match 2026-06-07 |
Voter Access
57.1% · 4/7| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7.1Ballot secrecy guaranteeIs voter–ballot unlinkability legally guaranteed and enforceable? | 1/1100.0% | The section mandates that voters mark and fold their ballots in the voting booth in a way that makes their vote unrecognizable, and further prohibits photography/filming in the booth and requires poll workers to refrain from disclosing voter information in ways that could be overheard. These provisions legally guarantee and enforce voter-ballot unlinkability through procedural safeguards. “Der Wähler begibt sich in die Wahlkabine, kennzeichnet dort seinen Stimmzettel und faltet ihn dort in der Weise, dass seine Stimmabgabe nicht erkennbar ist.” | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 7.2Accessibility mandateAre accessibility standards (vision, motor, language) legally required at every polling place? | 3/560.0% | The section addresses accessibility for voters with disabilities by permitting assistance for those who cannot read or have motor impairments, and allows use of ballot templates for blind or visually impaired voters. However, it establishes procedural accommodations rather than comprehensive accessibility standards required at every polling place, and does not mandate physical accessibility features or other infrastructure requirements. “Ein Wähler, der des Lesens unkundig ist oder der wegen einer Behinderung gehindert ist, den Stimmzettel zu kennzeichnen, zu falten oder selbst in die Wahlurne zu werfen, bestimmt eine andere Person, deren Hilfe er sich bei der Stimmabgabe bedienen will” | § view source 2026-06-07 |
| 7.3Polling-place density floorIs there a legal floor on polling places per N voters or per geographic area? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section (§ 62 BWO) addresses voting in smaller hospitals and care facilities through mobile polling stations. It does not establish any legal minimum requirement for polling-place density, such as a floor of polling places per number of voters or per geographic area. The section merely permits local authorities to allow voting at certain institutions under certain conditions; it contains no quantitative standard for polling-place distribution. | § view source 2026-06-07 |