Posted on 11/12/2020 10:14:55 AM PST by grundle
After many claims that voting systems were not connected to the internet, it turns out that they really were connected.
I am genuinely curious to know why they lied about it.
NBC News reported:
‘Online and vulnerable’: Experts find nearly three dozen U.S. voting systems connected to internet
A team of election security experts used a “Google for servers” to challenge claims that voting machines do not connect to the internet and found some did.
By Kevin Monahan, Cynthia McFadden and Didi Martinez
January 10, 2020
It was an assurance designed to bolster public confidence in the way America votes: Voting machines “are not connected to the internet.”
Then Acting Undersecretary for Cybersecurity and Communications at the Department of Homeland Security Jeanette Manfra said those words in 2017, testifying before Congress while she was responsible for the security of the nation’s voting system.
So many government officials like Manfra have said the same thing over the last few years that it is commonly accepted as gospel by most Americans. Behind it is the notion that if voting systems are not online, hackers will have a harder time compromising them.
But that is an overstatement, according to a team of 10 independent cybersecurity experts who specialize in voting systems and elections. While the voting machines themselves are not designed to be online, the larger voting systems in many states end up there, putting the voting process at risk.
That team of election security experts say that last summer, they discovered some systems are, in fact, online.
“We found over 35 [voting systems] had been left online and we’re still continuing to find more,” Kevin Skoglund, a senior technical advisor at the election security advocacy group National Election Defense Coalition, told NBC News.
“We kept hearing from election officials that voting machines were never on the internet,” he said. “And we knew that wasn’t true. And so we set out to try and find the voting machines to see if we could find them on the internet, and especially the back-end systems that voting machines in the precinct were connecting to to report their results.”
they wanted to do this in Houston
Connected to internet so a hungarian-born marxist could log on and make the appropriate changes?
In my job, we wanted systems to be accessible online so that updating Firmware was possible, otherwise the hardware needed to be opened up to access the update port. (harder to do)
Houston they wanted to deliver the results this way where the numbers could be compromised without any paper trail.
It was contrary to state law and I cannot find articles about it right now because of Googlesearch bias. Everything is about current arguments from Ken Paxton about ballot drop off locations, etc.
Adding “intranet” to the search (which is how results were supposed to be transmitted) does not yield results.
And wouldn’t you know it that the changed to how Haris County used to do elections has changed the past couple of cycles because of Democrats running this offices now.
Their systems provide live vote counts. There has to be a communication channel for that to happen
It's suppose to be hard to do? I guess you don't do cyber & are not involved in a Critical Infrastructure industry. Once acceptance testing or certification for use is complete no updates are allowed without rigorous re-testing. Anything other than that is dangerous and, I would think, a violation of law. (CISSP)
Because if they are connected the data can be manipulated.
The votes were changed. Wonder if anyone cares but the voters themselves?
Easy; Have a door with screen inside. Unlock door, read numbers, make a phone call to report numbers to SOS office.
Oh wait, I know. Pretty fraud-proof as I recall.
One of the MANY complaints that TX SOS machine examiners had with Dominion, the machine used in all States in question, is that they could connect to the internet. TX denied dominion certification twice in 2019.
This is the second time
https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/forms/sysexam/oct2019-hurley.pdf
https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/forms/sysexam/oct2019-mechler.pdf
https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/forms/sysexam/oct2019-pinney.pdf
https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/forms/sysexam/oct2019-sneeringer.pdf
https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/forms/sysexam/oct2019-watson.pdf
https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/forms/sysexam/oct2019-vassar.pdf
Reports from the 6 SOS examiners. Not super long and in fact one is a single page statement. Dominion is a mess.
Which witch , a Kalifornicatia congresscritter , has the husband who cashed in on the recent vax propaganda ?
https://twitter.com/CodeMonkeyZ/status/1326915779854557186
Ron
@CodeMonkeyZ
What if election fraud was as easy as dragging votes from one folder to another?
Who are the county representatives (between 2 and 6 people per county) that had official training for the ICC device in their county?
Do you trust those two to six people with your election results?
9:52 AM · Nov 12, 2020
The results can be manipulated and the firmware can be changed
Bookmark
Bookmark
They lied because they could.
bkmk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.