Senate Election Security Briefing Clip 3 – Intro

Senate Election Security Briefing Clip 6

This video demonstrates how easily voting machines can be programmed to rig an election. Shelby County Election Commissioner Bennie Smith demonstrates how. Audience members choose who will win the election and the malware on the voting machine declares that candidate the winner.

DEFCON 2025 Voting Village show Jessica Denson just how easy it is to hack a voting machine widely used in the 2024 election. Also, FSFP Senior Election Security Advisor Susan Greenhalgh debuts their new review of the weakness of post-election audits in swing states, and Election Integrity Foundation Executive Director Catherine Terranova explains why acknowledging voting machine vulnerabilities is far from conspiracy.

Hacking Democracy

Mar 20, 2014 – This is the hack that proved America’s elections can be stolen using a few lines of computer code. The ‘Hursti Hack’ in this video is an excerpt from the feature length Emmy nominated documentary ‘Hacking Democracy’. The hack of the Diebold voting system in Leon County, Florida, is real. It was verified by computer scientists at UC Berkeley. To watch the full movie, visit http://www.hackingdemocracy.com

The disturbingly shocking HBO documentary HACKING DEMOCRACY bravely tangles with our nation’s ills at the heart of democracy. The film the Diebold corporation doesn’t want you to see, this revelatory journey follows tenacious Seattle grandmother Bev Harris and her band of extraordinary citizen-activists as they set out to ask one simple question: How does America count its votes? From Florida and California to Ohio and Washington State, filmmakers Simon Ardizzone, Russell Michaels and Robert Cohen starkly reveal a broken system riddled with secrecy, incompetent election officials, and electronic voting machines that can be programmed to steal elections. Equipped only with a powerful sense of righteous outrage, the activists take on voting machine industry, exposing alarming security holes in America’s trusted voting machines. They even go dumpster diving at a county election official’s office in Florida, uncovering incendiary evidence of miscounted votes. But proving our votes can be stolen without a trace culminates in a duel between Diebold voting machines and a computer hacker from Finland – with America’s democracy at stake.

‘Hacking Democracy’ was nominated for an Emmy award for Outstanding Investigative Journalism.

“Disturbing stuff. . . It’s not shocked-shocked you feel watching this; it’s genuine shock.’ – The New York Times

“It is hard to imagine a documentary that is more important to the civic life of the nation — let alone one that is so compelling and ultimately moving” – Baltimore Sun

After we filmed the ‘Hursti Hack’ California’s Secretary of State ordered an investigation. The best computer scientists at UC Berkeley analysed the Diebold voting machines’ computer source code.

The UC Berkeley Report can be found here: https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections…

Election Security Expert Susan Greenhalgh of Free Speech for People explains why rigging an election is easier than most people are aware

Duplicate ePollBook Checks, Hand Recount Updates, Technical Notes on CVI/CVRs

I can’t unsee the Seven Swings output is machine made, not human. Nor forget the declared winner is a felon surrounded by a bunch of folks who conduct coupes for fun. Never normalizing that.

Per the above post from Cyber Security Expert Stephen Spoonamore

“The data now being certified nationwide, in my opinion, is hacked. In the world of cyber-crime (hacking an election) is a modest effort. Forget the mostly false talking point that tabulators are not networked. They are not supposed to be network accessible WHILE they are tabulating. But they are all programmed in advance, either in person or over network access. They are updated and contacted by many persons. They have, at minimum a flashdrive access.

I think many people may not understand that tabulation machines actually are pretty sophisticated and have several core functions each with different programming, risks and functions. They Scan. Interpret the Scan. Tabulate the Interpretation., Store the Scans as CVR images. And lastly compile the various runs and races and upload the outputs.

During the first process, the scan of the ballot, they just make an image. The votes are NOT counted directly from the ballot, but from a computer analysis of the SCANNED IMAGE. This is not a trivial distinction. There are counting devices for many things including currency, standardized tests, proxy votes etc which DO NOT make an image of the paper item to be sent on for interpretation by other software, but actually do “count” the tally directly from the paper itself. One reason this is important, it is relatively hard and much more labor intensive to add or subtract paper items being scanned. By contrast, from a hacker’s perspective, it is extremely easy to add or remove electronic images into a system designed to manage electronic images.

The paper ballots, become CVIs (Cast Vote Images) which are then reviewed by software to create CVRs (Cast Vote Records) This is accomplished by the CVI having scanned images with registry marks all around the edges and the software compares these registry marks with any black dots it’s sees on a page it views as a reference grid. The computer has been programmed by a vendor, to know which “dots” correspond to a bubble next to a candidates name on that elections particular points on the image grid. A dot on that correct spot on the grid, tallies a vote for that candidate or issue.

There are a number of ways to compromise this.

Part of the pitch of companies like Dominion and ES&S is their proprietary software. But both of those companies have had their software copied by GOP activists associated with Sydney Powell and others in Trump’s orbit. Copies of the software have been taken from counties in FL, GA, AZ, MI, PA, TX and CO. You can read the legal filings, concerns and numerous news articles. Functionally, at least 85% of the tabulation systems used in the US, use software duplicated by right wing activist who actively claim they have this access. Why? Just for the Lolz of wearing DvsCorp08! firmware passcode T-Shirts and offer them on Etsy?

I don’t think so.

In the hands of sophisticated hackers this software,and this system would allow a load of possible exploits. Looking at the absurd published results, all of which appear machine manufactured, not human behavious created, I think votes were injected into the system during the hours after polls have closed. I am sure the machines worked fine in the weeks before the election, and again hours after the election, but the code is in there and dormant. Only a complete audit will find it.

Let me share two similar hacks I personally helped uncover. One had scripts which swapped credit card settlement numbers from an aggregation layer of a retailer, in effect “padding” the profits of the merchant. The second had scripts written into banking check-image deposit systems which clipped parts of account numbers from check images and replaced them with alternative numbers. An insider embezzlement scheme. The required insider access and knowledge of the code. I believe both those conditions exist here as well.

Either of these strategies could be applied to the presidential vote in part of all of the swing states. A script could be added at the software layer in which the Ballot Image (CVI) is interpreted into a vote total. The script would simply look for black dots at the grid reference for Kamala, clip the dot, and then move the dot into the grid reference for Trump. The IMAGE of the ballot once changed would then be counted. As the image is then permanently altered, you can review the CVRs forever, and the false result will be forever the outcome. Alternatively, there are 100s of Gigs of storage available inside these machines allowing them to store 50,000K+ image scans of the ballots. Clever hack would be to preload sets of ballots filled out with Trump and/or all/other other race combinations could be included. As long as Trump is leading by a designated amount, the script sits dormant. Nothing happens. If Kamala begins leading, the script can start swapping out the right proportion of Kamala ballots with the prestored stock of ballot images. It can be substituted for one of the pre-loaded Trump ballots.

These are just two of numerous methods and scripts which could accomplish an outcome reversing hack of the vote. A computer will output whatever it is programmed to output, by whoever has programmed it. In both cases the number of ballots, the epollbook numbers and the number of ballot images will match. BUT if you actually hand count the ballots, you will get a different outcome from the machine stored images.

Either of my two scripts, or several others suggested by friends would only be discovered by a human recount of the original hand-marked paper ballots”.