Critical Discovery During Wisconsin Recount: Cellular Connectivity of Tabulators

[Coyotl]

UNBELIEVABLE, unless, of course, elections are being designed for rigging.

Critical New Discovery During Wisconsin Recount: Cellular Connectivity of Tabulators Leaves Door Open to Hacking

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MADISON, Wis., Dec. 15, 2016

A huge security hole in our US elections, which allows alteration of vote totals by outsider or insider entities, was discovered during the Wisconsin recount, according to electronic security investigators from RecountNow.org.

A cellular capability is available as an option on the latest Election Systems and Software (ES&S) DS200 model of optical scanner.

"Cellular connectivity at the precinct level is bad," says IT specialist Jim March-Simpson, who, along with forensic investigator John Brakey, discovered and examined the vulnerability, "but the precinct-level scanners can open an internet channel to the central vote tabulator." March-Simpson is referring to a central unit that collects and adds vote totals from a whole region.

"That is the big disaster," says March-Simpson, "and cannot be tolerated in a US election."

An entity with "government-level resources . . . could completely 'own' the electoral process," March-Simpson says. "If the central vote tabulator does not have the best possible security, then even a good hacker with a normal PC can get in," he reports.

Cellular wireless connections can not only link directly with the internet, but they are built to have a longer range and be harder to detect than regular Wi-Fi networks. There is universal agreement among computer professionals that anything connected to the internet is hackable.

When FBI Director James Comey told the public, and Congress specifically, that none of our election equipment is connected to the internet, perhaps he was unaware of these connections or did not fully understand their implications. It is possible that no government agency ever examined, tested or certified this newest equipment.

There are currently over 26,500 ES&S DS200 optical scan vote-counting machines in 25 states. It is not yet known how many of them have the cellular capability at present, nor whether other equipment models have the same or similar capabilities. DS200 scanners count ballots electronically; ballots are fed in by hand but are counted by a computer inside in accordance with programmable instructions.

"This is a huge discovery that totally changes the rather blanket assurances of election security," stated Jonathan Simon of RecountNow. "Gaping vulnerabilities such as these, coupled with the statistical red flags that have appeared in places where these vulnerable machines have been used to count votes, call for immediate and thorough federal investigation of the electoral results to which they contributed."

March-Simpson and Brakey are working with the support of several non-partisan, nonprofit organizations working to achieve transparent elections, AuditZ, ProtectOurVote, RecountNow, and TrustVote.

[triron]

1. But recount lawyers not given

access to tabulators used in Wisconsin. Correct?

[Coyotl]

2. No one gets to see the secret code owned by the ultra-right vote counting corporations.

It would be bad for business ....

Seriously, the problem is that the recount wasn't a recount, it was a rerun on these tabulators in the very areas that needed to be hand counted.

[triron]

3. And that's exactly where the cyber scientists

said to look when they advised the Clinton camp to challenge the results.
Damn why do the democrats (especially the administration) appear to be going along with this bullshit??

[TheFrenchRazor]

11. they should have done it a long time ago, but they are blocked by GOP every step of the way. nt

[Achilleaze]

7. + 1,000

And for how many years has the DNC known about this?

[Dustlawyer]

19. Many, many years!

Stephen Spoonamore, a Republican, who works protecting credit cards from electronic fraud has testified and spoken about this for many years. In the late 1970's, he was asked to try and hack the first Di-bald electronic voting machine the two RW fundamentalist christian brothers came up with. It took 30 minutes, mainly because it was a 186 computer that ran very slow.

He describes how for 2 million you could rig the Presidential election. He states that given how much is spent on these elections why wouldn't they?

[SticksnStones]

26. Why spend money on a costly ground game

when you can buy the results for $2mil.

Oh, I could just cry ~

[Nay]

104. Exactly. The Dem leadership's failure to demand that this issue be corrected has

doomed them forever.

[elehhhhna]

129. I may get killed here for his but there were anomalies in the democratic primaries

There is a reason some players act weak and unknowing. We are being governed by one entity that plays bad cop/worse cop.

[Nay]

130. You're not going to get killed for saying that. The very fact that Dems don't fight

for us in any area of conflict has certainly made many dems feel like our leadership is indeed the bad cop in bad cop/worse cop. The claim that corporate Dems were trying to rig it for their candidate has definitely been discussed. I think what we fed-up dem constituencies have been trying to convey to the leadership is: "This isn't acceptable any more." But now we have Trump, the worse cop, with a police dept. filled with his business and KKK cronies. Not only will this make our myriad problems worse, it can easily mean the end of civilization. If Trump is president for 4 or 8 years, I feel that there is no going back, there is no fixing the damage, there will be no money to do anything we must do to survive. We will be left to die by the side of the road, so to speak.

[Kolesar]

102. Welcome to the Democratic Underground!

[TheFrenchRazor]

10. yep; it is a f*cking joke. nt

[alfredo]

12. Urosevich brothers are the evil behind these machines.

Bob owns Diebold, Todd is vice president of ES&S. They are both members of a right wing Christian cult, Christian Reconstructionism, that wants the US to be a theocracy.

