.@EACgov commissioners are meeting now to vote on whether to adopt a major overhaul of federal voting system guidelines, which includes many new security, privacy, and accessibility provisions. eac.gov/sites/default/…
@EACgov “VVSG 2.0 is a major step forward to ensure the next generation of voting equipment is more secure and accessible and ensures a better voting experience for all Americans," says Chairman @benhovland.
@EACgov @benhovland Hovland: “Election security has been a major topic and focus during these efforts, and I'm proud that the VVSG 2.0 includes provisions to ensure that we will have more paper ballots and built-in support for election officials to conduct more efficient post-election audits.”
Hovland: "These gains, along with the many other benefits to security, usability, and accessibility that come with a 15-year technological leap forward, are all part of what makes this update so critical."
EAC Vice Chair @VotingGuy: “The VVSG 2.0 represents a significant leap forward in each state's ability to modernize their own standards and acquire new voting systems with the latest technology to ensure the most secure, transparent, and accurate elections possible.”
Commissioner @RedBlue2024 says VVSG 2.0 "reflects the push and pull" of different stakeholders but "represents reasonable compromise" that lets vendors start designing systems, gives guidance to test labs, and "positions the EAC for considering enhancements in the future.”
Commissioner Christy McCormick: "I appreciate the effort that went into the work over the last year and the years preceding it, and I'm looking forward to this vote today and the work required to fulfill the next step in the process."
EAC Executive Director Mona Harrington is presenting a summary of the VVSG 2.0 process and changes to the commissioners and recommending that they adopt the documents. 
Of the 1,659 public comments that the EAC acknowledges receiving (activists say it's not counting a bunch citizen.org/news/groups-of…):
66% accepted
16% rejected (not deemed relevant or not accepted)
18% marked as noted (did not provide specific suggestions, were more general)
66% accepted
16% rejected (not deemed relevant or not accepted)
18% marked as noted (did not provide specific suggestions, were more general)
Breakdown of the categories of requirements in VVSG 2.0.
VVSG 2.0 adds a requirement for penetration testing of voting systems during the certification process. This is in addition to vulnerability scanning and other security testing.
Hovland asks Harrington to discuss changes to the wireless ban, which I wrote about here: politico.com/news/2021/02/0…
Harrington says the changed language "does not diverge substantially" from what was in the public comment draft, as the intent was never to ban wireless hardware.
Harrington says the changed language "does not diverge substantially" from what was in the public comment draft, as the intent was never to ban wireless hardware.
“The added language goes beyond airplane mode," Harrington says. "I’ve heard that criticism, that we're essentially asking for voting machines to be in airplane mode … and I don’t believe that’s the case."
McCormick asks Harrington how the EAC can avoid a lack of a commissioner quorum delaying future VVSG updates.
Harrington says that criticism ignores another major factor delaying updates: lack of sufficient EAC staff to do research, work with NIST, and produce final language.
Harrington says that criticism ignores another major factor delaying updates: lack of sufficient EAC staff to do research, work with NIST, and produce final language.
Harrington: The long delay since the last time the EAC voted on VVSG language "tells me, predominantly, one of the major delays to get VVSG 2.0 completed was a staffing or resource-related issue rather than a quorum issue alone.”
The EAC got a big budget boost at the beginning of 2020, and Harrington says that without those resources, "the work" to complete VVSG 2.0 "wouldn’t have been possible."
Harrington says EAC testing program manual was updated to require vendors to report if new systems sold to customers are EAC-certified. Vendors also have to report all anomalies in voting systems, not just those experienced in EAC-certified systems during federal elections.
Breaking: All four EAC commissioners vote to adopt VVSG 2.0 and its associated testing manuals, clearing a major hurdle in the process of designing, testing, and certifying new voting machines with improved security and accessibility.
Sign of possible friction to come: In new statement, voting tech vendors ask EAC to create a "framework" for applying newly approved VVSG 2.0 guidelines to their existing products.
Some of the new guidelines could make this tricky. How hard will the EAC try to appease vendors?
Some of the new guidelines could make this tricky. How hard will the EAC try to appease vendors?
I misread this statement. The vendors are talking about the need to maintain current equipment, which has been certified to the existing VVSG. Thanks @eddieperezTX
for setting me straight. TBH I didn't realize this would even be a worry for vendors — seems like a no-brainer.
for setting me straight. TBH I didn't realize this would even be a worry for vendors — seems like a no-brainer.
https://twitter.com/ericgeller/status/1359555228538966021
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
