Science Applications International Corp., a scientific engineering and technology company working under a consulting contract with Maryland, will assess the risk of election fraud with the machines and study state and local election procedures. Both parts of this review are crucial to ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the expensive new voting system. The Johns Hopkins researchers pointed to potential security threats both from the outside, such as a person with a homemade card casting numerous ballots, and from the inside, with poll workers or other election employees skewing vote tallies.

When the study was released, Maryland election authorities countered that the touch-screens had passed not only a rigorous battery of tests but the ultimate trial: They were used without a hitch in four counties during last fall's election. However, one uneventful election does not prove the long-term ability of these machines to thwart hackers. Even Diebold officials, who have produced point-by-point reports challenging the Johns Hopkins findings, have said that they will welcome the scrutiny of the state-requested review.

It's about time that Maryland decided to confirm the suitability of its voting mechanism. Despite the potential benefits of touch-screen technology -- and there are many, especially for voters who have disabilities or who don't speak English -- election infrastructure doesn't necessarily improve in direct proportion with dollars spent. In fact, studies have indicated that some old-fashioned ballots outperform newer vote-casting methods. And election experts have repeatedly voiced concerns about any system that entirely eschews a paper trail.