Hi Mark H,

“safeguards … designed to prevent tampering” “Georgia is very careful about elections… machines are light-years ahead”

—————–

Did you read the 3 part series mentioned in the article above?

Just a few highlights:
Part 1 — Massachusetts: Machines have a “weighted race” feature that allows assigning a greater or lesser value than 1 (.66 and 1.2 in the court case mentioned in article).

Part 2 — In Federal District Court of Georgia in 2024 (your state) a 96-page “Security Analysis of Georgia’s Ballot Marking Devices” report was unsealed. The report shows many exploitable vulnerabilities in the Georgia’s voting system, confirms that votes can be altered in the machines and that the software is vulnerable and can be hacked.

And a demonstration of how Georgia’s systems can be hacked with a BIC ball point pen. And reprogrammed using less than $30 worth of common items.

Part 3 — Many examples of extreme vulnerabilities mostly on Arizona’s systems. For example 12,507 non-approved executables were found on the certified system.

But for the hackers at Symantec Security Response, Election Day results could be manipulated by an affordable device you can find online.

“I can insert it, and then it resets the card, and now I’m able to vote again,” said Brian Varner, a principle researcher at Symantec, demonstrating the device.Symantec Security Response director Kevin Haley said elections can also be hacked by breaking into the machines after the votes are collected.

“The results go from that machine into a piece of electronics that takes it to the central counting place,” Haley said. “That data is not encrypted and that’s vulnerable for manipulation.”

“How big of a hacking potential problem is this?” Villarreal asked him.

“Well, there’s a huge potential,” Haley responded. “There are so many places in the voting process once it goes electronic that’s vulnerable.”

According to a report from the Brennan Center for Justice, one reason these voting systems are so vulnerable is their age.

Hi Robert,
One thing I find interesting is that, based on the comments, it appears that conservative or Republican leaning individuals tend to be weary of computerized voting systems, while liberal or Democratic leaning individuals are not.

I would think that this would be a politically neutral issue. I would expect that everyone would want their voting system to be honest and trustworthy. Any question about the integrity or vulnerability of electronic voting machines should concern everyone, no matter what side of the political fence they are on.

Canada, not exactly a Trump-supporting locale, uses paper ballots in all federal elections to prevent hacking. I have no desire to live there, except possibly for Alberta, but at least our neighbor to the north gets a thumbs up for doing something right.

Hi Scott,
Did you read the 3-part article? Those articles were just the tip of a very, very large mountain of evidence.

Ask yourself why did they write computerized election software that can manipulate elections if they didn’t plan to use the software to manipulate elections? Also, why has this software been outlawed in many countries?

Hi Salb,
It is interesting that you brought up “The Pillow Guy”. There was a 2021 Cyber Symposium, I wanted to include data from this in the original articles but couldn’t find the actual documents.
From what I understand, Mike Lindell (the pillow guy) was given election packet data from US intelligence services that had all the internet data (computer IDs, election machines mac addresses, times, vote manipulation data, etc.) showing all the manipulation on the election equipment. He brought in the best security experts in the country to look at the data and prove it was not legitimate. They would win $5 Million. They could not prove it was illegitimate data. I.e.. there was massive manipulation (most from China and Iran) in 2020 election.

A guy (Robert Zeidman), brought the Cyber Symposium to arbitration. Not about the data (he couldn’t prove the data was illegitimate) but that he just had to say the data wasn’t legitimate, not prove it (this part was a little fuzzy to me). The arbitrators agreed and awarded him the prize. The Cyber Symposium brought the case to court, the court agreed that the arbitrator’s conclusion was faulty, but because the arbitration agreement was poorly written, he had to uphold the arbitrators. Strangely, the media was claiming that Zeidman proved the data was illegitimate when that is not what happened.

I didn’t care about the legal shenanigans, I was interested in reading the court documents on the data. I looked and looked and looked, but I could not find any of the data, just the judge’s conclusion that he would have interpreted the data differently than the arbitrator but the arbitration agreement was poorly written so the arbitrator’s finding stood.

Well if vulnerabilities were found then, irrespective of evidence being found to prove that cheating did take place, even more reason to go back to paper voting same day and Voter ID.
Only the Democrats are objecting to these safeguards. Funny that.

Being vulnerable to exploitation is not the same as evidence of an actual hack. Fake news! Shame on you.

Now, will they repay fox news and mypillow guy the lawsuit money they won?

People just don’t understand, if it has internet access …. it’s hackable