Thread by @SMART_elections

Thread #VVSG2
1. "The Election Assistance Commission on Wednesday voted to adopt the first comprehensive update to its voting system security guidelines in more than 15 years, concluding a lengthy process that ended with a mixed reception from some election security experts."

https://twitter.com/CyberScoopNews/status/1359630985378361344

2. @SMART_elections wrote a letter to @EACgov that hundreds of others sent as well asking for a number of requirements,including:
- create a panel of technical election security experts, separate from NIST staff, with no financial relationship to vendors
smartelections.us/write-the-eac

3. Other items we asked for:
- The EAC must set and meet the goal that by the end of 2022 40% of the Technical Guidance Development Committee will be made up of technologists and individuals with technology expertise.
- require digital ballot images to be public records

4.
Items we asked to be banned:
- Direct record electronic voting machines
- modems & wireless connectivity
- ballots & summary cards that go under a printhead after being cast
- barcodes & QR codes for votes
- weighted elections (votes being counted with fractions)

5. We will be going through the new VVSG2.0 to see what work remains to be done to reach these goals.

6. Here is more of the report from @timstarks and @snlyngaas "The security community largely greeted the update as a security upgrade to standards that most states rely upon at least partially for their own equipment testing and certification."

7. "A significant number of academics, activists and even some in Congress, though, voiced displeasure in particular for how the so-called Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 would handle wireless connections on voting systems."

8. "some skeptics said they thought the guidelines’ language on banning wireless connectivity didn’t go far enough...prominent election security professionals said ...allowing those connections to exist, even if the guidelines say they should be disabled, is dangerous"

9. “Permitting the inclusion of wireless radios will both increase the vulnerabilities of the voting system and diminish voter confidence in the security of our election systems,” they wrote. “Neither is acceptable.”

10. "Those experts accused the EAC of caving at the last minute to vendors who want to sell scanners and tablets with wireless connectivity."

11. “The EAC’s last-minute edits to the ban on wireless were concerning, but the EAC made unambiguous statements that it is banned,” said @kskoglund. “We’ll hold them to that while we work to improve the language.”

12. "The commission denied making any significant late concessions, publishing a document “dispelling misinformation” which said that the changes only served to clarify what already was there."

13. “I am okay with the compromise to allow wireless networking hardware as long as wireless capability is disabled by software because it is impractical to try to source chips without wireless functionality,” said Maurice Turner, a former senior adviser @EACgov."

14. "Turner, however, faulted the document for another element it left out.

It “completely misses the opportunity to improve defenses for the growing risk area of electronic poll books,” he said."

15. "On the + side, experts said the guidelines...would promote “software independence,” ... machines needing to produce independently verifiable records. ...verifiable paper ballots that election officials can audit after votes are cast."

16. Q for @TimStark: What does "verifiable" mean here? Experts like @philipbstark @rad_atl say "Elections conducted on current BMDs cannot be confirmed by audits." As "no audit can ensure that the votes on paper are the ones expressed/on a touchscreen."
liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.108…

17. Whose definition of "verifiable" will @EACgov be using? Experts or vendors?

#VVSG2 #ElectionProtection #ElectionSecurity #ElectionTrust #ElectionTwitter