30°

A preliminary University of Alaska Anchorage study of election security has found some troubling weaknesses in the state, and a more in-depth study has begun.

The report was requested by Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who oversees elections in Alaska.

No known violations of election security have turned up, election officials say, but state Democratic Party Chairwoman Patti Higgins said that isn't good enough.

"The problem is that you just wouldn't know," she said.

The potential problems the study found in Alaska were based on a look at other states' systems, including California, which uses identical equipment as Alaska, and experts there have found ways the system can be exploited.

The preliminary report, released in December, also found some strengths in the Alaska system, which Parnell said may counteract the weaknesses found in California.

Strengths included a unified statewide system with standardized processes.

"This standardization is unique among the states, and may offer fewer opportunities for tampering," the authors said.

The first phase of the study looked at how Alaska elections processes work, how they attempt to count and report votes accurately, and how they protect the secrecy of individual ballots. It also reviewed how other states do that as well.

Alaska, like California, uses election hardware and software produced by Premier Election Solutions, formerly known as Diebold, in its election system. Among the findings in California:

• A failure to protect ballot secrecy, holding in memory information about how people voted.

• Vulnerability to malicious software, which could allow miscounting or undercounting of votes.

• Susceptibility to viruses.

• Vulnerability to malicious insiders.

Diebold responded to the California study and disputed some of its conclusions. The University of Alaska researchers said they took that response into consideration while writing their report.

Most votes in Alaska are counted electronically, the report said. The vast majority of Alaska voters fill out a paper ballot that is then read by an optical scan machine.

The California study found security concerns in both the optical scan and touch-screen machines, but said the optical scan machines were less susceptible to attacks.

Alaska also does some things differently than California, such as use paper ballots. That allows for recounts in the event of a discrepancy.

"The fact that you'd have a paper trail allowing verification is incredibly reassuring," Parnell said.