[TheFrenchRazor]

39. nothing to see here folks, move along... nt

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

34. The fact that our voting machines are controlled by "secret propiratary software" is

something every citizen should rise up against. Most of them are too busy watching reruns of the Apprentice, I guess.

[alfredo]

70. And the coders have an agenda, that is not consistent with our secular constitution.

[HoneyBadger]

4. Not sure I understand the issue

The voting machine can call the central tabulator. Recounts do not look at the central tabulator. If anything, the voting machine recount is a sanity check of the central tabulator. How is cellular connectivity an Internet channel? I certainly have had many cell phones without Internet in my years. My older home alarm system does this. Can anyone knowledgeable clarify this?

[TheFrenchRazor]

9. treason, end of story. nt

[Achilleaze]

105. + 1,000

[Thor_MN]

17. With optical scan tabulators, a recount would make this connectivity meaningless.

The tabulator counts the ballots, then the results are collected, in some fashion. No matter if the tabulator can report results wirelessly or a paper tape is printed and driven to the collection point, one needs to have the ballots to produce the same result. Any wide swings would be easily seen.

Only touch screen machines represent undetectable opportunities for tampering.

[hellofromreddit]

23. Anything communicating over a network has bidirectional protocols

Most protocols have gaps in them, a lot of them left over from decades ago. For example, a classic hack is what's called a script injection. Instead of filling in a "Name" field on a web page with a name, you instead put in a little string of HTML or SQL commands. When the server received the "Name", if it's not smart enough to handle it correctly, it may inadvertently run the code.

Same thing with network data. It has a packet format it expects to get, but if it's not well designed and you send it crap, you can make it do unexpected things. A frightening number of these electronic voting machines run very old software. I'm talking Windows 95-era. Back when people were first figuring out how to make things secure. Even a connection that's only supposed to send still has to receive something back to maintain the connection, leaving just enough exposure for somebody to get his foot in the door.

So, in theory, if the software has enough flaws in it, a hacker could worm through them and execute foreign code on the election machine, thus doing something unexpected. All without ever going near the machine.

This is why very high security systems often have a gap. The computers are simply not connected to any outside network, thus avoiding all potential security flaws. Getting data on and off the network requires using intermediate physical media, which means physical contact with the machine. Ideally, electronic voting machines would be configured that way.

[Coyotl]

48. And possibly a back door in the code. How would we know if we don't get to see the secret code?

The code could be created to specifically allow a back door entry, just like your computer has a back door so the government to spy on you.

[AtheistCrusader]

67. Poll observers looked at the ballots as they came out of the machines and compared the counts to the

tabulation totals.


If this was skepticism about the touchscreen devices, fine. I'm personally skeptical of those, because there's no way for observers to catch a problem. None. Can't be done without observing the machine during actual voting, which we don't allow for the privacy of the voter.

But these optical machines CAN be validated, by humans from BOTH parties, BOTH looking for any way to cast shade on the totals, if the victor wasn't their preferred option. This system is validated, before, after, and on the fly, by partisans from both sides.

Doesn't get more secure than that.

[Coyotl]

100. Except, they don't necessarily count every vote, and they aren't double checked by humans.

So, even though we had a recount, ballots were run through the same machines and no human was allowed to count the votes. Only in some areas did hand counting happen, but not in the places where it mattered, like Milwaukee.

[AtheistCrusader]

123. I'm not talking about hand counting.

You don't need to touch the ballot at all with the optical systems. You can just stand around the output bin and look, which poll workers did to validate totals in some locations.

They didn't 'not allow' poll observers to see the output hopper.

[frankieallen]

78. it was nice of the Repubs to allow Obama to win twice.....

[triron]

5. knr

[colsohlibgal]

6. Our Election Procedures Are A Joke

Election after election, the result is opposite of what the exit polling said, always in the favor of the right wing candidate or issue. Always.

Yes the democrats have largely been a willing victim, just like with the Electoral College scam.

There are ways to make our voting virtually tamper proof and reliable but there has been no real push to get that done from the party that should want to do it.

That would leave the Crosscheck issue, which is kicking otherwise registered democrats (mostly) off voting rolls because the happened to have a similar name to a convicted felon in some other state. it is rarely talked about in the MSM for some reason.

We are like a bank that keeps getting robbed but never does anything about it.

Now it may be too late, we'll see.

[TheFrenchRazor]

8. i'm shocked... not. nt

[DFW]

13. For the 99th time, this is no discovery and it is not news

A relative who does tech work for DARPA told me --in 2002!!!!--"give me a cell phone and a laptop, and I'll make any of those machines give you any result you want it to."

Their hackability--apparently a snap for anyone who is technically savvy, has been known ever since people in Georgia started scratching their heads about how Max Cleland, so clearly favored to retain his Senate seat in Georgia, could lose in such a "surprise (well, not to everyone)" upset.


