quote:
So is the thumb drive at each machine? Who typically would be the person to insert and takeout the thumb drive? But what you are saying is the switching can happen inside the machine without internet access.

This is a good point - each machine has a very tight chain of custody and any variance would be uncovered quickly so any nefarious thumb drive attempt would be detected

Plus, if a vote was fractioned off- the post election audit would note that. Also - there is a finite number of ballots cast , this is good base number and any deviation is exposed.

Our election ballots are secure- now, to your point…having ballot harvesting can be problematic and easily frauded (pay for vote sequences) ….that conspiracy is easier to logically support

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by GumboPot

Member since Mar 2009

119044 posts

Posted on 5/31/22 at 9:35 am to 850SaintsGator

quote:
This is a good point - each machine has a very tight chain of custody and any variance would be uncovered quickly so any nefarious thumb drive attempt would be detected

The technician using the thumb drive wouldn't even know he was updating software to change algorithms. He simply can be given orders that precinct(s) such and such need their "firmware" updated. All the technician is charged with is downloading the firmware to at thumb drive, going to the precinct, showing credentials, updating each machine with the current version of firmware and signing out.

The precinct personnel and the IT technician have no clue what the firmware update entails. Just like when you get an software update on your phone, PC, GPS, Fish Finder, etc. you have no clue what the software updates entail. In fact that information can be kept secret to one person.

This post was edited on 5/31/22 at 9:37 am

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by TenWheelsForJesus

Member since Jan 2018

6650 posts

Posted on 5/31/22 at 2:39 pm to 850SaintsGator

quote:
This is a good point - each machine has a very tight chain of custody and any variance would be uncovered quickly so any nefarious thumb drive attempt would be detected

It's been shown that multiple users shared the same login. That's not a tight chain of custody.

The user logs were also deleted. It's hard to detect nefarious activity when the people in charge of elections intentionally delete evidence to prevent others from verifying all the activity on the voting machine.

quote:
Plus, if a vote was fractioned off- the post election audit would note that. Also - there is a finite number of ballots cast , this is good base number and any deviation is exposed.

Unless, of course, a state, say Georgia for example, illegally shredded ballots before they could be completely audited.

0 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board