Inventor of QR hacks into Dominion voting machine, live, during GA state election hearing.

a reply to: Hypntick

Thanks for the explanation. I did understand how it was done and simply thought folks here would enjoy the titbit. I am constantly amazed at how lax many companies and governments are with their IT security. For that matter how lax folks are with their own home IT security; there are constantly stories about baby monitors and thermostats and security camera letting hackers into their home and now we have a voting machine displaying the exact same opening.

I don't know how Dominion can claim it wasn't online since they know they can remote diagnose problems as well...

Amazing.

originally posted by: Hypntick
a reply to: RickinVa

And yet his claims are entirely probable, just go to the voting village at Defcon one year.
Defcon 26 Voting Village Report
Defcon 27 Voting Village Report
It's absolutely astounding what can be done with these machines, even if they are not connected. They bring in 100 different machines from different vendors and every single one of them has been compromised. They are all insecure by design and it's been known about for years, yes to Gryphon's point since even before the 2016 election. Why the snip are we still using these things? You legitimately cannot make them secure in any way with current technology.

a reply to: rounda

So what you're saying is that there is no encryption in the middle at all? If the traffic was encrypted in transit, MitM attacks are much less likely to succeed as you would have to break the encryption, change the data, and re-encrypt. Significantly more complex, but still possible. Even the fact they were able to enumerate the topology via the thermostat should have been impossible with the proper security controls. Makes me want to start yelling...sorry I've been doing infosec with a specialization in ICS and IoT security for almost a decade now and it ticks me off to no end when government or high end businesses fail even the basics of security for these things.

Doesn't matter....when your expert has an easily proven past case of fraud and making false statements....it's hard to believe anything he claims.

A lawyer would eat him alive on the witness stand.

a reply to: Identified

Remote diagnostics is fairly common for vendor equipment, that's why there is such a need for proper segmentation. I know in the power industry they typically have an on-demand VPN that the site in question has to contact the vendor, and the site initiates the VPN connection to allow the vendor in. So during normal operations that piece of equipment has no route to the outside world, it's essentially disconnected, but can be temporarily connected for diagnostics. The equipment that's always on and always sending telemetry out (predictive failure monitoring for example), typically has to traverse in the Perdue model 3 network segments and only in a single direction (some companies use a data diode to achieve this). That's useful when you want to receive data from a machine but do not want the capability of sending data to that machine.

The power grid in this country isn't the most well protected thing on the planet, yet they're still able to do some basic security measures, and the vendors are getting better about including those features in their products because the clients are now demanding them. It's sad that the voting infrastructure can't be at least as secure as the power infrastructure.

Looks like many votes got "diagnosticated" 😈👹

originally posted by: rounda

As in, Dominion representatives lied, under oath, when they claimed these machines are not connected to the internet..

Whatever, there's nothing to say that Dominion lied, You don't need to be connected to the internet to be hacked.

originally posted by: Hypntick
a reply to: rounda

So what you're saying is that there is no encryption in the middle at all? If the traffic was encrypted in transit, MitM attacks are much less likely to succeed as you would have to break the encryption, change the data, and re-encrypt. Significantly more complex, but still possible. Even the fact they were able to enumerate the topology via the thermostat should have been impossible with the proper security controls. Makes me want to start yelling...sorry I've been doing infosec with a specialization in ICS and IoT security for almost a decade now and it ticks me off to no end when government or high end businesses fail even the basics of security for these things.

So my understanding is that there are three parts to these machines.

You've got the actual voting terminal the user inputs the vote into, then the tabulator, then the adjudication server.

It sounds like Jovan got access to the voting terminal, which means they can change the data before it gets sent for the count. Which means it hasn't been encrypted yet.

But these IoT devices are a serious issue. They run stripped down versions of Linux, and they all basically allow access through firewalls. And most people dont even change the default admin passwords. Basically, easy targets.

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: rounda

As in, Dominion representatives lied, under oath, when they claimed these machines are not connected to the internet..

Whatever, there's nothing to say that Dominion lied, You don't need to be connected to the internet to be hacked.

Nothing except testimony in a state legislature hearing.

a reply to: smurfy

That's very true, look at Stuxnet. It was a USB drive that was the initial vector of compromise. All you need is to pay off the right people to have physical access. Being connected to the internet just makes it easier and there's less of a paper trail of money to follow.

a reply to: a325nt

I watched this earlier. All if the other testimonies I watched were if credible people imo.

I liked the guy who did numbers on people that all had unique first and last names. Basically saying it's not natural to not have instances of people that DO NOT have the same names, in large numbers.

He claimed the info is in state websites and you can enter it into excel and see this odd patterns.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Gryphon66

Buuuuutttttt....they should not be. So, whose issue is that really? If we look at the law it is the states. Not the Federal Government as designed.

The change started in 01. I think most people are just waking up to it....