At most, the fact that, after 14 years, NOTHING has been done about this--now THAT is news. Bad news. Shocking news. Somebody compose a strongly worded letter.

[SharonAnn]

22. I closed an argument with a local elections official, who believed the voting machines were safe,

by saying this;

I can personally program a computer to display one thing, count another thing, and report yet a third thing. I can make you think you voted for Al Gore, count the vote for George W Bush, and report later that the voted was for Ralph Nader. And without robust audit tools, you'll never know that something happened. And with no VVPB (Voter Verified Paper Ballot), there's nothing to audit against, so you're screwed.

And I'm only one of millions who know how to do this kind of programming, so what makes you think you don't need a way to perform a robust audit?

[OldRedneck]

28. Your argument is nonsense.

I'm a member of our county's three-person electoral board.

Prior to each election, we program our machines, test them by running test ballots through them and verifying the count.

The machines are then sealed and the seal numbers recorded. The machines are then locked in the registrar's vault that requires two-person entry.

On election day the machines are removed from the vault, set up at the precincts. Seal numbers are verified to ensure the machines have not been tampered.

Our machines are digital scanners that count the votes using long-time proven scanning tabulation software. No internet connection, no wifi, no connection of any kind . . . unless you are trying to tell me you can access the machine over the power lines.

What makes you think you will get anywhere near my voting machines to program them?

[Aimee in OKC]

32. Just out of curiosity, OldRedneck ...

In the right-hand column of the webpage below are a number of selections for a great many different types and models of voting machines. Would you identify the machine(s) on which your county relies?

https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/voting-equipment/

[zippythepinhead]

44. no reply from redneck

I see redneck has not replied to you. I wonder why?

[Aimee in OKC]

111. Voting machines & vulnerability

The first two don't have any 'downcheck' from VerifiedVoting, but the 3rd & 4th do have some security concerns noted on their pages.

1. Hart InterCivic -- Verity Scan = Optical Scan ( + )
https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/voting-equipment/hart-intercivic/verity-scan-verity-touch-writer-and-verity-central/

2. Unisyn Voting Solution -- OpenElect OVO = Optical Scan ( + )
https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/voting-equipment/unisyn/openelect/


3. Dominion Voting Systems -- ImageCast Precinct = Optical Scan ( -4 )
https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/voting-equipment/dominion/imagecast/

4. Election Systems & Soft. -- DS200 = Optical Scan ( -6 ) {used by one city}
https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/voting-equipment/ess/ds200/

* * * * *
(There are cities & counties in the state which have DRE Touchscreen & Push-button machines.)

[Coyotl]

49. Your argument is nonsense

because not every election uses the same system. Vulnerabilities are different under different systems. Not all ballots are counted at precincts, for example. Sometimes, they are given to the police first, to transport to a central tabulator. Does anyone check if the police officer is a KKK member? No, they are just trusted because they are the police. Would you trust the Milwaukee chief of police, a rabid Trump/Walker supporter, with your vote?

[DFW]

30. Let me guess the response

Either, "well, we'll look into that" or "Well, I haven't seen any evidence of that." These people don't want to be confronted by people who can point out the vulnerabilities in their systems, because that would show up the truth: their machines ARE subject to fraudulent manipulation, and they'll never know it (assuming they want to know about it in the first place--hardly a given, I'm afraid).

[AtheistCrusader]

52. And yet no white hat hackers left one of these machines showing 99999999 for Trump and 0 for Hillary

to illustrate and prove the weakness.

How fascinating.

[KamaAina]

115. I believe there was a county in WI that had over 100% turnout.

Outstanding!

[AtheistCrusader]

122. That can happen naturally.

Provisional ballots.

[TheFrenchRazor]

92. yep; the machines are working exactly as intended. nt

[Ellipsis]

14. Jim March ... Bev... same cast different election.

[Rex]

15. As long as voting machines are owned by right-wing corporations

expect GOPukers to keep 'winning'.

[DFW]

95. Not only owned

Manufactured, as well. Their makers/owners went to court to sue to declare their machines "private property" that no one could forensically examine without express permission from the owner/maker, which is always denied. One big exception: a small, out-of-the-way precint in Ohio in 2004. The hard drive on THAT voting machine WAS examined. It gave Bush 3000 votes in a precinct with 600 registered voters. So what did Ohio do? It called the incident a "glitch," deducted 2400 votes from Bush's margin of "victory," still refused to examine the other machines in the Ohio vote, and gave the state, and with it, the election, to Bush.

[Rex]

112. This is why I doubt every election after 2000.

Nobody ever cleaned up the transparency part of e-voting. Seems everyone just doubled down and got rid of exit polling. THAT told me they knew these elections are bullshit and will never line up with exit polls.

So they simply did away with them.

And then we had this 'election'.

