I think that we are having 2 different discussions. There is no disputing that these system have vulnerabilities. There are only 2 types of computer systems - ones that are vulnerable and ones that will be vulnerable at some point in the relatively near future. With Election systems, you are dealing with an environment that is only used a couple times a year, at most. Plus, the systems are (if done correctly) not connected to the Internet and able to receive timely OS upgrades or auto upgrades from the vendor. Given that, to complain that these systems have vulnerabilities seems like one of those "Well...Duh" type things. Having a 100% invulnerable system to the standards of a free standing Internet-connected sys is not practical. The best we can probably hope for is to have a reasonably secure system that is mandated to exist in an "air-gapped" environment as election locations should have. If there circumstances where Internet connectivity is required for whatever reason, it should never be directly on the same LAN as voting systems and it should utilize VPN's to provide secure encrypted traffic to only VPN-connected networks and prevented from freely accessing the Internet by a firewall. That is why we focus on the likelihood of these vulnerabilities being exploited - as we have already stipulated that they exist. And depending on many factors, they may or may not be an issue in this context.
Here's an analogy... I have a 2003 Ford Expedition that I have had since it was new. I've kept it, because I like the size and I have let my sons learn to drive and use it. I have done a pretty good job keeping up with the maintenance and we haven't had many issues. Last winter, I noticed it was leaking oil, but not a lot. I took it in to get it checked out and it'd cost $500 to get it fixed - this on the heels of having just spent $700 on tires. So, I made the decision it was better short-term to just add oil every do often. It's a risk, but an acceptable one for now.
