Posted on 11/12/2020 10:14:55 AM PST by grundle
Who didn’t know that computerized vote machines are connected to the internet?
Isn’t that their whole reason for being?
There has to be a communication channel for that to happen
—
There are five point of entry at anyone of them from the manager at a poling place to overseas third party querying Frankfort servers anything and all things can be hanged - there is no security stopping them
In Harris County the recent election chief was the DNC finance chairman of Texas. He was selected not elected and did not run for the seat for 2021.
No. Intranet isn’t internet.
And you can collect data locally to an external computer or storage device and upload those results.
Need to have the ballot boxes avoiding tainted access.
Not sure, but many of the ink-a-blot and punch ballots go into tabulation machines and from there to unknown servers - the only safeguard is the polling place keeping the ballots ... in many, if not all, Dem polling places ballots are destroyed after bring put through tabulation machine.
The electronic tabulation machine is the weak point in fool-proof.
WHY? WHY? WHY?
WHY? WHY? WHY?
Voting file/database manipulation. Period.
We were in a development program, and yes we did not want unverified firmware changes, but we also wanted the changes we found necessary to be relatively easy to install. In this program every touch of the hardware required paperwork and observation. When a digital problem could be solved with a message from the test equipment we were generally happier to see it approved. We were not in an environment where any employee would deliberately make a change. But we were also not an election counting team working for a democrat state.
Having the capability to install updates via the data bus did require each item to allow the data bus access to the firmware. companies who considered their firmware to be proprietary would not want to see this option made available.
As I understand things, Dominion S/W wanted the operator to have this feature and as we see it could be used for election fraud.
As I understand it punch ballots NOT fraud proof.
Hand count. Twice. Match. Certified triple check tally carried by Brinks. There you go. Or have bankers keep up with votes with audits and jail times for mistakes that are certified. My bank account is always correct somehow.
I agree with you about testing after any SW modification. My understanding of this set up is that if a critical change was needed, (like you are in an election and the other guy is doing much better than you expected) then you may have to make a change and slip it in when no one is watching and then retesting is out of the question. But this is a criminal modification we are talking about.
What bothers me is I cannot think of any way that we could prove this if they have several days (and nights) to cover things up with forged ballots and such.
In an HONEST election, there would be no change to software AFTER the voting process has begun.
If the machines are determined to be flawed then paper ballots would have to be substituted.
But that is in an HONEST election.
Always have a backup process ready. Even in the event of power outage people should be able to vote paper ballots and not just provisionally.
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.