Lawrence Norden at The Atlantic writes—The Voting Technology We Really Need? Paper. Software-independent backup systems are more important than ever:
In January, America’s main intelligence agencies issued a report concluding that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, using a combination of cyber-intrusion, espionage, and propaganda. In addition to the details provided in this account, media outlets have since reported that several election databases were hacked before and after the election. While the Department of Homeland Security found no evidence any of these efforts manipulated vote tallies, the assaults have left many Americans asking: Just how safe are voting machines from cyberattack?
The answer is not reassuring.
For more than a decade, independent security experts have repeatedly demonstrated that many electronic voting machines are dangerously insecure and vulnerable to attack and manipulation by bad actors. [...]
A study I co-authored last year with a colleague at the Brennan Center showed that 43 states were using voting machines that were at least a decade old, perilously close to the end of the projected lifespans for most of these systems. Not surprisingly, election officials in 31 states told us they hoped to replace their equipment within the next five years.
Security experts and voting-machine vendors are already exploring what’s needed to make the next generation of machines more secure. Among the wide variety of solutions being explored or proposed are use of encryption, blockchain, and open source software.
While each of these technologies can offer a path to more secure voting, the most important technology for enhancing security has been around for millennia: paper. Specifically, every new voting machine in the United States should have a paper record that the voter reviews, and that can be used later to check the electronic totals that are reported.
This could be a paper ballot the voter fills out before it is scanned by a machine, or a record created by the machine on which the voter makes her selections—so long as she can review that record and make changes before casting her vote. [...]
TOP COMMENTS • HIGH IMPACT STORIES
QUOTATION
“Experience has already shown that the impeachment the Constitution has provided is not even a scarecrow.” ~Thomas Jefferson, letter to Spencer Roane, 1819
TWEET OF THE DAY
BLAST FROM THE PAST
At Daily Kos on this date in 2010—Kagan Filibuster? All Part of the GOP Plan:
TWI's Mike Lillis catches Mitch McConnell mid flip-flop. Last month, he ruled out a Republican filibuster of any Obama nominee, unless that person had "really bizarre [views]."
But today he's saying that "it's way to early to be making a decision about the issue of whether there should be a 60-vote threshold on the nominee." Way too early, because it's not like they've already been through a nomination process for Kagan when she received confirmation as Solicitor General, or as Lillis put it, as if she "just arrived in a coffee can from Pluto."
On today’s Kagro in the Morning show, well, come on. You know what today’s show was about. Greg Dworkin and Armando survey the wreckage of the Comey firing, and generally pick the whole thing apart. In other news: the Census Bureau chief quits, and Jared & Ivanka got a sweetheart rent deal.
YouTube | iTunes | LibSyn | Keep us on the air! Donate via Patreon or Square Cash