Right. For example, for the last 18 years in Georgia, the old ES&S machines were used. They are totally electronic and cannot produce a paper trail. They've been found with "internet" capability as well.

I'm not sure it's fair to say that we've only "just woken up to it" though. We've known that past election systems were hacked.

originally posted by: slatesteam

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: slatesteam

I'm not suggesting that voting machines aren't connected to the internet at all.

Many if not most are.

All across the country.

So you are or are not denying the OPs claim? I’m still super confused... for a shill you’re fairly deft and dodgy at holding down a staked claim....

It's against T&C to call other members shills.

I said that it has been well-known that the ability of electronic voting systems to connect to the internet in some cases, and that it was known long before this election. To prove that is common knowledge, I posted MSM articles from NBC and Bloomberg.

In my opinion, which seems to be what you're going for, Mr. Pulitzer pulled a "stunt" today with the pad in the polling center. I haven't seen enough details of what he actually claimed to do to find out what I think of that act.

It was stunty. He has been an "expert witness" for the Giuliani lawsuits as well as the Kraken lawsuits. He is not a disinterested party. No one should be shocked that some systems in use in polling places connect to the internet.

Besides that, his claim is that he can determine the validity of millions of ballots in a few hours with his special "technique." That he has offered to do so "for free" makes it even more suspect. I would reserve judgement on the process until more details are made available on his "process."

Aside from all that, Article II of the Georgia Constitution does say that the ballots are secret. Since we know nothing about Mr. Pulitzers "process" (or it's accuracy) we can't say that the ballots would remain private. His claim that the actual paper ballots are somehow the "property" of anyone who wants to look at them is simply not true.

a reply to: rounda

Not just there, they state that on their website:

Voting systems are, by design, meant to be used as closed systems that are not networked (meaning not connected to the Internet). It is technologically impossible to "see" votes being counted in real-time and/or to "flip" them.

Dominion Voting Systems

Mr. Pulitzer was pretty vague about what he was "demonstrating" at the Subcommittee hearing today and he makes a lot of fallacious arguments. Association with Rudy G. would tend to support my comment of the matter being "stunty" above.

I should add "in my opinion." Perhaps we'll see how successful his process is; I hope it's more successful than Allied Security Operations Group. I'm concerned, however, that they are all too similar.

originally posted by: rounda

originally posted by: Gryphon66
We've known for a long time that some of the electronic voting machines connect to the internet.

It's not a new revelation, though this is being portrayed as a "shocking new discovery."

Pulitzer has been part of the Kraken lawsuits.

Mainstream media low-hanging fruit.

America Won't Give Up its Hackable WIreless Voting Machines Bloomberg Jan 3,2020

Odd, because the Dominion rep stated, under oath in Michigan, that they had no internet capability.

Yes. Not suppose to have any blue tooth ability. Even if he's not aware that the machine had blue tooth, some engineer type could probably easily modify the machine later. We have to make sure this never happens again. Trump won the election.

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: rounda

originally posted by: Gryphon66
We've known for a long time that some of the electronic voting machines connect to the internet.

It's not a new revelation, though this is being portrayed as a "shocking new discovery."

Pulitzer has been part of the Kraken lawsuits.

Mainstream media low-hanging fruit.

America Won't Give Up its Hackable WIreless Voting Machines Bloomberg Jan 3,2020

Odd, because the Dominion rep stated, under oath in Michigan, that they had no internet capability.

Yes. Not suppose to have any blue tooth ability. Even if he's not aware that the machine had blue tooth, some engineer type could probably easily modify the machine later. We have to make sure this never happens again. Trump won the election.

What part of the system has Bluetooth capability? Is there any evidence of someone connecting to one of the Georgia systems via Bluetooth?

These same machines that are compromised according to you were used in counties and States where Trump won.

Are you saying that somehow, Bluetooth or internet capabilities makes the results questionable for one candidate but not the other?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: slatesteam

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: slatesteam

I'm not suggesting that voting machines aren't connected to the internet at all.

Many if not most are.

All across the country.

So you are or are not denying the OPs claim? I’m still super confused... for a shill you’re fairly deft and dodgy at holding down a staked claim....

It's against T&C to call other members shills.

I said that it has been well-known that the ability of electronic voting systems to connect to the internet in some cases, and that it was known long before this election. To prove that is common knowledge, I posted MSM articles from NBC and Bloomberg.

In my opinion, which seems to be what you're going for, Mr. Pulitzer pulled a "stunt" today with the pad in the polling center. I haven't seen enough details of what he actually claimed to do to find out what I think of that act.

It was stunty. He has been an "expert witness" for the Giuliani lawsuits as well as the Kraken lawsuits. He is not a disinterested party. No one should be shocked that some systems in use in polling places connect to the internet.

Besides that, his claim is that he can determine the validity of millions of ballots in a few hours with his special "technique." That he has offered to do so "for free" makes it even more suspect. I would reserve judgement on the process until more details are made available on his "process."

