WASHINGTON, D.C. (2/03/2026) – Over 20 esteemed and renowned computer scientists have published a stinging rebuke of Uber millionaire Bradley Tusk’s Mobile Voting Project, “VoteSecure,” which Tusk has promised will be “the most secure voting technology we’ve ever had.” The scientists’ paper, founded on a review of the technical documents and software protocol, finds that “[r]ecent announcements by Bradley Tusks’s Mobile Voting Foundation suggest that the development of VoteSecure somehow makes internet voting safe and appropriate for use in public elections.  This is untrue and dangerous.”

VoteSecure is not a mobile voting system. 

In recent months, Tusk has been aggressively promoting mobile voting through numerous media interviews, claiming he has funded the development of a mobile voting app that can provide secure internet voting. 

Tusk’s remarks have suggested that he has funded the development of the mobile voting app itself and news reports reflect this notion, but this is inaccurate and misleading. The scientists’ review explains that “VoteSecure isn’t a complete, usable product, it’s just a “cryptographic core” that someone might someday incorporate into a usable product.” In other words, VoteSecure is a software development kit (SDK) that may be used in conjunction with an existing mobile voting application or internet voting platform to enable ballot verification, but it is not an internet voting system or mobile voting app. VoteSecure’s developer, Free & Fair, have confirmed this fact, stating: “VoteSecure is a cryptographic protocol and reference cryptographic library, not a complete voting system.”

VoteSecure has “critical security gaps.”

Moreover, the computer security experts have concluded VoteSecure has “critical security gaps,” and that the limited security enhancements VoteSecure may confer on a commercially available mobile voting application are overstated or unrealized. For example, VoteSecure does not provide the attribute of “receipt-freedom,” and can therefore enable large scale vote buying, selling or coercion. VoteSecure is also unable to protect ballots from being manipulated by malware on the voter or election officials’ computers. The scientists cite specific security weaknesses that they raised with the developers, and which the developers conceded were unresolved.  

“For the last 20 years, it is a well established scientific consensus that internet voting is too insecure for public elections, unless some miraculous new technology is invented.   People have been working for 30+ years on such technologies, and no such breakthrough has arrived, or is likely to arrive any time soon,” said Andrew Appel, Professor Emeritus of Computer Science, Princeton University, and lead author of the paper.  ““VoteSecure” is yet another design for internet voting that is vulnerable to malware on voter’s devices, malware in county election systems, and insider threats.    Mr. Tusk should not use VoteSecure as a pretext to promote unsafe internet voting.”

Read the security review here.