Jason Smith

Opinion contributor

The Russians aren’t coming. They came. And they launched a cyber strike on last fall’s elections for which the consequences remain an unknown. It’s a sexy, new Cold War replete with headlines featuring the president's son and a curious meeting with Russians last summer. Sadly, what gets lost within these seductive media narratives are the comprehensive hazards of America’s voting components.

It’s essential to note that there’s no confirmed proof any vote recording or ballot tallies were altered back in November. However, such knowledge provides little solace because American voting systems remain extremely vulnerable, and as former FBI Director James Comey said of the Russians, “They will be back.”

If the U.S. does not change how it conducts elections, when the Russians return, many of the vulnerabilities from 2016 will still be intact. I learned of these insecurities while producing "I Voted?," a non-partisan documentary on election integrity.

Paper ballots are hack-proof. It's time to bring them back.

Trump justice double standard: Presumed guilty unless you're family

A good deal of noise now surrounds election administration, including a turf war between the president’s voting commission and state election officials. It’s difficult even for the well informed to sort thru this tangled narrative. Last month’s leaked NSA document made headlines but did not contain bombshell revelations. Instead, it portrayed the terrifying intent and capability of sophisticated Russian Military Intelligence also known as the GRU. It’s now evident that Russian government operatives continued to meddle with our election process even after President Obama told President Putin last September to “cut it out.”

Days before the election, the GRU targeted at least 120 local election officials in an email malware attack to gain computer access. Since many election officials use the same computer network for all election matters, including components of vote recording, such a breach is extremely dangerous. The GRU also went after VR Systems, an American election software vendor. How successful were these attacks or other infiltrations? Nobody knows. Unfortunately, this not knowing undermines our democracy.

In addition to selecting government leaders, elections must also convince the unsuccessful (and their supporters) of a loss’s validity. That cannot be accomplished without transparency and assurance, which are sorely missing from many of today’s voting systems. Presently, American elections feature millions of paperless ballots cast on voting computers that fail to produce any shred of worthwhile evidence capable of verifying outcomes. Every four years, the nation trains a close eye on the results of Pennsylvania while ignoring the fact that most Keystone State votes are digital ballots, which cannot be audited or recounted. In addition, 29 other states use similar unverifiable equipment for at least some of their voting, including the swing states of Virginia, Florida, Colorado, and Ohio.

Like any crime, election fraud must offer motive and opportunity. No one doubts the motive to influence an election, and Russian Military Intelligence has clearly shown the opportunity. Even the most cursory examination of our elections shows flawed equipment filled with obsolete technology, which remains in use throughout the country. Many states utilize end-of-life voting computers designed and deployed prior to the sale of the first iPhone. In addition, touch screen voting machines with faulty calibrations and buggy software also pose major cause for concern. Considering few people use a 10-year-old computer, why would anyone trust a decade old voting computer with ancient software?

Trump is an easy mark for U.S. adversaries. He's accomplished two things: jack and squat

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media

Any talk of computers must also consider the black hole of cybersecurity — the internet. Bureaucrats and vendors offer solace that most of these voting computers are never connected to the internet. While direct connections may not occur, the same cannot be said of the assorted media such as flash drives and memory cards that are routinely inserted into these voting machines. Plus, updates and patches are sourced online. Consequently, voting computers are connected, albeit indirectly, to the internet and today’s cybersecurity protocols are alarmingly deficient.

Perfect elections, of course, remain a utopian dream. At the same time, a few simple steps would minimize uncertainty and dramatically improve election integrity. Such remedies center on paper ballots, risk limiting post election audits and strengthening cybersecurity. Paper ballots contain a durable record of voter marked intent. As University of Michigan Professor and computer scientist J. Alex Halderman states in my documentary, “Without paper today ... there’s just no hope.”

Following an election, a risk limiting audit provides an efficient, high degree of confidence in the results. Basically, this entails recounting a portion of the overall ballots with the sample audit size based on the race’s margin of victory. In other words, a close race would have more votes audited than a landslide. When paper ballots are tabulated electronically, a risk limiting audit ensures that the technology is doing what it’s designed to do. Additionally, enhancing cybersecurity builds yet another firewall to protect our election technology.

Thomas Jefferson placed great faith in the wisdom of the people. But for the people to have faith in the legitimacy of our constitutional republic, there must be faith in the legitimacy of our elections. When outcomes cannot be verified thru evidence based balloting, we open the door to questionable results. We open the door to doubt. Neither doubt nor Putin are good for American democracy.

Jason Grant Smith is the writer & director of the non-partisan documentary I Voted?, which premiered at the 2016 Tribeca Film Festival.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @USATOpinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To submit a letter, comment or column, check our submission guidelines.