Aside from all that, Article II of the Georgia Constitution does say that the ballots are secret. Since we know nothing about Mr. Pulitzers "process" (or it's accuracy) we can't say that the ballots would remain private. His claim that the actual paper ballots are somehow the "property" of anyone who wants to look at them is simply not true.

The ballots don't have identifying information, if I'm not mistaken. Voter ID is encoded.

The issue with the secrecy was matching the envelopes with the ballots.

a reply to: rounda

Indeed. The matter of the secret ballot speaks to the comment Pulitzer made regarding ballots access being a property right of the voters.

I'll be interested to see if anything develops out of the Pulitzer promises.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: rounda

Indeed. The matter of the secret ballot speaks to the comment Pulitzer made regarding ballots access being a property right of the voters.

I'll be interested to see if anything develops out of the Pulitzer promises.

I don't understand how you interpreted what he said?

He said those ballots are the property of the voters, then explained what he meant...

All documents pertaining to the vote are to be retained for 22 months in order to insure the process in case an audit is required.

Tough to verify election integrity when access to those documents is being denied at all levels.

If there is evidence of fraud, or reasonable doubt in a free and fair election, denying access to a real audit is, in essence denying Americans the right to a free and fair election.

a reply to: rounda

The ballots are not property of "the voters" to the extent that you or I can go down to the elections center and demand to see ballots. That's not how it works. The only people allowed to review the votes are State and Elections officials because of their oaths to uphold the law. It short, it's a specious claim, as were many of his comments.

It's not tougher to verify election integrity than it ever has been, not to mention, the election integrity has been verified. The votes have been certified. The legal process has been followed step by step.

The machines in Georgia in 2016 and 2018 didn't provide a paper trail nor audit. We know that foreign actors interfered in those elections via hacking. Some of the same officials involved now were involved them.

Why is it, suddenly, that the Governor, the Secretary of State, Elections officials and workers across the State are suspect with no legal basis?

The goalposts get moved everytime a Trump campaign demand is met. Signatures get audited, no fraud is found, that's not enough. Votes get recounted and audited as directed in Georgia law and rules and regs ... and suddenly, that's not good enough.

It seems to me that it's quite clear that the only reason all these questions come up is that folks are having a hard time accepting that Trump lost, because I can tell you that some of the same people here were shouting down claims of fraud in 2016 and 2018.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: rounda

The ballots are not property of "the voters" to the extent that you or I can go down to the elections center and demand to see ballots. That's not how it works. The only people allowed to review the votes are State and Elections officials because of their oaths to uphold the law. It short, it's a specious claim, as were many of his comments.

It's not tougher to verify election integrity than it ever has been, not to mention, the election integrity has been verified. The votes have been certified. The legal process has been followed step by step.

The machines in Georgia in 2016 and 2018 didn't provide a paper trail nor audit. We know that foreign actors interfered in those elections via hacking. Some of the same officials involved now were involved them.

Why is it, suddenly, that the Governor, the Secretary of State, Elections officials and workers across the State are suspect with no legal basis?

The goalposts get moved everytime a Trump campaign demand is met. Signatures get audited, no fraud is found, that's not enough. Votes get recounted and audited as directed in Georgia law and rules and regs ... and suddenly, that's not good enough.

It seems to me that it's quite clear that the only reason all these questions come up is that folks are having a hard time accepting that Trump lost, because I can tell you that some of the same people here were shouting down claims of fraud in 2016 and 2018.

I suggest you watch the other testimonies in that video.

They ran 15,000 votes through the machines 5 times and never received the same results. Then raised objections about certification to the Secretary of State, so he sent the cops and forced them to certify.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: rounda

originally posted by: Gryphon66
We've known for a long time that some of the electronic voting machines connect to the internet.

It's not a new revelation, though this is being portrayed as a "shocking new discovery."

Pulitzer has been part of the Kraken lawsuits.

Mainstream media low-hanging fruit.

America Won't Give Up its Hackable WIreless Voting Machines Bloomberg Jan 3,2020

Odd, because the Dominion rep stated, under oath in Michigan, that they had no internet capability.

Yes. Not suppose to have any blue tooth ability. Even if he's not aware that the machine had blue tooth, some engineer type could probably easily modify the machine later. We have to make sure this never happens again. Trump won the election.

What part of the system has Bluetooth capability? Is there any evidence of someone connecting to one of the Georgia systems via Bluetooth?

These same machines that are compromised according to you were used in counties and States where Trump won.

Are you saying that somehow, Bluetooth or internet capabilities makes the results questionable for one candidate but not the other?

Wi Fi actually. They can receive and send data from the machine. What are you afraid of? Let them do a real audit and examine the ballots. They will find the illegal ballots. We all know that it was Biden that needed to cheat. Trump was winning by a landslide before plan B went into effect.