DHS Never Ran Audit to See if Votes Were Hacked

[deminks]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/dhs-never-ran-audit-to-see-if-votes-were-hacked

The Department of Homeland Security insists that no one hacked actual votes—but admits it never ran an audit to check.

Despite assurances from the U.S. intelligence community that Russian hacking only influenced the 2016 U.S. election—and didn’t change vote tallies—there was never actually a formal federal audit of those systems, the Department of Homeland Security said.

And while DHS offered free security scans to any state that wanted them, many states—even ones that took up the DHS offer, like Michigan and Maine—either use audit procedures that are considered inadequate or don’t audit their election results at all.

“I think there’s a presumption amongst both the general public and lawmakers that DHS did some sort of investigation,” said Susan Greenhalgh, who serves as Elections Specialist at Verified Voting, a nonprofit devoted to U.S. election integrity.
“It didn’t happen. That doesn’t mean that something happened, but it also means it wasn’t investigated.”

The January report from the Director of National Intelligence, an unprecedented public document of declassified intelligence that serves as the authoritative public U.S. stance on Russia’s role in the election, indicates an assurance neither Russia nor anyone else tampered with vote tallying systems.

(snip)

But DHS’s role in state, county, and local voting systems, a spokesperson admitted to the Daily Beast, was limited.

(end snip)

What I just said in another thread. They can't say it didn't happen if they don't look. And I am betting some of the states like my own won't let them look.

[Zoonart]

1. What would be the point of all of the hacking...

if they did not flip votes to assure their victory? If they had lost after all of that hacking, they would have left themselves very exposed for little gain.

On must also wonder why the Republicans are so very confident that they can craft this absolute disaster of a health care bill in secret and outrun the stink once the bomb explodes. They don't seem to be one little bit concerned about what their constituents think about it, and seem pretty assured of their continued electoral success no matter what... HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

Just sayin.

[TBA]

4. YUP

That is why they are ditching the town halls. They are being told not to worry about reelection *wink* *wink*.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm an IT pro. We are in deep doo doo folks.

[Zoonart]

7. Double Yup

My niece is an IT pro working for the federal government and she has reached the same conclusion.

[Alice11111]

14. Triple Yup.

The evidence is everywhere. The Repubs are using the bureaucratic quagmire to their advantage when they can.

If they can get Obamacare repealed, the Repubs will praise their leadership for getting it done by any means possible...and that's what they are doing. They know it would fail unfer light and time
Mumble grumble by a few, but they will salute and vote to kill Obamacare, even if they never see the bill. We all know DT won't read it
He will be briefed by someone w an agenda.

Obama ,or Hillary, would have been at his or her desk at 2 am combing the fine detail. Then, they would also be briefed by staff w opposing views. Dems are competent if they can get elected. Repubs are not as competent at running government. They have cheated for so long that now they have almost total control of government. The aren't going to become the party of nice people, ever. It doesn't look good for the future.

[TBA]

2. This just makes me want to scream

Why else would Russia hack election systems if not to change voter tallies? Hummmmmmm? Really? Voter roles are public record. I could get my state's roles by just asking for them.

This damn narrative "Oh they were just after voter info" is total BS IMO.

YOU HACK ELECTION SYSTEMS TO FRIGGIN CHANGE THE TOTALS.

[Alice11111]

15. Let it be written.

[Orsino]

3. You can't audit ballots that never really existed...

...except in the fever dreams of the partisan owners of proprietary and vulnerable machines.

[TBA]

5. You can audit a server and see if someone is poking around.

You can audit network traffic. You can audit server logs.

Hell you can audit to see if logs have been altered.

[Orsino]

6. Oh, you can certainly read a log.

But does the proprietry software/firmware log all relevant activity? Were the voters' inputs correctly registered in the first place? Was network traffic captured during and immediately after the voting period?

We need hard-copy ballots that can actually be counted and recounted, not machines tht tell us who they want us to have voted for.

[TBA]

8. I totally agree on the hard copy ballots

But in lieu of those, there is a lot a forensic computer expert can do to audit a system and determine if it has been hacked and where in the system they go.

I only work in general IT (I'm a programmer). I wish a security expert would weigh in.

[Orsino]

9. If they have access to the source code...

...and if they can verify that the version is the same as was in use during the voting period, and if they understand the firmware well enough, they could be confident in a conclusion about the necessary logging.

But who will give access to the proprietary source code? Hell, who now will order even the appearance of a real audit?

[TBA]

10. Whomever owns the source code can give them access.

The change comes in the form of a "security update". Boom.

Or the compiled code is reverse engineered. Harder but not impossible.

Or they hack the central tabulating computer that may or may not use the proprietary code.

Look I'm no expert. But you have Russia, money, Republicans, hackers all wanting the same thing.... come on..

[Orsino]

11. Reverse compiling is an inexact art.

And is dependent on the level of access granted by the software/firmware/hardware/network owners, voluntarily--unless there is some force that could compel transparency.

[TBA]

12. Least likely senecio I admit.

So do you think it is likely they have altered vote totals? Would that not be the ultimate goal?

[Orsino]

13. Given that many "theys" could have been hacking for many years, I think it likely.

Harvesting voters' personal info might be a more profitable goal for small-timers, but the sheer amounts of money at stake in control of government would seem to guarantee that certain Powers That Be would tweak vote counts as much as they think they can do safely. A Trump Administration will shield them further, so I would assume that the next election will be hacked even more blatantly.

That we can't know any of this for sure ought to be reason enough to return to a verifiable balloting system.

[Alice11111]

17. Amsterdam saw it coming, and managed to change their system

in a couple of months. We will fuck around another 20 years with Repubs and state's rights ( which they only use when it blocks us...how fast did they ditch it in Bush v Gore), while they continue with voter suppression, faulty ballots, no back ups..because those things are some of their most important tools for winning.

[Madam45for2923]

16. States would've had to have asked DHS to do so? to audit to see whether votes were hacked.