Jan 11, 2026

Accessible AI and Election Integrity: Societal Risks of AI-Enabled Voter Suppression

Peter Courtney

This report examines a critical and underexplored societal risk at the intersection of artificial intelligence, election integrity, and U.S. federal law: the ability of a single individual, acting alone, to conduct a credible voter suppression campaign using widely available AI systems. Building on an empirical stress test conducted during the AI Manipulation Hackathon, the study evaluates whether open-weight language models meaningfully lower the cost, skill threshold, and time required for election interference.

Using structured prompting across three accessible models—Qwen2.5-Instruct, Phi-3.5-mini-Instruct (Microsoft), and Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.3—the author finds that AI substantially amplifies an existing legal and societal blind spot. Through iterative prompting and role-play framing, multiple models produced misleading election-procedure information, suppression-aligned messaging, and targeted disinformation narratives, despite nominal safety guardrails. The findings suggest that AI scales lone-actor capabilities in ways that existing legal, institutional, and governance frameworks are poorly equipped to address.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

The legal context this project provides is a great contribution. The insight around the distinction between two-actor conspiracy requirements and single-actor scenarios under U.S. law (18 U.S.C. § 241) is extremely relevant and (afaict) not widely known in the AI safety community.

I also really appreciate the connection drawn between near-term election manipulation risks and more catastrophic single-actor takeover scenarios from the existential risk literature. Showing that there's a continuum here is really valuable.

The write-up is clear and pleasant to read. The specific examples are well-chosen, and I appreciate the care taken around redacting harmful content while still demonstrating the risk.

For strengthening the work: the execution makes sense for a contribution centered on legal context, but it could be more compelling with a quantitative baseline. How much harder would this be without AI assistance?

I'd encourage the author to write this up as a blog post and circulate it more widely. This should be read by more people!

Submission is a well-presented note on an important challenge. The language is clear, with references to prior work justifying the problem's relevance. Unfortunately, the results seem expected, and the methodology wasn't novel or interesting, though I enjoyed that authors tried to honestly simulate a realistic attack scenario, even assuming the threat actor didn't have technical expertise.

I would enjoy to see this project developed with more technical effort — one obvious next step would be to run LoRA-based safety training -stripping techniques on the OS models used, and evaluate their performance on voter suppression techniques afterwards.

I want to applaud this submission on the detail of the presentation of the problem, full logs of the results in the appendix, and a lack of attempt to exaggerate results. This is good and honest scientific communication.

This paper addresses a critical vulnerability regarding the capacity of a lone actor to utilize LLMs for rapidly generating large-scale misinformation that threatens the integrity of democratic institutions. The technical finding that even a novice could potentially generate pipelines for voter suppression in approximately two hours is alarming. Furthermore, the argument that such actors may be legally immune from prosecution is particularly concerning, given that US federal law typically requires coordination or conspiracy to establish criminal liability.

While the central premise of the paper is valuable and timely, the experimental design would benefit from additional nuance to strengthen the findings. It would have been beneficial to include a control condition where the author utilized advanced programming skills alongside AI assistance, rather than simulating a novice user. This approach would likely demonstrate that such pipelines can be constructed in minutes rather than hours, thereby emphasizing the severe asymmetry of this threat.

Additionally, incorporating empirical evidence of such attacks in the wild, perhaps through an analysis of likely AI-generated misinformation on platforms like X, would provide necessary context that this is an active problem rather than a theoretical one. Finally, it would have been valuable to explore the difficulty of fine-tuning these models to strip away safety guardrails entirely, which would likely increase their propensity to assist with misinformation campaigns.

Overall, this work highlights an urgent issue. I believe significantly more work is required across both political and technical domains to effectively address this challenge.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Accessible AI and Election Integrity: Societal Risks of AI-Enabled Voter Suppression

},

author={

Peter Courtney

},

date={

1/11/26

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.