*** ALERT ***  What to Expect When Citizens Approach Election Officials to get rid of the machines. Dr. Walter Daugherty, Computer Scientist, provides advise for citizens when approaching counties about voting machines. Citizens can't just go to their county yelling "These machines have got to go"! The election officials will state, "There isn't anything wrong with the machines; you can trust them". PROVIDE EVIDENCE: 
#1 MESA COUNTY COLORADO:  Forensic voting databases images (exact clone copy of disk) were obtained by Tina Peters in Mesa County CO (tinapeters.us) before Dominion did update to the voting system before Nov 2020 election. SUMMARY: In both the Nov 2020 election and the following primary election, second tabulation and adjudication databases were discovered. After about 25% of the vote were counted in the 1st databases, some but not all the records were copied to 2nd unauthorized set of databases and election records were deleted from the databases image BEFORE the Dominion update and not on the databases image AFTER the Dominion update. THE MACHINES CAN'T BE TRUSTED. 
#2 PROFESSOR HALDERMAN REPORT REGARDING GEORGIA 2020 DOMINION ELECTION MACHINE LAWSUIT: Professor Halderman is a Computer Science Professor and active in elections for many years. Halderman examined voting machines and discovered at least 9 critical national security vulnerabilities; any hacker anywhere in the world could break into the machine and alter files on it. Judge sealed the report. Halderman begged the judge to send the report to CISA (part of DHS) and Dominion so they could fix the critical 9 vulnerabilities and the judge refused. The report was kept under seal for almost 2 years; the judge then sent the report to CISA who contracted with MITRE to do an analysis of the Halderman Report, which basically said you don't have to worry about the machines 'if they are completely locked down', which is not realistic. MITRE didn't test the machines to see if the vulnerabilities exist; they didn't issues patches to close vulnerabilities that allow bad actors access to the machines. Halderman and numerous others engaged in the computer security field took great exception to the MITRE Report and issued a public letter rebuttal saying the problems were not addressed or solved.
#3 PROFESSOR HALDERMAN'S PHD COMPUTER SCIENCE STUDENT HACKED A VOTING SCANNER: Reprograms a Cannon voting scanner to swaps bubbles on a ballot.
#4 CAST VOTE RECORDS are an electronic image of a voter's selection, equivalent to a spreadsheet where the 1st row indicates who the first voter voted for, the 2nd row indicates who the 2nd voter voted for, etc. The votes are shuffled in blocks of 100 - 200 to maintain anonyminity and tere is no connection to a voter. Manipulation was detected in so many counties across the country using these cast vote records.  
It was determined a weak random number generator was used to shuffle the cast vote records and Professor Halderman's students were able to unshuffle the records. Dr. Daugherty's solution would be to select a stronger random number generator; however Professor Halderman's solution was to shuffle all the cast vote records at one time, which cripples the cast vote record. In Maricopa County in 2020,  there was strong evidence of manipulation in all the races Dr Daugherty looked at. Cast vote records are valuable as they allow you to look at the sequence of votes, rather than recounts and risk limiting audits which only look at the final total.  In 2022, Maricopa County deleted the sequence number column and shuffled 2 million ballots, which crippled the cast vote record and made it impossible to look for the same type of manipulation done in 2020.
#5 Accreditation of Voting Machines. A Vendor submits a voting machine to The Elections Assistance Commission (EAC) and the EAC has a certified lab test the machine. There were only 2 vendors certified to test voting machines in xxx If it passes the 'standards', then the EAC certifies the voting machine. Many states, including Ohio require EAC certification for all voting machines used in Ohio.

Clay Parikh worked in Voting System Test Labs (VSTL) from 2008-2017. look over all election standards, requirements FCC, HAVA which formed EAC, Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) 1.0, which was the only version accredited until 2.0 - even though they had reiterations in between 1.0 and 2.0. EAC is co-chaired by NIST who does the laboratory inspections and provides an accredited certificate to the laboratory that says they are qualified.     
The EAC Voting System Test Laboratory Program System Manual states in Section 3.6.1 that a certificate of accreditation will be issued to each accredited laboratory and will be signed by the Chair of the Commission. SLI Compliance and Pro V&V are the only two testing laboratories listed as active; however, their SLI Compliance Certificate was signed by the Executive Director and Pro V&V  Certificate was signed by the Acting Executive Director, which make the laboratories certifying the voting machines invalid. The EAC cannot certify that the voting systems meet the requirements to be certified because the laboratory that tested the systems was not certified.

Project plan has to be approved by the testing lab. There are requirements in the test report that should be done. Test reports for voting machines in Missouri are missing the t Missouri test reports not including the appropriate tables for the requirements.  . 
  
MESA COUNTY COLORADO REPORT #3 
HALDERMAN REPORT ON GEORGIA MACHINES
MITRE ANALYSIS
REBUTTAL TO MITRE ANALYSIS
student swaps bubbles on a ballot video

Tags: ELECTION MACHINES, SECURITY