The integrity, transparency, and security of New York’s electoral process are currently at risk due to the State Board of Elections’ decision to manage voting system software escrow internally. While the goal is to ensure compliance with federal and state requirements, this approach presents significant challenges. Without the involvement of a neutral third-party technology escrow provider, concerns about conflict of interest, reduced accountability, and potential security vulnerabilities in the code escrow process arise.
Lack of Neutrality and Impartiality
When the State Board of Elections controls both the certification and software escrow of voting systems, it creates a conflict of interest. This concentration of power can lead to biases—whether intentional or not—in how the voting software is handled, stored, and protected. Implementing an independent, third-party code escrow agent would provide the necessary neutrality to ensure that the software remains secure and impartial.
Transparency is Crucial
Transparency is essential to maintaining public trust in the electoral process. By using a third-party SaaS escrow provider, the responsibilities for creating, storing, and deploying voting software are clearly separated. This division is critical for maintaining confidence in the system. Unfortunately, New York’s current method lacks this transparency, raising doubts about the accuracy and security of vote counts.
Reduced Accountability
In the event of a software failure or security breach, accountability is compromised when the same entity is responsible for both certifying and holding the software in escrow. A third-party technology escrow provider would offer an independent perspective, making it easier to pinpoint the source of the problem and hold the responsible parties accountable.
Security Concerns
New York’s reliance on the State Board of Elections to manage software escrow for voting systems raises serious security concerns. Specialized third-party escrow providers focus on securely storing critical software, often employing advanced security measures that go beyond what government agencies might use. Without leveraging these specialized SaaS escrow services, New York’s voting software could be more vulnerable to cyberattacks and tampering.
Need for Independent Audits
Regular, unbiased audits of the escrowed software are crucial for ensuring its integrity. A third-party code escrow agent would facilitate these audits, adding an extra layer of security. The absence of such independent audits diminishes the credibility of the State Board’s assurances regarding the safety and security of voting software.
Public Perception and Confidence
Public perception of electoral integrity is just as important as the actual security measures in place. By employing a neutral third-party SaaS escrow provider, New York would demonstrate its commitment to the highest standards of security and transparency, thereby boosting public confidence in the electoral process.
Conclusion
While New York’s State Board of Elections has taken steps to safeguard voting systems, the decision to manage software escrow internally represents a missed opportunity to enhance security, transparency, and accountability. By adopting a neutral third-party technology escrow provider, New York could align itself with best practices and ensure a more trustworthy and secure electoral process.