Date: 19th December 2023
As the date of the Indian General Elections 2024 come near, opposition parties and some Activists have started raising concerns about EVM’s, sensing a loss in the Air. Today we evaluate how secure are the EVM’s and are the doubts raised on it unfounded or is their any evidence of rigging anywhere in the world ?
In recent years, electronic voting machines (EVMs) have become a central part of election processes across numerous countries, offering increased convenience, efficiency, and a promise of more accurate polls. However, as with any technological advancement, concerns have emerged regarding the security and integrity of these machines. The question on many minds: can electronic voting machines be rigged?
Electronic voting machines, also known as EVMs, have witnessed a rapid evolution since their inception. These machines have replaced traditional paper ballots and manual counting systems in many countries globally. EVMs allow voters to cast their ballots electronically, often using a touch-screen interface, with votes being stored and processed digitally.
While EVMs provide a streamlined means of recording and tabulating votes, there have been recurring concerns over their security and vulnerability to manipulation. Critics argue that these machines lack transparency, making it difficult to validate the accuracy of the final results and raising suspicions of potential tampering. Several instances of alleged manipulation have fueled these concerns over the years.
One significant concern revolves around the possibility of hacking. Critics argue that hackers could potentially compromise EVMs, altering or manipulating the stored data to favor a particular candidate or party. The fear of foreign meddling or domestic conspiracies has caused public unease, particularly in countries where the legitimacy of past elections has been questioned.
Researchers, computer scientists, and activists have been at the forefront of investigating these claims, analyzing vulnerabilities within EVM software and hardware. They argue that inadequate security measures and outdated technology may enable hackers to gain unauthorized access or introduce malicious code into the machines, thus compromising the integrity of the voting process.
However, proponents of electronic voting machines argue that these concerns may be exaggerated. They assert that stringent security measures and protocols are in place to protect the accuracy and integrity of EVMs. Independent review boards, security audits, and continuous monitoring are often conducted to ensure the machines are tamper-proof.
Additionally, manufacturers of electronic voting machines emphasize the closed nature of their systems, claiming that the lack of internet connectivity minimizes the risk of remote hacking. They contend that any manipulation would require physical access to the machines, making it a challenging endeavor without detection.
To address these concerns, some countries have resorted to incorporating additional security features in their EVMs, such as voter-verified paper audit trails (VVPAT). VVPAT provides a printed receipt of the voters’ choices, allowing them to verify the recorded vote before it is stored digitally. This paper trail offers a means of cross-verification and can serve as evidence in case of disputes.
Ensuring the integrity of electoral processes remains paramount. Governments, election authorities, and manufacturers should be committed to continuous improvement and innovation to enhance the security of electronic voting machines. This includes investing in advanced levels of encryption, implementing robust testing procedures, and fostering transparency to alleviate public skepticism.
As the world moves towards digitization across various fields, the debate surrounding the security of electronic voting machines is likely to persist. Striking the right balance between the convenience and efficiency these machines offer and the necessary security measures they require is essential. By doing so, it is possible to maintain public trust and confidence in democratic elections while minimizing the potential for rigging or manipulation.