Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

No ballot box is safe: Volunteers hacked into all 100 voting machine types they went after

Hacking voting systems

Hackers, academics and military experts like these were among those who spent three days hacking into all the voting equipment in wide use across the country.

Air Force Tech. Sgt. R.J. Biermann

It wasn't the kind of test that you hope produces a perfect score. But hackers, technology geeks, academics and others were 100 for 100 this summer in their attempts to infiltrate and compromise an enormous array of voting machines using all sorts of technologies.

Their astonishing results will only boost the widespread anxiety among election security experts that American election systems remain widely vulnerable to hacking and Washington is not doing nearly enough to shrink the risks ahead of next year's presidential contest.


The total failure of voting hardware to ward off intrusion was revealed in a report last week summarizing the third Voting Machine Hacking Village, a three-day hack-a-thon held in Las Vegas in August as part of Def Con 27, one of the world's largest hacker conferences.

The participants either found new ways to break into the machines this year or replicated already published methods that could be used to alter stored vote tallies and change ballots displayed to voters.

"As disturbing as this outcome is, we note that it is at this point an unsurprising result," the report states.

The first such hacking village, in 2017, took on 20 types of voting devices. The second, last year, targeted more than 30 brands of equipment.

The equipment broken into included touchscreens, optical scan paper voting devices, paper ballot marking devices and electronic poll books — all the technologies that are currently in widest use by the more than 5,000 local jurisdictions that conduct our elections.

The volunteer intruders gained access in most cases through external interfaces accessible to voters or precinct workers.

Despite these vulnerabilities, the report's authors said some of the equipment is still viable for use in elections as long as there are "rigorous post-election audits." Legislation to mandate such audits is in a tall stack of election security bills that remains stalled in the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says none of those policy measures is necessary even though he has agreed to support $250 million in federal spending to protect the 2020 balloting from outside interference.

Attention has been focused on the vulnerability of the voting systems in the United States since Russian intelligence agents attempted to disrupt the 2016 presidential election.

Special counsel Robert Mueller's report on the Russian interference found that operatives attempted to hack into voting systems around the country and were successful in gaining access to a voter registration database in Illinois and to computers of some election officials in Florida.

The Voting Village report also includes a series of recommendations for improving security ahead of the 2020 elections, almost all of which are also being pushed by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. They include mandating post-election audits and the use of machines that generate a paper trail, and increasing funding to help local election officials protect their IT infrastructure.

How Hackers Can Target Voting Machines | NBC News Now

NBC News' technology correspondent Jacob Ward gives an inside look into how hackers can target voting systems with ease.

Read More

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less