8.15: Difference between revisions
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
The Green Book's emphasis on fraud and information security as separate risk assessment activity is intentional. MC may be able to defer to the Arizona Secretary of State's Election Procedure Manual as general steps taken to ensure the integrity of election results. Fraud occurs when loopholes are identified and exploited by the fraudsters. The implementers of election services (i.e., Arizona Counties) are better positioned to detect fraud and assess the risk of fraud because they are handling the data, not the state. Hence, governance gaps may be identified from patterns of poor assessment and response to risk with respect to election fraud and information security. | The Green Book's emphasis on fraud and information security as separate risk assessment activity is intentional. MC may be able to defer to the Arizona Secretary of State's Election Procedure Manual as general steps taken to ensure the integrity of election results. Fraud occurs when loopholes are identified and exploited by the fraudsters. The implementers of election services (i.e., Arizona Counties) are better positioned to detect fraud and assess the risk of fraud because they are handling the data, not the state. Hence, governance gaps may be identified from patterns of poor assessment and response to risk with respect to election fraud and information security. | ||
===== [[Signature Verification|Maricopa County Signature Verification (2020)]] ===== | |||
Note: This attribute does not appear to apply, because the procedure non-compliance issues appear to be intentional, not unintentional, given the quantity of violations that occurred. This is a clarifying comment for governance issues identified from [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation] of Arizona Senate allegations of Maricopa County - Signature Verification Process issues. This was not identified as a governance gap. | |||
Revision as of 15:07, 25 August 2026
Risk Assessment
Principle 8 - Assess Fraud, Improper Payment, and Information Security Risk
Attribute 8.15 - Internal risks include unintentional acts by employees, whose vigilance is a key defense against external threats and user error. Internal threats may also come from intentional malicious acts by former or disgruntled employees. They pose unique risks because these individuals may be both motivated to work against the entity and better equipped to succeed in carrying out a malicious act as they have greater access to and knowledge of the entity's information technology and business processes.
>>>Navigational Buttons<<<
- Index of Attributes
- Previous Attribute - 8.14
- Next Attribute - 8.16
Jamie's Story
No examples are available to illustrate governance gaps for this attribute.
Election Anomalies
The Green Book's Principle 8 addresses Assess Fraud, Improper Payment, and Information Security Risk. Obviously, improper payments is not a concern during the Assessment of Election Anomalies. However, improper payments by MC county may exist, but would require a separate assessment.
The Green Book's emphasis on fraud and information security as separate risk assessment activity is intentional. MC may be able to defer to the Arizona Secretary of State's Election Procedure Manual as general steps taken to ensure the integrity of election results. Fraud occurs when loopholes are identified and exploited by the fraudsters. The implementers of election services (i.e., Arizona Counties) are better positioned to detect fraud and assess the risk of fraud because they are handling the data, not the state. Hence, governance gaps may be identified from patterns of poor assessment and response to risk with respect to election fraud and information security.
Note: This attribute does not appear to apply, because the procedure non-compliance issues appear to be intentional, not unintentional, given the quantity of violations that occurred. This is a clarifying comment for governance issues identified from Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation of Arizona Senate allegations of Maricopa County - Signature Verification Process issues. This was not identified as a governance gap.
