Skip to content
Subscribe

Securing US Election Systems: Why A Paper Ballot Isn’t Enough

Securing US Election Systems: Why A Paper Ballot Isn’t Enough
Published:

At first glance, a citizen or “expert” might be persuaded that the way to provide adequate security surrounding the current U.S. election systems is to make sure the systems utilize paper ballots.

This is certainly a good idea, but only one piece of the necessary security conversation.

The fact is these systems run on software and the “bugging” of the software is a major vulnerability, regardless of the paper ballot component. If we are to properly defend against outside (and possibly inside) interference, or “hacking,” the software can not remain private and secret. For national security, the election system software must be what is used by NASA, the Air Force, and the Department of Defense. It must be open source.

Top election system solution technologists language in the Secure Elections Act, a bill introduced by Sen. James Lankford, R-OK, and co-sponsored by Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., is deficient in its failure to address the software code issues. Merely calling for a paper ballot will not provide adequate security.

Our new election systems must have open-source software as well as a paper ballot. If the bill does not call for public, open-source software, the systems purchased via the bill will suffer grave threat security vulnerability, allowing outside forces to manipulate our U.S. elections. NASA and the DOD, as well as the grand majority of the world’s super computers, utilize public software.

Regardless of “cybersecurity,” the foundation of a proper system is the recognition that “security by obscurity” is generally regarded as a failed concept. It is a far better security environment to have many eyes on the code proofreading for bugs.

Hopefully, legislators will get the message that we now have a historic decision to make regarding our national security. If we are to have secure elections that inspire voter confidence, we should put language in the bill calling for optimal “public” software.

Though some software business interests (and those who “bob in their wake”) may not appreciate it, we must do what is best for the national security.

Paper ballots and audits should be included in the bill. But without addressing the software, the bill fails the initial security hurdle. The time is now to get this right. The County of San Francisco is currently taking steps toward an open-source election system that should be the security model for the state and country.

---

This article was co-authored by Brent Turner and FMR CIA Dir. R. James Woolsey, and republished from the San Francisco Examiner with permission from the author.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Securing US Election Systems: Why A Paper Ballot Isn’t Enough

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us