In 2010, the
District of Colombia abandoned
its internet voting system before it was activated after University of Michigan
professor Alex Halderman and his students hacked the system and changed the
outcome of the mock vote. In response in response to recent publications by the Daily Kos and other progressive
online voting advocates, Hans von Spakovsky, Senior Legal Fellow with The
Heritage Foundation, recently published an op-ed criticizing this dangerous trend.
Von Spakovsky opposes online voting, “because of the fundamental
security problems presented by online voting and the fact that it could result
in large-scale voter disenfranchisement.”
He
highlights the recent arrest of five Chinese officials who were recently indicted
on charges that they hacked computer networks of American companies to steal
information. He notes, “[t]he
Chinese government has a special group, Unit 61398, that according to the Washington
Post is ‘one of the most prolific hacking crews targeting Western
companies.’”
The Pentagon abandoned its internet voting system for overseas military
voters after computer experts released a report criticizing the program. Von
Spakovsky writes, “The
vulnerabilities the experts discovered ‘are fundamental in the architecture of
the Internet and of the PC hardware and software that is ubiquitous today. They
cannot all be eliminated for the foreseeable future without some unforeseen
radical breakthrough.’” The report states that risks include, “insider attacks,
denial of service attacks, spoofing, automated vote buying, viral attacks on
voter PCs, etc.” The report also observes that the attacks, “could succeed and
yet go completely undetected.”
Pamela Smith and Bruce McConnell with the Wall Street Journal echoed
these concerns, writing,
“[t]he underlying
architectures of the Internet, the personal computer and mobile devices present
numerous avenues of attack, making it impossible to safeguard a voting system
with the security tools that are currently available. Methods of attack
continue to become more sophisticated, well-resourced and damaging.”
They conclude
by arguing, “[t]he move to online voting is motivated by good intentions: to
improve access to the ballot box for voters who may have difficulty exercising
the franchise, and to reduce costs. . . . But offering voters a voting method
that is not secure and cannot ensure their vote will be counted as they were
cast does them, and this country, no favors. Given the stakes, online voting
should be shelved until it can be made secure."
Von Spakovsky
concludes by arguing, “There is no way to design a secure system that protects
the anonymity of the voting process yet at the same time confirms that my vote
was received by election officials and not changed or intercepted along the
path it took on the Internet.”
No comments:
Post a Comment