EIIElection Integrity Index
How well does the legal framework defend against vote-altering attacks?
Dimensions
Citizen Verifiability
31.3% · 3/8| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1Public verification artifactDoes law mandate a downloadable public package containing certificates, device records, and result signatures? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-15-09 codifies that voting systems must generate printed zero-state records and end-state records (totals for each candidate, each measure, public counter), all certified by inspector + judges. § 16.1-06-15 codifies sealed retention of testing materials. § 16.1-07-13.1 codifies signature verification. Public verification artifacts (signed printed records) explicitly codified. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 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 candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-19 |
| 4.3Voter-verifiable paper trailIs voter-verifiable paper record (VVPAT or hand-marked paper) legally required? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-06-12(1) defines 'ballot' explicitly as 'a paper ballot from which the votes for candidates and questions are tabulated by hand or by a voting system' — paper-only regime statutorily mandated. § 16.1-13-22 codifies delivery of paper ballot to elector. § 16.1-13-25 codifies write-in on paper ballot. Voter-verifiable paper-trail regime fully codified. “"Ballot" means a paper ballot from which the votes for candidates and questions are tabulated by hand or by a voting system. The term includes the digital image of a marked ballot captured by a voting system.” | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 4.4Citizen re-tally rightCan any citizen — not just parties — legally re-tally from published precinct data? | 0.5/150.0% | § 16.1-02-13 codifies that the county auditor generates pollbooks from the central voter file. § 16.1-13-42 codifies that the auditor 'shall keep open for public inspection a list of all individuals who have applied to vote for presidential electors as new residents.' § 16.1-15-22 (not in FTS top-5) codifies certified abstract transmittal. Citizen access to precinct data is codified through public-inspection provisions, though standing for an independent re-tally is limited. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
Custody Hardware
50.0% · 4/8| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1Hardware tamper standardAre tamper-evident or tamper-responsive hardware standards mandated? | 2/540.0% | § 16.1-15-08 codifies that 'each wrapper must be sealed securely in a manner prescribed by the county auditor so the wrappers cannot be opened without an obvious and permanent breaking of the seal' — tamper-EVIDENT seal standard explicitly codified. § 16.1-15-04 codifies that ballots may not be sealed nor canvass report signed until totals reconcile. § 16.1-06-18 codifies ballot delivery procedure. § 16.1-13-21 codifies opening of sealed ballot packages at polling place. Ordinal level 2: tamper-evident multi-seal regime codified. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 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: § 16.1-07-28 codifies electronic free-access system for UOCAVA-voter receipt confirmation. § 16.1-08.1-06 codifies electronic campaign-finance filing. Neither codifies network-isolation requirement for vote-casting equipment. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 2.3Custody documentationIs full chain-of-custody documentation required and publicly available? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-15-12 codifies that 'ballot boxes and voting machines are to be under the care and custody of the county auditor and assigned staff members.' § 16.1-07-10 codifies absent-voter ballot custody. § 16.1-15-08 codifies sealed-wrapping return-to-county-recorder procedure. Chain-of-custody clearly codified. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 2.4Tamper criminal penaltyAre there explicit criminal penalties for unauthorized device access? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-06-25 makes tampering with a voting system or device a class C felony — explicit codified criminal penalty. § 16.1-02-11 codifies central voter file rules. “Any person who violates any of the provisions of this chapter relating to voting systems, who tampers with or injures any voting system or device to be used or being used in any election, or who prevents the correct operation of any such system or device to be used or being used in any election is guilty of a class C felony.” | § view source 2026-05-19 |
Post Election Audit
44.4% · 4/9| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1Mandatory auditIs a post-election audit legally required for every election? | 0/10.0% | § 16.1-16-01 codifies mandatory recount triggers (auto-recount at 0.5% margin general, 1% primary, 0.25% measures). § 16.1-08.1-05 codifies Secretary-of-State audit of campaign-finance filings when irregularity is alleged. § 16.1-15-23 / § 16.1-15-28 codify canvass procedures. ND does not codify a separate per-election post-tabulation manual audit (no RLA, no fixed-percentage audit); the canvass + automatic-recount regime serves verification. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 3.2Audit methodWhat audit method is mandated? | 1/520.0% | § 16.1-16-01 codifies the recount method: triggered automatically at narrow margins (0.5% general / 1% primary / 0.25% measures), with manual recount of paper ballots under guidelines established by the Secretary of State. § 16.1-15-04 codifies the canvass report. § 16.1-15-23 codifies canvass publication. Ordinal level 1: manual recount triggered by margin (not risk-limiting; not fixed-percentage post-tabulation audit). | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 3.3Audit triggers beyond mandatoryDoes law trigger additional audits on close margins or sworn challenges? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-16-01 codifies discrepancy/close-margin triggers: 0.5% margin auto-recount for general elections, 1% for primary, 0.25% for measures. Demand-recount available at margins between 1% and 2% (primary). Comprehensive trigger-based recount framework codified. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 3.4Public observation of auditAre parties, media, and citizens granted observer access to the audit? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-16-01 codifies recount procedure under Secretary of State guidelines. § 16.1-05-09 (election observers, not in FTS top-5 for this datapoint) codifies that election observers have uniform and nondiscriminatory access to 'all stages of the election process, including the certification of election technologies, early voting, absentee voting, voter appeals, vote tabulation, and recounts.' Combined, public observation of recount/audit is statutorily codified. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 3.5Binding forceAre audit results legally binding on the final certified result? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-15-09 codifies that election officers shall generate reports of votes cast/counted by voting systems for all candidates and measures; printed records (zero-state + end-state) must be certified by inspector + judges. § 16.1-15-22 codifies certified abstract transmittal. § 16.1-15-44 codifies Secretary of State recording of statement. § 16.1-16-01 makes recount results binding on certification. Comprehensive binding-force framework. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
