The push for open source voting systems continues to gain momentum at the local, state, and federal levels. As public awareness of election security grows, more jurisdictions are exploring transparent alternatives to proprietary voting technology. Below are recent developments that are shaping the future of how Americans cast and count their ballots.
March 2026
Municipal Governments Explore Shared Open Source Voting Infrastructure
A growing coalition of mid-sized cities across the western United States is investigating the feasibility of jointly developing and maintaining an open source voting platform. The collaborative model would allow participating municipalities to share development costs while retaining full local control over their election systems.
The initiative emerged from frustration with the current vendor landscape, where a small number of proprietary companies dominate the market for election technology. City officials have reported difficulty negotiating favorable contract terms, long wait times for software updates, and limited ability to customize systems for local requirements such as ranked-choice voting or multilingual ballot support.
Under the proposed framework, each participating jurisdiction would contribute to a shared codebase maintained under an open source license. Individual cities could then adapt the software to meet their specific needs while contributing improvements back to the common platform. Election security experts have praised the approach, noting that a larger pool of developers reviewing the code would likely identify and resolve vulnerabilities faster than any single vendor's internal team.
Proponents point to successful open source collaborations in other areas of government technology as evidence that the model can work for election systems. The challenge, they acknowledge, lies in meeting the stringent certification requirements that govern voting equipment in most states.
Learn about organizations supporting open source voting
January 2026
Election Security Researchers Call for Greater Source Code Transparency
A group of computer science professors and cybersecurity professionals published a joint letter urging state election officials to require voting system vendors to make their source code available for independent review. The letter, signed by researchers at over two dozen universities, argues that the current model of proprietary, closed-source voting software creates unnecessary risk.
The researchers emphasized that transparency does not compromise security. In fact, the opposite is true: software that has been reviewed by a broad community of experts is far more likely to be secure than code that only a handful of vendor employees have examined. They cited decades of evidence from the open source software community showing that public code review leads to faster identification and resolution of security flaws.
The letter specifically addressed concerns that publishing voting system source code would make it easier for attackers to find vulnerabilities. The researchers countered that determined adversaries can reverse-engineer proprietary software regardless of whether the source code is published, while defenders benefit enormously from having a large community of researchers able to identify and report problems.
Several state legislators have expressed interest in introducing bills that would require source code disclosure for voting systems used in their jurisdictions. However, voting system vendors have generally opposed such measures, arguing that proprietary protections are necessary to sustain their businesses.
Read our FAQ on open source voting security
November 2025
Risk-Limiting Audits Gain Traction as Post-Election Verification Standard
More states are adopting risk-limiting audits as a standard post-election procedure, providing a statistical method to verify that election outcomes are correct regardless of the software used to tabulate results. These audits, which involve manually examining a statistically determined sample of paper ballots, offer a crucial layer of verification that complements the push for open source voting technology.
Risk-limiting audits work by comparing a random sample of hand-counted paper ballots against the electronic tally produced by voting machines. If the sample confirms the reported outcome with a high degree of statistical confidence, the audit is complete. If discrepancies are found, the sample size is expanded until either the outcome is confirmed or a full hand recount is triggered.
Advocates for open source voting systems note that risk-limiting audits and transparent software are complementary safeguards. Open source code allows pre-election verification that the software is functioning correctly, while risk-limiting audits provide post-election confirmation that the results accurately reflect the votes cast on paper ballots. Together, these measures create a robust system of checks that no single point of failure can undermine.
Election officials who have implemented risk-limiting audits report that the process builds public confidence in results by providing tangible, verifiable evidence that the outcome is correct. The audits are particularly valuable in close elections, where public trust in the accuracy of the count is most critical.
See media coverage of election technology developments
September 2025
Open Source Ballot Design Tools Improve Accessibility for Voters with Disabilities
An open source project focused on ballot design and layout has released a new version of its software that significantly improves accessibility for voters with visual impairments and other disabilities. The tools, which are freely available for any election jurisdiction to use, generate ballot layouts that meet or exceed current accessibility standards while maintaining compatibility with standard optical scan equipment.
The project demonstrates one of the key advantages of open source development in the election space: community contributors with expertise in accessibility were able to identify and address usability issues that the original developers had not considered. A team of accessibility specialists, working alongside election officials and software engineers, contributed improvements to font sizing, contrast ratios, ballot navigation for screen readers, and tactile guides for voters who are blind or have low vision.
Election officials in several jurisdictions have begun testing the tools and report that they produce clearer, more readable ballots than the proprietary alternatives they currently use. The project maintainers have also released comprehensive documentation to help election administrators adopt the software, including guides for customizing ballots for local office configurations and ballot measures.
The accessibility improvements underscore a broader principle: open source development produces better public-serving software because it draws on a wider range of expertise and perspectives than any single company can assemble internally.
Return to the SF Open Voting homepage