J Profile picture
20 Nov, 20 tweets, 3 min read
I'm going to break this down on why Dominion cannot be trusted regardless of outcome, and how even without any evidence of manipulation, there should be post-election audits...particularly when there are even unproven statistical anomalies. (1)
1: Dominion uses COTS (Commercial off the shelf) equipment. Including laptops and desktops (think the type of stuff you buy at BestBuy). Even in an off network environment, in todays world they can go online via a cell phones mobile hotspot in about 15 seconds. ENTRY POINT.
2: Malicious operators have THOUSANDS of entry points to direct access. With 37,000 machines in Georgia alone, manned by volunteers, partisan staff, and temp tech staff, ANYONE with an agenda could have direct access to change votes (even w/ lowest security "Poll Worker" access)
3: Automated Test Decks (and regular test decks). Dominion constantly reminds users in their training material to delete and purge ATD results and zero out. But if you simply don't, there are "fake" ballots in the system. ATD's are "premarked".
4: Manual recounts likely won't work UNLESS there is intense scrutiny. Batches of test decks would be indistinguishable from regular ballots, particularly to a partisan counter.
5: Random sampling of equipment for software and firmware for manipulation does not prove out a lack of fraud. Dominion machines are all largely stand alone by design. Meaning, one machine, one malicious user, one data set, can change everything. Remember...37,000 machines.
6: This isn't how cybersecurity works. This isn't a recount or "vote audit". It's a cybersecurity audit. Were there malicious actors, was the system manipulated or penetrated...likely only the audit logs of every machine compared to ballots (time/type) would be sufficient.
7: Experts agree with me, not with Libs. Harri Hursti and J Alex Halderman have BOTH said Dominion systems have massive vulnerabilities, Halderman even demonstrating how he could hack a single machine in seconds to import a vote skewing algorithm.
8: Cybersecurity experts don't wait for obvious evidence of foul play. They constantly search, audit, monitor, etc. None of this was happening during the election or after. You take that approach because breaches are often not detectable after the fact unless you look.
9: Words matter. When large cybersecurity groups say they have "seen no evidence"...that is exactly what they mean. They would never take this approach with guarding a system though. They would ALWAYS be looking, even without "evidence".
10: Robert Mueller indicted 12 Russian Military Intelligence spies in 2018 for "infiltrating local election apparatuses and stealing voter database information on 500,000 voters". It happens.
11: No, physically transporting flash drives is not secure. Most of the data downloaded is in formats that are easy to change. Some as simple as changing cell information in Excel.
12: Dominion has many areas in the Democracy Suite modules where votes can be changed. There are editable fields in total vote counts, candidate counts, etc. There are opportunities to throw out large batches of votes or alter voter intent digitally.
13: Dominion offers two dubious products that a malicious actor could manipulate. Automated Test Decks (large scale, preprinted ballots, with predetermined results.) Allegedly for "logic and accuracy testing", anyone with access could introduce them in a live election.
14: Mobile Printing. It give someone the ability to print ballots with a COTS laptop and printer, fill them out, and introduce them into the count.
15: Non-intuitive software. The Democracy Suite from Dominion is MASSIVE. There are multiple modules, fields, opportunities to add/delete votes, etc. that could lead to a person just accidentally influence the election due to user error. One thing configured wrong...it's over.
16: Proprietary Source Code. This means they will not allow testers to access their entire source code to fraud check. Hypothetically there could be backdoors or algorithm switches we can't see.
17: In a public election, there is no reason for anyone to be resistant to looking at ALL of the audit logs. This is separate from a recount. Lawyers on both sides should have free and open access to view these logs which Dominion promotes as a transparency tool.
18: Dominion freely admits that their software is vulnerable without robust physical security, which most jurisdictions cannot reasonably provide. "We build cars without locks. BUT, you could hire human security to follow you around all the time".
To sum up:
A: Even without evidence, vote totals coming from Dominion cannot be trust AT ALL without auditing.
B: Auditing is a selling feature from Dominion and they claim it is easy and accurate. Give both sides access...now.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with J

J Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JPMediaBoss

11 Nov
Can Dominion be hacked? YES.
Can you feed Dominion “test stacks” with only Biden marked? YES.
Can those be counted as legitimate results? YES.
Can entire batches of Trump votes be purged? YES.
How do I know? Its in Dominion’s user manual.
@T_S_P_O_O_K_Y
In digital forensics, you dont need evidence of fraud to audit. All you need is evidence of vulnerability. With that, you audit to find evidence of breach. A CC company investigates a vulnerability to see if data has been stolen before there’s a single customer complaint.
Read 5 tweets
10 Nov
BREAKING/SCARY: Ok, I want someone to independently verify, but Dominion Voting Systems user manual seems to indicate vulnerability to fraud. "Democracy Suite" was used in MI. Read thread (1) sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections…
ATTN: @RaheemKassam @HansMahncke @RonColeman @pnjaban
Multi-config options for easy changing of settings mid count, ability to config to exclude votes based on choice, ability to separate votes after counted and "re-batch" into the machines for a double count. (2)
The machines are connected to regular computers via an app. Meaning the counting machine configs and usage could be controlled remotely via webx once logged in. (ie. Are the apps running on internet connected machines?) (3)
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!