Software Verifiability
5.6% · 1/9| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1Source code disclosureIs voting system source code legally accessible? | 0/50.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 16.1-08.1-06.2 (Secretary of state training on campaign-finance rules) and § 16.1-09-05 (statement-handling powers) are FTS-surfaced but unrelated to voting-system source-code disclosure. ND does not codify voting-system source-code disclosure; the Secretary of State is empowered to decertify systems but proprietary code is not statutorily public. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 1.2Reproducible builds requirementMust the binary that runs in production be reproducibly buildable from public source? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-19 |
| 1.3Pre-election binary commitmentIs the running binary cryptographically committed (hash published) before polls open? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-19 |
| 1.4Election definition publicationAre ballot contests, layouts, and tabulation rules signed and published before polls open? | 0.5/150.0% | § 16.1-06-15 codifies mandatory pre-election testing of voting systems with one-week-prior-notice to each political-party district chair, public test in the county auditor's office, and sealed retention of testing materials. § 16.1-06-12 codifies voting-system definitions. § 16.1-08.1-01 codifies campaign-finance definitions. Pre-poll public commitment of voting-system behavior is codified, though without cryptographic signature. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 1.5Post-election integrity checkDoes law grant a right to verify the actual running binary matches the committed one? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-19 |
Transparency Observation
62.5% · 5/8| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1Domestic observer rightsAre party and civil-society observers given full procedural access? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-05-09 codifies the strongest observer mandate in the corpus: 'Election observers must be allowed uniform and nondiscriminatory access to all stages of the election process, including the certification of election technologies, early voting, absentee voting, voter appeals, vote tabulation, and recounts.' Any individual (except a candidate-on-ballot) may serve as an observer with notice. Each polling place must be arranged so the observer can plainly view and hear all occurrences without infringing voter privacy. “Election observers must be allowed uniform and nondiscriminatory access to all stages of the election process, including the certification of election technologies, early voting, absentee voting, voter appeals, vote tabulation, and recounts.” | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 6.2International observer accessAre OSCE/EU/IFES international observers admitted by default? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-19 |
| 6.3Precinct-level results publication speedAre precinct-level results legally required to be published within 24h of poll close? | 4/580.0% | § 16.1-11-31 codifies that 'vote tabulation machines must print reports detailing the election results from the precinct after the close of the polls.' § 16.1-15-09 codifies certified zero-state + end-state reports. § 16.1-15-44 codifies Secretary of State publication of abstract. § 16.1-01-03 codifies that the election board generates the report of vote totals not later than 30 minutes after the last elector in line received a ballot. Ordinal level 4: precinct-level results available within minutes of poll close. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 6.4Public election event logIs a public, signed, append-only election event log legally required? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-19 |
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% | § 16.1-06-02 codifies ballot printing/distribution authority (county auditor for local elections, Secretary of State for others). § 16.1-06-26 (not in FTS top-5) codifies Secretary of State voting-system certification with potential decertification. Multiple vendors may seek certification but no explicit multi-vendor mandate codified. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 5.2Open protocol standardsAre vote-format / device-protocol standards open and publicly documented? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 16.1-06-14 codifies requirements for voting systems — must provide for voting for nominated/non-nominated candidates and questions/measures, etc. Functional requirements codified, but no open-protocol/open-format mandate for vote-data exchange. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 5.3Contract duration capAre vendor contracts capped in duration, preventing perpetual lock-in? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 16.1-10-02 codifies prohibition on use of state property/services for political purposes. § 16.1-08.1-01 codifies campaign-finance definitions. No contract-duration cap codified for voting-system vendors. | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 5.4Source-code escrowIs source-code escrow with the state required as a condition of certification? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-19 |
Voter Access
28.6% · 2/7| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7.1Ballot secrecy guaranteeIs voter–ballot unlinkability legally guaranteed and enforceable? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-13-23 codifies that 'upon receipt of a ballot within the provided secrecy sleeve, the elector, without leaving the polling place, shall retire alone to one of the voting booths or compartments to prepare the elector's ballot' — voter must retire alone, ballot in secrecy sleeve. § 16.1-07-12 codifies absentee secrecy. § 16.1-06-14 codifies voting-system secrecy requirements. § 16.1-13-29 codifies booth-screening requirement. “the elector, without leaving the polling place, shall retire alone to one of the voting booths or compartments to prepare the elector's ballot” | § view source 2026-05-19 |
| 7.2Accessibility mandateAre accessibility standards (vision, motor, language) legally required at every polling place? | 0/50.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-19 |
| 7.3Polling-place density floorIs there a legal floor on polling places per N voters or per geographic area? | 1/1100.0% | § 16.1-13-29 codifies an explicit statutory polling-place density floor: 'the number of booths or compartments in precincts may not be less than one for each one hundred fifty electors or fraction of one hundred fifty electors in the precincts served by the polling place.' Additionally requires at least one certified tabulation device and ballot marking device per polling place. § 16.1-05-01 codifies election-board attendance. Explicit density floor — one of the few in the corpus. “The number of booths or compartments in precincts may not be less than one for each one hundred fifty electors or fraction of one hundred fifty electors in the precincts served by the polling place.” | § view source 2026-05-19 |