The hacker’s Perspective on Papal Security

According to Bruce Schneier, author of A Hacker’s Mind, even the most skilled hackers “woudl struggle to hack one of the most secure voting systems yet devised: the method for selecting a new pope.” Schneier points out that the Catholic Church “has come close to perfecting the art” of secure elections.

This assessment comes at a crucial time, as concerns about election vulnerabilities continue to mount in the U.S. and abroad. The 2020 election saw unprecedented levels of scrutiny and unsubstantiated claims of widespread fraud,highlighting the urgent need for robust and trustworthy voting systems.

Transparency and Simplicity: Key Principles

Schneier suggests three key lessons from the papal election process. First, “every step of the electoral system is transparent to all participants even if the votes are secret.” This transparency builds trust and makes it more difficult for bad actors to tamper with the process.

Second, “small and simple elections among known voters are less vulnerable to manipulation.” While U.S. elections involve millions of voters and complex ballot measures, focusing on clear procedures can minimize risks. Third, “when a selection process evolves over a long time it can become ‘surprisingly good.’” The iterative improvements made to papal elections over centuries offer a model for continuous refinement of U.S. voting systems.

The U.S. Challenge: Balancing Scale and Security

One of the biggest challenges in applying these lessons to the U.S. is the sheer scale of elections.”The challenge of holding secure ballots is especially acute in the US given the scale of elections and the range of issues presented to voters,” notes Matt blaze, a professor at Georgetown University who researches electoral integrity. He adds that “automation is essential even if risky” to manage the complexity of U.S. elections.

Blaze proposes a balanced approach: “Physical ballot papers (including postal votes) remain essential but they can be recorded and counted electronically using optical scan technology.” To ensure accuracy, he advocates for “risk-limiting audits,” a sampling technique to verify electronic counts against paper ballots. “I am optimistic that we can have very high-integrity elections even with the monstrous ballots we have in the US,” Blaze says.

The Persistent Risk of All-Digital Voting

Despite the convenience of technology, experts warn against relying solely on digital voting systems. “There is no such thing as secure voting that is purely digital,” Schneier asserts. This vulnerability is consistently demonstrated at the Def Con hacker conference, where “hackers regularly expose the flaws of the latest US digital voting systems.”

The reliance on electronic voting machines without paper trails in some jurisdictions remains a point of concern for election security advocates. These machines are susceptible to hacking and malfunction, and without a physical record, it is difficult to verify the accuracy of the results. While some states have moved to replace these machines with more secure options,progress has been slow.

Beyond Voting Machines: Addressing Broader threats

While secure voting mechanisms are crucial, experts emphasize that they are just one piece of the puzzle.Gina Neff, executive director of the Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy, argues that “papal conclaves do everything they can to ensure that the people voting and the people observing think the process is fair. Democracies have a lot to learn from this.”

Other threats to democracy include: “rabble-rousing politicians such as Donald Trump who refuse to accept legitimate results; AI-enabled manipulation and disinformation; and foreign interference.” Addressing these multifaceted challenges requires a thorough approach that includes media literacy initiatives, robust cybersecurity measures, and bipartisan commitment to democratic norms.

Counterpoint: The Impracticality of Papal Secrecy

While the principles of transparency and simplicity are valuable, some argue that the extreme secrecy of papal elections is impractical and undesirable in a modern democracy. Critics point out that the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and association, making it unachievable to completely isolate voters from outside influences.

however, proponents of learning from the papal model emphasize that it’s about creating a system that is as resistant to manipulation as possible, not about replicating the exact conditions of a papal conclave. By implementing robust security measures and promoting transparency, the U.S. can strengthen its democracy without sacrificing essential freedoms.

Moving Forward: A Call for Adaptation and Verification

The history of papal elections demonstrates the importance of continuous adaptation and effective verification mechanisms. “over many centuries, papal contests have been pockmarked by bribery, intimidation, riots, schisms and extended wrangling,” yet the process has consistently evolved to address these challenges.

Ultimately, “hackers can help the rest of us get there faster today by flagging risks and proposing safer solutions in voting systems around the world.” By embracing a culture of continuous improvement and learning from both successes and failures, the U.S. can strengthen its election systems and ensure the integrity of its democracy.

FAQ: Securing U.S. elections