[DFW]

117. Our credibility wasn't exactly enhanced

Even back in 2004, while I was at a meeting in Brussels, I was asked for my prediction on the outcome of the 2004 election. My prediction at the time was "Kerry wins but Bush stays in office." How did I do?

[Rex]

118. Spot on.

I had many foreign friends ask me (after 2000) why WE allowed our elite to hack and steal elections. My reply was the truth - we don't care as much about labor as we do capital. So, therefore, no holiday for our presidential election BUT dam ain't their a holiday for all those dollar bills?

They got it.

[Botany]

16. It is called a backdoor

The machines were designed to be hacked.

[TheFrenchRazor]

40. exactly. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

18. Cellular connectivity is available as an option on my CPAP machine too. So what.

Unless I purchase and install the cellular module (I have not) it still can't do it.

"A cellular capability is available as an option on the latest Election Systems and Software (ES&S) DS200 model of optical scanner."

"There are currently over 26,500 ES&S DS200 optical scan vote-counting machines in 25 states."

How many of the 26,500 machines are the latest model?
Of those, how many have the cellular module plugged in?

Oh there it is:

"It is not yet known how many of them have the cellular capability at present"

So, the number could be zero.


This reads like a fucking naturalnews article about the health benefits of 'alkalizing' your blood.

[Ellipsis]

31. it's not zero.

[AtheistCrusader]

51. Says who?

That article does not claim that a single module is installed. Only that the machine is capable of holding one.

Which is normal.

[Ellipsis]

55. Like I got time to school you ... keep up or don't post

Last edited Sun Dec 18, 2016, 04:53 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.fox9.com/news/221518020-story

[AtheistCrusader]

56. Sorry, I don't read Fox News.

[Ellipsis]

58. ah. and I posted it just for *you*

https://m.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5g98f0/wisconsin_recount_5_voting_machines_with_tampered/

[AtheistCrusader]

59. R/The_Donald? You'r really good at finding crazy right wing sources.

Reddit isn't terribly Trump friendly, but you managed to find a pro-trump shard of it. Bravo.


The Warranty seal isn't the election county seal and doesn't in any way suggest tampering. Whether it shows the modem was actually installed is not clear. The election board will know if that is the case, and should state definitively whether that is the case.

[Ellipsis]

60. yeah you got me..

"Engage people with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the extraordinary moment — that which they cannot anticipate."

[AtheistCrusader]

62. Or, you could just use a reputable source. Or a non-right wing source. Use whichever adjective you

want.

[Ellipsis]

63. Why?

[AtheistCrusader]

64. Because I read the fucking rules.

Don't peddle right-wing talking points, smears, or sources
Do not post right-wing talking points or smears. Do not post content sourced from right-wing publications, authors, or pundits. Exceptions are permitted if you provide a clear reason for doing so that is consistent with the values of this website.
Why we have this rule: News media and the Internet are already awash with conservative propagandists attacking our candidates and our values -- we're not interested in providing them with another outlet. We understand that many of our members might hold some conservative viewpoints on isolated issues, but nobody here should be parroting hateful garbage from the RNC, the NRA, or the Family Research Council. Forum members should expect that the only time they'll have to read a right-wing smear or an article from Breitbart is when someone is pointing and laughing at it.

And also because I read Snopes, rather than FOX FUCKING NEWS.
http://www.snopes.com/wisconsin-recount-observers-find-voting-machines-broken-seals#!

Anything else you'd like to 'school me' on?

As for the presence of the modems in that machine, the machines STILL passed bipartisan observation and counts locally and remotely. So, dry hole, folks.

[Ellipsis]

68. You misconstrue the point.

Of which I have already spoken to when this was originally reported by Wendy at the time.

Broken warranty seals indicate the machine was opened. No big deal in truth.... And was what I stated.

However...

Only after the observer reported this did the county respond that the machines were opened to install modem cards.

THAT is the point.... They were not tampered with. Modem cards exist in at least 5 opscans one county.

Glad you know how to use Google. You should use it more often to find your answers. Before posting inane comments.

[AtheistCrusader]

74. So that's five machines. In a county other than the one in question here.

So how many are involved here in the story in the OP.

Still waiting and google is no help.


I'm also still waiting for an explanation how hacking the machine, tabulation code, or vote totals, gets you past the physical observers that are counting the ballots as they come out of the machine visually, and then comparing to the machine total, and the total submitted and reported to the central office.


You know what pisses me off the most? How the poor buggers that DO all that work must feel right now, with so much unfounded speculation that they failed. To say these modems are in place, widespread, and provide an avenue to alter the results when their physical presence and night-long efforts were specifically to counter that possibility... that's gotta suck. Especially for those of them that are true blue, hard core democrats who did everything they could to ensure the vote was on the up and up.

Now they gotta hear this shit.

[Ellipsis]

76. Why does a machine in a rural county need a modem?

When the Opscans gives a print out of the vote?

I'm not even sure that's HAVA compliant.

You seem angry.


