How US Election Security Could Be Tested by Voting Machines and AI Influence
Summary
An explainer examines potential weaknesses in voting-machine certification, software, and ballot counting, alongside AI-enabled voter influence. It outlines safeguards and proposed verification measures, while noting no evidence machine tampering has changed a US l
Key points
- Voting procedures vary by state and county; some jurisdictions use machines that print paper ballots with human-readable selections and machine-readable codes, which are later scanned for counting.
- Sequent CEO Shai Bargil says certification timing can leave voting-machine software unpatched for years and claims machines used at DEF CON’s Voting Village have been hacked with hands-on access.
- The article notes that voters may be able to check the printed selection but not the barcode or QR code used by counting systems; experts recommend treating election technology as part of a potentially hostile system and making outcomes independently verifiable.
- Proposed safeguards include open-source voting-machine software, encrypted voting records, paper-ballot audits, access controls, and verifiable backups. Microsoft’s ElectionGuard project uses homomorphic encryption.
- Experts cited say election influence efforts can target public trust through disinformation, impersonation, phishing, fake websites, and AI-generated content, without directly changing votes.
- The article describes a 2024 deepfake Biden robocall in New Hampshire that urged Democrats to stay home; it says the attempt failed but highlighted potential AI-enabled voter manipulation.
- Election officials use safeguards including pre-election testing, chain-of-custody controls, bipartisan poll workers, and post-election paper-ballot audits; the article says there is no evidence machine tampering has changed a US election outcome.
Article Details
- Topic
- Cybersecurity risks to US elections, including voting-machine integrity and AI-enabled influence campaigns
MITRE ATT&CK
People
Adam MarrèArctic Wolf CISO who discussed geopolitical motives for election-related activity and described disinformation, social-media manipulation, cyber espionage, and phishing as potential tactics.Alex QuiliciYouMail CEO who discussed targeted robocalls and robotexts as ways to discourage voters and referenced the 2024 Biden-impersonation robocall.BidenWas impersonated in a 2024 New Hampshire robocall that urged Democrats to stay home; the article describes the call as a failed attempt to influence voters.Bobby FordDoppel chief strategy and experience officer who discussed impersonation, fake websites, and AI-generated misinformation as ways to influence public perception.Casey EriksonNRLabs director of penetration testing who discussed constraining election-security risks through access control, verifiable backups, and redundancy.Christiaan BeekRapid7 VP of cyber intelligence who recommended treating voting machines as one component of a potentially hostile system and limiting the impact of compromise.Dave GerryBugcrowd CEO who said election adversaries focus on operational systems around voting machines, including voter-registration databases, county websites, and election workers’ email accounts.Robert MuellerThe article cites his 2019 statement as special counsel that Russia ran an influence campaign prior to the 2016 US election.Shai BargilSequent co-founder and CEO who discussed voting-machine certification and security risks and recommended open-source software and verifiable vote records.
Vendors
Products
Countries
IranMore recently, in 2024, US intelligence agencies attributed a hack-and-leak operation targeting the Trump campaign to Iran.RussiaMultiple sources claimed that Russia ran a pro-Trump multi-faceted influence campaign prior to the 2016 election.United StatesReceived wisdom is that foreign nations attempt to disrupt US elections with influence campaigns targeting the voters.