Joseph Sohm/Shutterstock.com

Featured eBooks
Best Dates to Retire 2020
What’s Next for Federal Customer Experience
 The Future of the Air Force
Massive Voter Database Left Unsecured

Information from over 190 million registered voters was found in loose online database.

An un­se­cured data­base con­tain­ing in­form­a­tion on more than 190 mil­lion U.S. voters has been float­ing around the in­ter­net, and nobody seems to know how it got there. That’s a troub­ling sign as polit­ic­al cam­paigns be­come in­creas­ingly de­pend­ent on col­lect­ing, ana­lyz­ing, and util­iz­ing per­son­al voter in­form­a­tion.

In­ter­net re­search­er Chris Vick­ery found the data­base on Dec. 20; it has since been taken down. The data­base con­tained in­form­a­tion that cit­izens provided to states when they re­gistered to vote: names, ad­dresses, phone num­bers, and po­ten­tially demo­graph­ic info and vot­ing his­tory.

The in­form­a­tion would be time-con­sum­ing to ag­greg­ate (it can be pur­chased from state gov­ern­ments) but it is only truly use­ful to cam­paigns when com­bined with oth­er data sets ob­tained from me­dia com­pan­ies, poll­sters, and dir­ect voter con­tact.

Vick­ery, re­cog­niz­ing the voter file in­form­a­tion that is used by cam­paigns to plot out­reach and strategy, began con­tact­ing polit­ic­al data vendors to fig­ure out where it came from, and found tell­tale data la­bels used by a com­pany called Na­tion Build­er.

“While the data­base is not ours, it is pos­sible that some of the in­form­a­tion it con­tains may have come from data we make avail­able for free to cam­paigns,” Na­tion Build­er CEO Jim Gil­li­am wrote on his com­pany’s web­site. “From what we’ve seen, the voter in­form­a­tion in­cluded is already pub­licly avail­able from each state gov­ern­ment so no new or private in­form­a­tion was re­leased in this data­base.”

Ac­cord­ing to cam­paign spend­ing data, Na­tion Build­er’s biggest cli­ents in the cur­rent elec­tion cycle are the Mas­sachu­setts Re­pub­lic­an Party, Rep. Dav­id McKin­ley of West Vir­gin­ia, and the Lyn­don La­Rouche Polit­ic­al Ac­tion Com­mit­tee—which is as­so­ci­ated with the con­tro­ver­sial con­spir­acy the­or­ist and per­en­ni­al pres­id­en­tial can­did­ate.

There are a patch­work of state laws that lim­it us­ing the data for com­mer­cial or non­polit­ic­al use, and the un­se­cured data is wor­ry­ing to se­cur­ity pro­fes­sion­als and pri­vacy ad­voc­ates. But it’s im­port­ant to re­cog­nize that all of this in­form­a­tion is avail­able to the pub­lic. Ul­ti­mately, this is ap­pears to be a much less wor­ry­ing in­cid­ent than the data breaches that have plagued ma­jor re­tail­ers and the U.S. gov­ern­ment.

This is also not ex­actly the kind of data that got Sen. Bernie Sander’s cam­paign in hot wa­ter a few weeks ago. While that in­volved a sim­il­ar data­base of voter in­form­a­tion, the real is­sue was the Sanders cam­paign’s abil­ity to see pro­pri­et­ary in­form­a­tion gathered by Hil­lary Clin­ton’s cam­paign about which voters sup­port her and are likely to vote.

It’s not clear how re­cently the ex­posed data­base was up­dated; voter file in­form­a­tion tends to quickly grow stale, as voters die, move, or change their polit­ic­al al­le­gi­ances. The kind of re­gis­tra­tion data found in ex­posed data­base is typ­ic­ally only the a start­ing point for the com­pre­hens­ive voter files main­tained by the two ma­jor U.S. parties and their vendors. The parties, in turn, rely on cam­paign can­vass­ers to up­date the files.

But as the free-for-all search for per­son­al in­form­a­tion be­comes ever more im­port­ant to politi­cians—in­deed, some cam­paign vendors brag that they are psy­cho­ana­lyz­ing voters from afar—voters will be in­creas­ingly con­cerned about the se­cur­ity of their per­son­al in­form­a­tion.

(Image via Joseph Sohm/Shutterstock.com)