Voting equipment for every county in the state is inventoried. http://elections.wi.gov/elections-voting/voting-equipment/voting-equipment-use with your Google skills you can find out? Hand counted paper ballots my friend are the only guarantee.

We do take great pride in our work in Wisconsin and it's evident when we go vote.

Good luck.

[AtheistCrusader]

79. Hand counting occurred. That's why these optical machines are superior to touchscreens.

This list tells me nothing about which had the cell module installed or how many modules were purchased. It also doesn't tell me the purchase date, so I cannot infer if it is even possible to install the cell module in all of these DS200's.

I am angry, because this OP is an example of 'a lie can go halfway around the world while the truth is putting on it's pants.'. The article does not even claim that a single machine HAD THE CELL MODULE INSTALLED. Not even one. It reports they have (in the latest version) the OPTION to install, which is NOT news even though it is presented as this frightening discovery in the article. Not news.

I am angry because there is an unrealized inference here; if you hack the machines and alter the tabulation totals, the means in which they are counted, or the recorded totals in the memory card, you must needs have accomplices in the form of people who were optically verifying the ballots as they emerged from the machine. Some of those people are our staunchest allies, and I am ANGRY at how they are, whether people realize it or not, calling their integrity into question.

So yeah, I'm angry.

Rural reporting as an option makes unofficial totals available to everyone, faster. It also makes state-wide non-national elections cheaper/easier for elections other than this one. They don't throw the machines out when this election is over. They will be used for all sorts of elections.


Take pride in your poll watchers, and trust in this technology BECAUSE it is verifiable. THESE machines, are. Touchscreens, you won't see me defending, for that reason.

We need to get to the bottom of why we actually lost, and this conversation is not it. It's just going to convince a bunch of people who will never circle back when the analysis is complete, that the process is rigged and not worth participating in. I don't believe that's the answer, and I hope you don't either.

[Ellipsis]

81. You may pass

.


Call them and ask... I'm sure they'll tell you. There is more specific info on configs out there but Im done.


"Rural reporting as an option makes unofficial totals available to everyone, faster. It also makes state-wide non-national elections cheaper/easier for elections other than this one. They don't throw the machines out when this election is over. They will be used for all sorts of elections."


Fuck that. Faster.... we need to stop being an instant gratification society. Faster - fuck that. Hand count period Paper ballots... Period. Cheaper, easier. And leave the complicated down ballot issues out of this conversation as well.

The hardware has on average... has three times the average failure ratio as normal "computers" and scanners are super ,super flaky just sitting on your desk let alone being traipsed all over a county. . Service, maintenance, training, software updates, storage add an INORDINATE amount of back end expenses not appreciated during the life expectancy of the product.

Giving access to maint. technicians for software updates, ballot definition files is OBSCENE in terms of security. You can't equate an expense to an accurate count of the vote if you are going to leverage security.

At least look at a solution like Vote Pad (that's a dated recommendation.)


As to 2016 Election... it strikes me that MICRO-TARGETTING went a long way to influence this election. This is the first time in time we had the technology and processing power to micro-target people in the middle of bumbfuk nowhere. .... but you need lots and lots and lots and lots of resources, individuals and a processing power infrastructure... and lots and lots and of lots of money. That was this years thing, Like Ohio tabulators was the "Man in the Middle" thing. like 2000 Florida, the paper substrate played a role. "Too thick to punch".

This ain't no Bourbon/Whiskey election with one internal US machine verses another... this one is Vodka and we can't have that.

We'll maybe Bloody Mary on a late brunch on an occasional Sunday.

Best.

[AtheistCrusader]

83. I tend to agree on the speed of results piece.

Especially being a west-coaster that is constantly told the outcome of the election before our polls even open.

However, that's not the society we live in, sadly. Getting back to that is a different issue altogether, but I'm on the same page with you on it.


Micro targeting could be enabled by knowing the vote tallies, without ever editing anything on the machine. So there's potentially illicit value there that could sway the election by mobilizing efforts in key areas, concentrating resources, etc. SORT of like gerrymandering but on the fly, by suppressing some groups and encouraging others to squeak across some particular finish line.



My preference is to remove the modems, however many may or may not be installed, and not utilize that technology at all.
Of the electronic machines, I trust the optical tabulators the most.

[Ellipsis]

85. I doubt many are installed. But they pitch hard on thier product page.

I think it takes them three days.

[AtheistCrusader]

87. Instant gratification society.

If we can fix that, I'm all ears. It is clearly a problem.

[TheFrenchRazor]

93. what makes you think that the installation of cell capability would be "recorded" anywhere?

seems like it might be a whole lot more useful if it was known only the manufacturer (GOP supporters), and certain trusted friends.

[HoneyBadger]

103. Cell calls generate cell bills which get paid by ???

[TheFrenchRazor]

110. maybe, but who's going to be checking? we can't even get the votes looked at. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

125. The election board handles, inspects, programs, and controls the physical access to these machines.

I linked the Illinois election board analysis of these machines upthread.

