We realize “infrastructure” can be a yawn-inducing word. So instead of New York’s and the nation’s “voting infrastructure,” let’s talk about national security. The deflections and distractions of some politicians aside, there seems to be little if any credible dispute that Russia attempted last year to penetrate this country’s voting systems. To put a fine point on it, an adversary sought to affect the outcome of an election that would determine who decides where America sends its military, who it points nuclear weapons at, how it spends $3.3 trillion in our taxes and fees, and whether or not it continues sanctions on that particular adversary for aggression that includes forcibly annexing part of another country. So whether you’re pleased with the outcome of the election or not, it should matter to you that anyone tried to rig the system, and that there is no reason to believe they won’t try again.
… Such measures could include revisiting the decision many have made to use computer technology. Some are switching, or considering a switch, to voter-verified paper ballots. Several states are talking about doing post-election audits of electronic tallies in order to detect tampering. States also need to look at other ways intruders could enter election systems and wreak havoc, whether by directly tampering with votes or by creating chaos with voter registration lists.
… To his credit, Gov. Andrew Cuomo in June directed the state Cyber Security Advisory Board to work with state and county elections boards to assess the status of the state’s election infrastructure.
This is the sort of thing all states need to do. Any vulnerability in the nation’s election technology could potentially change the outcome of a race. Those are high stakes. All the more reason we should expect adversaries to look for vulnerabilities, and all the more reason a polarized society needs to bridge, if not its divides, then at least its gaps.
Full Article: Editorial: Our vulnerable elections – Times Union.