While conducting a months-long review of election infrastructure security, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) found no evidence of successful foreign interference in U.S. elections. The thorough assessment, which spanned several months, examined everything from cyber threats to physical security vulnerabilities at polling locations. Officials analyzed incident response capabilities and evaluated how prepared state and local authorities actually are. Turns out, pretty prepared.
CISA identified several areas where security improvements could be made. No system is perfect, right? They highlighted the resilience of current election systems and noted increased collaboration with various partners. Security is never “done” – it’s an ongoing effort that requires constant vigilance. Kind of like laundry, but with higher stakes.
On the cybersecurity front, CISA pushed for enhanced network monitoring, better patch management practices, and stronger access controls. They’ve also expanded cybersecurity training for officials. Because nothing says “fun workplace activity” like learning about multi-factor authentication.
Physical security got an upgrade too. Better facility access controls, improved chain of custody procedures, and enhanced surveillance systems were implemented. They even strengthened transportation security measures. Ballot boxes don’t just transport themselves, folks.
Collaboration efforts expanded considerably. CISA increased information sharing with the Election Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EI-ISAC) and strengthened partnerships with federal agencies, state and local officials, private sector entities, and international partners. It takes a village to secure an election. CISA provides these essential resources as part of their commitment to cybersecurity for elections, which many officials rely on due to their limited budgets and technical capabilities. Much like MSSPs, CISA offers 24/7 protection against cyber threats targeting critical election infrastructure.
Despite all this work, the full report remains classified. CISA cited security concerns as the reason for limiting public disclosure. General findings were shared without specific details. Some might question this approach, but CISA insists they’re balancing transparency with legitimate security needs.
Going forward, CISA recommends continued investment in security infrastructure, regular assessments, ongoing training, enhanced threat intelligence capabilities, and improved public communication. The message is clear: election security isn’t a one-and-done deal. It requires sustained effort and vigilance.
