In July 2022, The Gateway Pundit highlighted significant testimony within a federal complaint made by Kari Lake and Mark Finchem in Arizona. This civil rights action aimed to prevent the use of electronic voting machines in state elections due to concerns about their security. Central to this complaint was Clay Parikh, a former contractor who discovered critical errors associated with the Maricopa County elections.
Parikh, with extensive experience as a security tester, revealed a 19-inch ballot printing error that caused widespread delays, impacting thousands of voters. His past work for Wyle Laboratories and Pro V&V positioned him as a credible source, having tested numerous voting systems, including Dominion Voting Systems and ES&S.
During his testimony, Parikh made bold claims about the vulnerabilities in voting machines. He stated unequivocally that he could hack into such systems in a matter of minutes, showcasing a troubling ease with which he accessed sensitive data. He reported, “It would take me anywhere between five to ten minutes to hack into these systems, with a ‘best time’ of two and a half minutes.” This alarming admission raises questions about the security measures in place to protect electoral integrity.
Parikh’s testimony took a particularly concerning turn when he recounted his attempt to hack into the ES&S DS200 voting machine. He confirmed, “Yes, I was” able to hack into the machine but noted that he was halted from proceeding further. His goal was to demonstrate how he could manipulate software, significantly influencing the statistical data recorded by the system. The questioning revealed a gap in oversight and control over these electronic voting systems, exposing the lack of rigorous testing that could ensure their reliability.
The role of Voting System Testing Labs (VSTLs) complicates the situation. These labs, contracted by voting machine vendors rather than government entities, may have restrictions that limit comprehensive vulnerability assessments. Such constraints raise critical concerns about who is truly accountable for the security of voting systems. The revelation that Parikh was prevented from fully exploring the systems he tested suggests systemic issues within the certification process.
In a noteworthy shift, the National Defense Authorization Act, signed by former President Donald Trump, introduced a significant amendment aimed at enhancing election security. Specifically, Section 6805 mandates penetration testing as part of the certification process for voting systems. This change requires that accredited labs conduct thorough evaluations of voting hardware and software—a step toward addressing the vulnerabilities that experts like Parikh have identified.
While this legal amendment may still fall short in ensuring complete election integrity, it marks a crucial step toward requiring cybersecurity experts to undertake the type of testing that Parikh was denied. It aligns with broader efforts to ensure that electronic voting systems are put to rigorous scrutiny.
Additionally, there is a movement toward utilizing hand-marked paper ballots, such as those being implemented in Dallas County, Texas, for upcoming elections. This precinct-level method aims to bolster election security and transparency—a key goal for advocates seeking to guarantee free and fair elections in the United States.
The implications of these developments extend beyond mere policy adjustments; they signify a growing recognition of the vulnerabilities inherent in current voting systems. The spotlight on electronic voting security is more pertinent than ever as the nation prepares for future elections.
"*" indicates required fields
