Chattanooga Times Free Press

Could voting fraud panel create an easy target for hackers?

- BY GEOFF MULVIHILL

CHERRY HILL, N.J. — Officials from both parties had a consistent answer last year when asked about the security of voting systems: U.S. elections are so decentrali­zed it would be impossible for hackers to manipulate ballot counts or voter rolls on a wide scale.

But the voter fraud commission establishe­d by President Donald Trump could take away that one bit of security.

The commission has requested informatio­n on voters from every state and recently won a federal court challenge to push ahead with the collection, keeping it in one place.

By compiling a national list of registered voters, the federal government could provide one-stop shopping for hackers and hostile foreign government­s seeking to wreak havoc with elections.

“Coordinati­ng a national voter registrati­on system located in the White House is akin to handing a zip drive to Russia,” said Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes, a Democrat who has refused to send data to the commission.

Trump appointed the commission, led by Vice President Mike Pence, to examine integrity of the voting system, including practices that “could lead to improper voter registrati­ons and improper voting.” The president has asserted repeatedly and without evidence that several million fraudulent votes were cast in last year’s election. Voting experts say that there is not widespread election fraud in the U.S. But Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign, as well as Russian attempts to meddle with state election systems, has raised concerns about U.S. election security.

In June, commission Vice Chairman Kris Kobach, the Republican secretary of state in Kansas, asked state election officials for informatio­n about registered voters. The request included details such as driver’s license and partial Social Security numbers — if they’re considered public in the states. Several officials interprete­d the request as saying that all the data would be made available publicly; the commission has since said that individual voters’ informatio­n would be kept private.

Thirteen states plus the District of Columbia say they won’t hand over the informatio­n, according to a tally by The Associated Press. Those that are complying have said that not everything on the commission’s checklist could be shared under their state laws. Social Security numbers are widely off limits; in several states, birthdates and political party registrati­ons are, too.

The IRS, Social Security Administra­tion, banks and internet companies, among other entities, have far more informatio­n about many citizens. Political parties and other organizati­ons have access to some voter registrati­on informatio­n — though that permission often comes with restrictio­ns on how they can use it and how widely they can share it.

Still, security experts and fair election advocates say any records stored on computers are susceptibl­e to attacks.

“It’s creating more security vulnerabil­ities in our election system that don’t seem to be necessary,” said Barbara Simons, president of Verified Voting, an organizati­on that advocates for transparen­t, accurate and verifiable elections.

Still, Bruce Schneier, the chief technology officer at the online security firm IBM Resilient, said hacking into a federal database can’t affect voters’ informatio­n in their home states. He said having a copy of data that’s already on a federal hard drive “doesn’t make it that much worse, assuming the federal government isn’t idiotic about it.”

A massive database of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management was hacked in 2015, compromisi­ng the personnel records of millions of federal employees as well as the security clearance informatio­n for many of them, which included personal informatio­n about their friends and relatives. The hack compromise­d the informatio­n of up to 21 million people. U.S. officials have said there were attempts by Russians to hack into election systems in 21 states. The FBI has confirmed intrusions into voter registrati­on databases in Arizona and Illinois.

Louisiana Secretary of State Tom Schedler, a Republican, said last month that “the release of private informatio­n creates a tremendous breach of trust with voters who work hard to protect themselves against identity fraud.” But in a statement this week, the Republican said he is not deeply worried about how the data the state is sharing will be guarded. “Because this data is public informatio­n, we have limited concerns regarding sharing it with the commission in terms of how it is housed,” he said.

Andrew Appel, a Princeton University computer science professor who studies voting technology, said a new federal voter informatio­n database probably would not allow a hacker to manipulate data to make it look like some eligible voters are ineligible. “If someone hacked their database, they could come to believe things that aren’t true,” Appel said.

Commission spokesman Marc Lotter said states will send the data through a secure connection and it will be encrypted and kept on a White House system “designed to handle sensitive informatio­n.”

Appel said states have all made some efforts to protect their own voter registrati­on data from hacks. “At least initially,” he said, “the president’s commission didn’t seem to have in place any organized way to secure this data.”

In Maine, Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap, a Democrat who is a member of Trump’s voting commission, is not handing over the informatio­n.

Dunlap said the informatio­n the commission is getting from other states “isn’t wicked intimate” and may be too sparse to identity ineligible registered voters. Another commission member, Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson, said in a statement the commission is aware of limitation­s of the data. But Lawson, a Republican, said the commission’s work using the informatio­n could help find ways to help states improve the “quality and integrity” of their voter rolls.

But it could still be hacked, Dunlap said.

“The best way to protect people’s private informatio­n,” Dunlap said, “is not to have it in the first place.”

 ?? ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE PHOTO ?? Vice President Mike Pence, left, and Vice Chairman Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, right, speak last month during the first meeting of the Presidenti­al Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in Washington.
ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE PHOTO Vice President Mike Pence, left, and Vice Chairman Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, right, speak last month during the first meeting of the Presidenti­al Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in Washington.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States