Overview
Title
To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require the Election Assistance Commission to provide for the conduct of penetration testing as part of the testing and certification of voting systems and to provide for the establishment of an Independent Security Testing and Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure Pilot Program for Election Systems.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants to make sure voting machines are safe from hackers by checking them for problems and letting scientists help find those problems without getting in trouble. It's like having a superhero team to test and protect our voting computers!
Summary AI
H. R. 7447 proposes changes to the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to enhance the cybersecurity of voting systems in the United States. The bill requires the Election Assistance Commission to implement penetration testing as part of the certification process for voting system hardware and software. It also establishes a five-year pilot program to facilitate independent security testing and coordinated vulnerability disclosure, allowing cybersecurity researchers to identify and report vulnerabilities in election systems. Participation in this program is voluntary, and vendors cannot take legal action against researchers for accidental, good-faith violations under federal and state laws.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed bill, titled the "Strengthening Election Cybersecurity to Uphold Respect for Elections through Independent Testing Act" or the "SECURE IT Act," aims to enhance the security of voting systems in the United States by amending the Help America Vote Act of 2002. It proposes two main initiatives: incorporating penetration testing into the certification process of voting systems and establishing a five-year pilot program for independent security testing and coordinated cybersecurity vulnerability disclosure for election systems.
General Summary of the Bill
The bill mandates that the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) incorporate penetration testing as part of the certification and testing processes for voting systems. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) will play a role in recommending entities qualified for these tests. Additionally, the bill introduces a pilot program to allow cybersecurity researchers to test election systems for vulnerabilities, with legal protections for those conducting such research. This program is intended to last five years and aims to involve collaboration between various stakeholders, including vendors and election officials.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several issues arise from the bill's language and provisions. One concern is the short implementation period of 180 days for the penetration testing initiative, which may be insufficient for adequately setting up the necessary processes and accreditation. Furthermore, the bill lacks detail on financial impacts, not specifying who will bear the costs of these new cybersecurity measures, thereby potentially imposing undue financial burden on certain entities.
Another significant issue is related to transparency. Excluding cybersecurity vulnerabilities found under this program from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) could diminish public oversight, affecting trust in electoral processes. The vetting criteria for researchers and the process for handling vulnerabilities also lack specificity, which could lead to inconsistent application and gaps in addressing security threats. Additionally, the potential overlap between the EAC and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) creates ambiguity in responsibilities which could affect the program's execution.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this bill could have a profound impact on the public by aiming to secure election systems, an area of increasing concern given the potential for cyber threats to undermine democratic processes. Implementing rigorous cybersecurity measures like penetration testing appears advantageous, likely boosting voter confidence in election integrity. However, if transparency is hindered, public trust might be adversely affected, putting pressure on lawmakers to balance security with openness.
Various stakeholders might experience both the positive and negative aspects of this legislation. Election system vendors, for example, might be concerned about increased operational costs and the legal complexities involved in compliance with new cybersecurity mandates. Cybersecurity researchers could benefit from the legal protections provided by the "safe harbor" provisions, encouraging their participation. Conversely, these stakeholders might also face legal ambiguities due to the bill's wording on intellectual property laws.
Positive and Negative Impacts on Stakeholders
On the positive side, election system vendors may see benefits in stronger security protocols, enhancing the overall trust in their systems. However, without clear accountability measures for vendors that do not address vulnerabilities, the efficacy of these enhancements could be questioned. Local and state election officials might gain from more robust election infrastructure, but the ambiguity in authority between different federal bodies could complicate implementation.
Cybersecurity researchers stand to gain from legal protections allowing more freedom to engage in vulnerability testing without fear of prosecution. This could lead to innovative solutions and heightened security. Nevertheless, there is a risk that unclear rules might stifle some legitimate research activities if misunderstood or misapplied.
Overall, while the SECURE IT Act brings a bold approach to election cybersecurity, it requires further refinement to ensure clarity, stakeholder cooperation, and the balance of public trust and security.
Issues
The program's 5-year duration without a specified budget could lead to overspending or a lack of funding, impacting its effectiveness and transparency. (Sections 3, 297)
The 180-day timeline for penetration testing implementation may be too short for proper setup and accreditation, risking rushed or inadequate processes. (Section 2)
There is no overview of costs associated with penetration testing or who will bear these costs, raising concerns about potential financial burden on certain entities. (Section 2)
The exemption from the Freedom of Information Act for discovered vulnerabilities might reduce transparency and oversight, hindering public trust. (Sections 3, 297)
Vetting criteria for cybersecurity researchers are not clearly defined, potentially leading to inconsistent application or exclusion of qualified participants. (Sections 3, 297)
The process for applying patches or fixes lacks detail, possibly causing delays or inconsistencies, especially given the 90-day framework. (Sections 3, 297)
The 'voluntary participation' language and 'safe harbor' provisions for researchers could lead to interpretation issues, resulting in legal loopholes or challenges. (Sections 3, 297)
No penalty or enforcement mechanism exists for election vendors failing to act on disclosed vulnerabilities, which could undermine the program's effectiveness. (Sections 3, 297)
There is potential confusion about interaction with existing copyright law exceptions, which may cause legal ambiguities. (Sections 3, 297)
Potential overlap in authority between the Election Assistance Commission and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency could create ambiguity or conflicts. (Sections 3, 297)
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides the short title of the Act, which is called the “Strengthening Election Cybersecurity to Uphold Respect for Elections through Independent Testing Act,” or simply the “SECURE IT Act.”
2. Requiring penetration testing as part of the testing and certification of voting systems Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill requires that, within 180 days, the Commission must implement penetration testing for voting system hardware and software as part of their certification processes. The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology will suggest entities for accreditation that are competent to conduct these tests, with the Commission deciding on their accreditation based on these recommendations.
3. Independent security testing and coordinated cybersecurity vulnerability disclosure program for election systems Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill section establishes a 5-year pilot program for independent security testing and disclosure of cybersecurity vulnerabilities in election systems, aiming to improve their security. The program is voluntary for vendors and researchers, includes protections for research activities, and involves collaboration with the Secretary of Homeland Security and election officials to address and notify any discovered vulnerabilities.
297. Independent security testing and coordinated cybersecurity vulnerability disclosure pilot program for election systems Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section establishes a 5-year pilot program that allows election system vendors to voluntarily let cybersecurity researchers test their systems for vulnerabilities. If vulnerabilities are found, vendors must address them, and researchers are protected from legal action for accidental good-faith breaches during their research.