The modems are not some insidious secret. They wouldn't be behind the service door if you wanted to hide the capability. Anyone with a 15$ 'security bit' kit from Harbor Freight can open those doors and look inside.

The 'warranty seal' is NOT the election board inspection seal.

[AtheistCrusader]

80. I'm also angry at the cognitive dissonance.

If these machines are so very fucking vulnerable, why did no black, white, or blue hat hacker break into one of these machines and make the results obviously tampered?

Not. One.

[Ellipsis]

82. Sorry I reject the premmise. Later dude.

[AtheistCrusader]

84. As I reject the premise that these machines are quite so vulnerable as the other posters in this

thread have dismissed them as.

[Ellipsis]

86. Sure.

[forthemiddle]

71. Snopes has debunked this as FALSE

http://www.snopes.com/wisconsin-recount-observers-find-voting-machines-broken-seals/

[Ellipsis]

72. Tampering yes... Installed modem cards no.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2639820

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2640059

[ucrdem]

57. "The seals were broken by the technician who came to install the modem in each machine. . . . ''

“The seals were broken by the technician who came to install the modem in each machine after purchase,” wrote Reid Magney, public information officer for the Wisconsin Elections Commission. “The technician was supposed to replace the seals when he was finished, but neglected to do so.”

Bingo.

[Coyotl]

101. THIS n/t

[RealityChik]

116. Hi, I'm new here but...

I thought we were suppose to be nice to each other...

[Coyotl]

119. Indeed.

Welcome to DU.

[Ellipsis]

121. Awww... come here you. Welcome to DU

[TheFrenchRazor]

41. wow, you sure are a trusting soul... nt

[AtheistCrusader]

53. No, i'm a skeptic.

Until someone shows these machines were actually EQUPPIED with the option, this story is fluff nonsense.

[tenorly]

20. This is exactly the "unintended" flaw that just sank a bill imposing electronic voting in Argentina

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10912203

The Dutch were actually the first to discover this little kink, a decade ago already.

[AtheistCrusader]

21. It's not a 'flaw', it's an option you have to BUY.

Did the State of Wisconsin purchase ANY of the cellular modules for installation in these machines?

Illinois looked at it and found the feature unremarkable. http://www.elections.il.gov/Downloads/AboutTheBoard/PDF/09_21_15AgendaAmended.pdf

I see no evidence the main scanner manufacturer included the option for free.

[tenorly]

24. I'm sure buying such a thing would be cinch for the GOP and its fellow travelers.

The funding coming from the same sources (many of them foreign, even criminal) they're used to hitting up for SuperPAC donations ever since Citizens United.

It's a brave new world, mon ami.

[AtheistCrusader]

25. They have to be purchased and installed by the election board.

Are we assuming the entire election board for the state of Wisconsin is corrupt? Is that where we are now?

They physically inspect the machines, and seal them. Many of them, are *us*.



Come on guys. Seriously.

[tenorly]

27. Memory cards in numerous WI voting machines were in fact shown to have been tampered with.

Keep in mind that Trump "won" Wisconsin by just 22,000 votes out of 3 million cast, such that this kind of tampering would not have to be too widespread for a heist to succeed. A well-choreographed operation in Waukesha County alone would have probably sufficed.

[AtheistCrusader]

54. Links?

Sometimes 'tampering' is 'bob fucked up'.

The Illinois election board evaluation of the same machines that I linked downthread illustrates a couple ways to fuck up. There is little differentiation between a fuckup and malicious tampering in the case of the digitial signature on the memory card.

That evaluation was from 2015. Same machines. There is nothing new here in this thread.

[dionysus]

43. The oengths ppl are going to to deny any weakness in our candidate is breathtaking...

[synergie]

73. As are the lenghts people are going to insist on attacking the candidate with a historic number

of votes, and rejecting simple facts to keep the seething hate and bitterness alive is even more so.

It's like facts are hard, and number too scary to understand, when one can simply reject them all to continue bashing the most qualified candidate who was actually popular enough to win millions of voters over the guys who were whining about rigging a whole lot when they were losing, but not so much when actual allegations and evidence that it happened actually arise.

The utter lack of self awareness of these people still flogging their favorite myth of "weakness" in a candidate is truly astonishing.

[dionysus]

88. Her weakness, IMO lies in hillary the candidate, not the president she would have been.

She was my second choice, but as far as i'm concerned, she would have been a better president than she was a candidate. She would have been like socrates compared to trump. No one is perfect.

And some of it was beyond her control; if the press doesn't report this or that part of her message, it may as well never have been put forth...

[synergie]

107. 65 million people, and tens of thousands of others whose votes were not counted

thought she was a pretty good candidate. Quite literally everyone who knew her, met her, worked with her, or did their homework on her, rather than just letting the media educate them, liked her.

