Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Election Reform
Related: About this forum'The selling of an election': how private firms compromised midterms security
Source: The Guardian
'The selling of an election': how private firms compromised midterms security
Georgias voting machines and online registration were almost entirely managed by private companies, raising security concerns
Jordan Wilkie
Thu 1 Aug 2019 13.44 BST First published on Thu 1 Aug 2019 07.00 BST
Private companies had near-complete control over Georgias elections for the 2018 midterms and posed a serious security risk, according to testimony and documents revealed during a federal court case challenging the constitutionality of Georgias elections.
The most maligned components of Georgias election systems voting machines and online voter registration were almost entirely managed by private companies, prompting concerns from election security experts.
Voting machine company Elections Systems and Software (ES&S), which has close connections with the Georgia secretary of states office and Governor Brian Kemps staff, had three staff in Georgia building electronic ballots out of their homes through the 2018 midterms.
This introduced significant security concerns about both foreign actors attacking the election system with malware or about a political insider potentially introducing their own coding that could alter the results of an election without detection, according to the plaintiffs.
Its a shock to everyone that the vendor is actually building ballots for state elections, said David Cross, lead attorney for one of the two groups suing the state. That should not be happening. That should be at the state level, because the state does not have any means of ensuring the necessary security protocols of the vendor.
-snip-
Georgias voting machines and online registration were almost entirely managed by private companies, raising security concerns
Jordan Wilkie
Thu 1 Aug 2019 13.44 BST First published on Thu 1 Aug 2019 07.00 BST
Private companies had near-complete control over Georgias elections for the 2018 midterms and posed a serious security risk, according to testimony and documents revealed during a federal court case challenging the constitutionality of Georgias elections.
The most maligned components of Georgias election systems voting machines and online voter registration were almost entirely managed by private companies, prompting concerns from election security experts.
Voting machine company Elections Systems and Software (ES&S), which has close connections with the Georgia secretary of states office and Governor Brian Kemps staff, had three staff in Georgia building electronic ballots out of their homes through the 2018 midterms.
This introduced significant security concerns about both foreign actors attacking the election system with malware or about a political insider potentially introducing their own coding that could alter the results of an election without detection, according to the plaintiffs.
Its a shock to everyone that the vendor is actually building ballots for state elections, said David Cross, lead attorney for one of the two groups suing the state. That should not be happening. That should be at the state level, because the state does not have any means of ensuring the necessary security protocols of the vendor.
-snip-
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/01/the-selling-of-an-election-dangerous-level-of-private-control-revealed-in-2018-georgia-midterms
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
'The selling of an election': how private firms compromised midterms security (Original Post)
Eugene
Aug 2019
OP
mopinko
(72,098 posts)1. "without detection"
yeah, really hard to detect things you never bother to look for.
i'm not going to believe in our elections until some machines are pulled apart, and someone goes to jail.
and audits are robust and public.
TheRealNorth
(9,629 posts)2. Outsourcing
Also shields your dirty deeds from governmental Open Records/Sunshine laws.