Spoofing Attacks
Here are several reasons why spoofing attacks should not hinder the implementation of SIV for citizens:
-
SIV is intended to be an additional option, not a replacement. Voters who prefer traditional paper methods can continue to use them.
-
While it is crucial to minimize the number of votes lost to fraud, we must also consider the votes not being cast in paper-only elections. The increased accessibility of voting from mobile devices can lead to a substantial rise in voter participation.
-
Spoofing is already an issue in the physical world with fake ballot drop-boxes and ballot harvesting rings. Education, clear communication from election administrators, and criminal prosecution where necessary are effective responses for both physical and digital voting.
-
SIV can be installed on the election administrator's domain, ensuring it is only available through easily identifiable .gov domain addresses.
-
Spoofing and phishing risks exist for numerous digital services, such as e-commerce and banking websites. While unfortunate, these risks do not warrant prohibiting online services entirely.
-
If a voter casts a vote on a fraudulent service, they can still vote on the legitimate service. If voters have registered their contact information, election administrators can send reminders to confirm official votes.
-
Even without offering SIV, fraudulent actors can set up fake voting websites to deceive vulnerable voters.
-
Risk Limiting Audits can also measure and detect voters who are victims of spoofing, which can then be remediated.
In conclusion, while spoofing attacks pose challenges to digital voting systems, the benefits of Secure Internet Voting far outweigh the risks. By implementing robust security measures and providing clear communication, we can ensure a more accessible and convenient voting experience for all citizens. Having SIV as an additional option alongside traditional methods will strengthen our democratic processes and encourage greater voter participation in elections.