[triron]

108. You are so right!

Russian disinformation screwed her (along with Comey and the media)

[AtheistCrusader]

126. No russian misinformation had to do with my mom voting for Trump.

Her misgivings about Clinton were entirely based on her husband's position on NAFTA, Hillary's defense of that position, and Hillary's subsequent position on TPP.

I tried to convince her that however bad she thought TPP was, Trump was light-years worse, down the road, but I didn't stress it as much as I should have because I didn't know she'd really vote for Trump. Plus, it didn't matter, Washington is a blue state and all our EV's go to Hillary anyway.

But that's a warning sign. Baby boomer union democrats didn't necessarily like Hillary for reasons that we should not ignore by yelling 'russia' over and over.

[dionysus]

120. Yes, that's a ton of people. However, in a sane country we'd be talking about the biggestst

landslide in history. If you asked people a few years ago what the outcome of a trump vs clinton election would look like... after people stopped laughing, the only thing up for debate would be how big she won by...

It shouldn't have been even remotely close. It goes to show how sick people were of "establishment" politicians and the bush and clinton style political dynasties...

Never mind that trump, who has probably bought politicians his whole life, is in no way an "outsider". Anyone involved in the size deals he was doing has plenty of experience with politicians.

[synergie]

131. Kind of tells you how good the "anti-establishment" sales people were. They were just

shouting slogans to people who literally had no clue what words meant. And now they're pretending they had no hand in this outcome. That's just not going to fly. This wasn't a change election, this was an election that showed us exactly how little a hefty portion of the American electorate is engaging in critical thought and the abject failure of the media to do their damned jobs.

I mean really, 8 years of fixing the foul up of Bush, despite all the obstruction, with supreme court at stake, and these morons were like, we need a change from having healthcare, low unemployment etc. Just goes to show exactly how stupid and easily manipulated people truly were. They actually attacked Hillary for telling the truth to coal miners that their jobs were not coming back and it was time to invest in education and new skills. She was attacked for that by both the right and the left, and they voted to screw themselves over. So many did. Guess they'll be learning what happens when they change the "establishment" as Trumpie explodes all of our institutions.

[TheFrenchRazor]

94. seriously??? OMG. nevermind... nt

[AtheistCrusader]

124. Yes, seriously.

[triron]

29. More than this

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/voting-rights-activists-pursue-federal-lawsuit-wisc-after-discovering-way-hack-ballot

[voteearlyvoteoften]

33. K r

[pnwmom]

35. As soon as I used the phrase "cellular connectivity" to my husband, he said:

"Wow! Are you serious?"

He has a PHd in a technical field and the ramifications were immediately clear to him.

This IS a disaster.

[triron]

36. Did you two discuss this

further?

[pnwmom]

37. No, I just emailed him the article a couple minutes ago.

I'm sick and every time I open my mouth I cough -- but I did get those words out.

He isn't happy about Trump, but he likes to make light of everything (probably to counter my doom and gloom.) But this he thought could be a major problem, if it's true.

[triron]

38. From wikipedia

"One form of wholesale fraud possible with optical scan voting systems is during the recording of votes. Douglas W. Jones of the University of Iowa states that if a potential attacker were to gain access to the voting system configuration files, they would be able to "credit one candidate with votes intended for another." He found these files are exposed in the computer system used to prepare the election, making them vulnerable to anyone setting up the election. The files are then transferred to the voting system using removable media, and "anyone with access to these media could potentially attack the system."[15]

Another form of wholesale fraud is during tabulation. Possible attacks have been demonstrated by Harri Hursti[16] and the University of Connecticut.[17]

If an attacker is able to obtain a blank ballot (by theft, counterfeit, or a legitimate absentee ballot) the attacker can then mark the ballot for their chosen candidates and convince (through intimidation or bribery) a voter to take the pre-marked ballot to a polling station, exchange it for the blank ballot issued and return the blank ballot to the attacker. This is known as chain voting[18]"

[UCmeNdc]

42. It is not a matter of who votes but who gets to count the vote

The Republicans understand this better than Democratic politicians and their voters.

[zippythepinhead]

45. no reply from redneck

I see redneck has not replied to the member who challenged him to reply.

[dmosh42]

46. "Waterboarding" would be helpful in solving this!

[LLStarks]

47. NY uses these machines and I've always vouched for their security. Well shit...

[brush]

61. We need to go back to the old, mechanical, lever voting machines NY used to have

Not network connectivity, those were unhackable.

[AtheistCrusader]

65. There are a variety of tried and tested means to hack a mechanical voting system.

'hack' doesn't apply only to electronics.

[brush]

69. Don't see how you'd hack those old lever ones since they are not on networks.

Guess they could tamper with the mechanics or the ballot output but I wouldn't call that "hacking" in the modern sense.

And those ballots have to be hand counted with reps from both sides present.

[AtheistCrusader]

75. Chaining ballots is one of many methods, and could be considered 'hacking'.

Most 'hacking' is human social engineering.

[ucrdem]

50. Remember the modem excuse for the broken seals ?

Those torn foil screw covers photographed by a recount observer? WI officials claimed they'd been broken when modems were installed. So it sounds like their crappy voting machines could be hacked with a cell phone while the election was in progress -- in response to instructions from that crack "digital" team in Houston, would be my guess, or maybe directly from Houston.

[AtheistCrusader]

66. From snopes

http://www.snopes.com/wisconsin-recount-observers-find-voting-machines-broken-seals#!

Wrong location, and the machine stores the images of the ballots, so even if the vote total is altered at tabulation, the copies of the ballots still exist and can be re-counted.

They also, per snopes, observed the count totals increasing, and poll observers from both parties verified the ballots visually as they came out of the machine.



For all the claims of hacking, and how perfectly easy it is to hack these machines, it's interesting to me that none of the machines were pegged to TILT, with 99999/00000 count by some white hat hacker demonstrating the machines are vulnerable.

Not one.

I don't know what circles you run in, but the penetration and zero day exploit testing folks I work with wouldn't hesitate to do that, to illustrate to the world that the machines were vulnerable.

'Hacking' these machines requires

1. Collusion of the election board.
2. Collusion of the poll observers from both parties who visually inspected the ballots against the totals.


Sorry. Not buying it. Even if the modems were installed.

[ucrdem]

90. Snopes quotes the official admission: "ES&S sent out a technician to install modems in the scanners"

And therein lies the problem.

On 5 December 2016, a public information officer for the Wisconsin Elections Commission responded to our inquiries regarding the voting machines used and reports of broken seals in St. Croix:

Here’s our statement on St. Croix County voting equipment questions:

Questions have been raised by some recount observers in St. Croix County about the security of voting equipment. The Wisconsin Elections Commission has been in contact with the St. Croix County Clerk and the equipment manufacturer, Elections Systems & Software (ES&S), and is confident that this is not an issue that would have affected the accuracy of the results reported by the equipment.

St. Croix County municipalities use DS200 scanners from ES&S. After the equipment was purchased, ES&S sent out a technician to install modems in the scanners, which are used on Election Night to transmit unofficial results to the county. In order install a modem, the technician was required to break a “warranty seal” on a door on the scanner. Unfortunately, the technician apparently did not replace those seals on the doors after completing his work.

[rainy]

77. We should just ask Carl Rove. He knows!

[Exilednight]

89. Statement by Loretta Lynch about voting machine hacks.

Fortunately we didn't see the sort of technical interference that I know people had concerns about also in terms of voting machines and the like. But a lot of education went on about that, a lot of training went on about that; and a significant number of states did reach out to DHS and talk with them about those issues.

[TheFrenchRazor]

97. well, i guess it's all goood then... NOT!!! nt

[ucrdem]

91. WI election officials admit they installed modems in the voting machines, per Snopes:

On 5 December 2016, a public information officer for the Wisconsin Elections Commission responded to our inquiries regarding the voting machines used and reports of broken seals in St. Croix:

Here’s our statement on St. Croix County voting equipment questions:

Questions have been raised by some recount observers in St. Croix County about the security of voting equipment. The Wisconsin Elections Commission has been in contact with the St. Croix County Clerk and the equipment manufacturer, Elections Systems & Software (ES&S), and is confident that this is not an issue that would have affected the accuracy of the results reported by the equipment.

St. Croix County municipalities use DS200 scanners from ES&S. After the equipment was purchased, ES&S sent out a technician to install modems in the scanners, which are used on Election Night to transmit unofficial results to the county.

http://www.snopes.com/wisconsin-recount-observers-find-voting-machines-broken-seals#!

And if their voting machines had modems, they were hackable.

[TheFrenchRazor]

96. Game. F-ing. Over. how can ANYBODY trust these machines?? nt

[AtheistCrusader]

127. Because the machines passed physical observation by the poll observers.

If the totals don't match the output; problem.
If the totals submitted to the board don't match the machine totals; problem.

No reported problem.

It's not like the machine has a fucking eraser, and can re-fill a different bubble on the paper ballot.

[HoneyBadger]

98. Are we talking about dialup?

[ucrdem]

99. Is it 1986?

We're talking about cellular connectivity. What exactly was installed in these things I don't know, but I suspect that "modem" is a word carefully chosen by attorneys or publicists to convey a feeling of harmless AOL-era insignificance.

[TheFrenchRazor]

109. don't know, but not very much data would need to be sent. nt

[Kashkakat v.2.0]

106. Who exactly is "recount now" - no names, no location given nt

[Coyotl]

114. A new offshot of an Election Integrity group. Jonathan Simon heads it, I think.

Several long term EI activists involved. Look them up.

[ElementaryPenguin]

113. And the FBI had reported prior to the election...

That the Russians had hacked voting machine manufacturers...

Obviously, the Russians would have been aware of the cellular connectivity! (What an incredibly STUPID (or brilliant - depending on the intent - feature!)

[MFM008]

128. Comey should

Shut the fuck up. He did a worse job on our elections......