This is a lay
guide to computerized voting machines with the purpose of understanding
function to raise questions. A highly
relevant point to consider is the claim that the machines are not connected to
the internet or any other means of external communications. That particular claim is subject to a lot of
scrutiny as this document raises.
One of the things
that has to be considered is the role of military research on device
communications funded by DARPA. The internet
and the communications protocols used therein were for the original purpose of
creating a global communications network for war fighting. If you spend any time going through military
documents funding research projects you will see there is a significant effort
to find any and all means of communications between devices, using technology
that may
not be well known or currently in existence but
could be. Prejudging is not
the way to discover things. Funding
for military projects is not usually an issue and pouring money down a rabbit
hole in the hope of finding breakthroughs is not uncommon. Nor is hiding the
contracts for promising research.
The second
thing to look at is one of the mainboards on voting machines to see what chips
and combinations of chips are on them, and forensically examine what the
machines are doing in environmental chambers to see what signals they give off
and what applying signals to them does to their operation. That MAY give a lead as to what is going on
BUT, remember Volkswagen.
The
communications technology, when needed and that may be used by computerized voting
machines is called Internet Protocol.
Internet Protocol (IP) is a set of standards for
addressing and routing data on the Internet. It works by breaking down data
into packets, which are then transmitted to the destination address where they
are reassembled. IP is responsible for defining how applications and devices
exchange packets of data with each other, ensuring efficient and accurate data
transfer across diverse networks.
Every device or domain that connects to the Internet is
assigned an IP address, which uniquely identifies it and enables it to
communicate with and exchange data with other devices connected to the
internet.
IP addresses are crucial for directing packets to the
correct destination, and they come in two distinct versions: Internet Protocol
version 4 (IPv4) and Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6). IPv4 has space for up
to 4 billion IP addresses, while IPv6 can accommodate trillions of addresses,
supporting the growth of global networks.
The internet protocol suite, commonly known as TCP/IP,
includes IP along with other protocols such as Transmission Control Protocol
(TCP) and User Datagram Protocol (UDP). These protocols work together to
provide end-to-end data communication, specifying how data should be packetized,
addressed, transmitted, routed, and received.
Think of it in the simplest terms as a long train of box
cars, one after another on a track, each full of coal, with each lump of coal
in the boxcars a small piece of data (information) being transferred from one
place to another. In simple terms, each boxcar and the coal in it has a unique address or
fingerprint that allows for making sure that all of the information coal in
each boxcar gets where it is supposed to go, and even if one boxcar loses its
coal, there are others that have a duplicate of the data to make sure the delivery
is complete and goes through. That’s
called redundancy. That information coal
could be voice, data, video, text, whatever.
It also could be coded so that even if it is exposed to view, a person
seeing or intercepting it could not understand it without the encryption keys
to decode it.
But unlike a railway line, with linear tracks, imagine that
the boxcars can travel in a less rigid line, so the route has more flexibility.
Information
Routing Flexibility
The picture below is of a wireless MESH network. As you can see from the diagram, each house or connected point (node) is a two-way connection with other houses, nodes, devices in the MESH. The formless (no tracks) connectivity makes it more robust and potentially more reliable. One of the interesting points is the MESH can be fed data by a wired connection, like cable, fiber, plain old telephone lines, wirelessly by satellite, microwave, cell tower, or by nearby passing trucks, buses, cars, maybe even airplanes.
I worked on one
of the largest networks in the US which used standard telephone lines and modems.
In early Windows communications, modems
were essential for connecting to other devices through telephone lines. Windows
operating systems used modems according to specific international standards,
such as V.22, V.34, and V.90, which dictate the speed at which data is sent and
received in bits per second (bps). Data
was packetized.
MESH Out
of The Box
One of the
things you have to think about in trying to figure out how voting machines can
be rigged, is by thinking outside the box.
If for example the MESH is located in an oasis in the idle of the
Sahara, or say the jungle in a remote location without access to microwave,
cell towers, or satellite coverage, there is another way to populate the MESH
with data. It could be a truck, a plane
flying over, a passenger bus, a boat on the river, even a guy with a backpack,
carrying a computerized device setup to communicate its data load and pickup a return
load of data from the MESH. Call it a pass
by. The MESH can be populated intermittently by pass by devices. In our world today there are many types of
nearby devices such as cell phones that have remote communications capabilities that are constantly
passing by withing range of surrounding voting machines.
Many
Types of Pass By Devices
Think of
devices like Apple’s AirTag, which when it is near other Apple devices can
expose its ID which allows Apple’s FindMy to work to track lost Apple
devices. There are also technologies
like RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) chips which can be passive and
activated by a reader nearby reader, or active chips which draw power from a
power source like a battery or some wired source and actively broadcast
information 300 feet or more. The idea
that a voting machine is not connected by means we commonly think of to
communicate is really not truthful at all. We just have to investigate what they can do
without interference from the manufacturer and anyone wanting to prevent us
from seeing what they can do. It should
also raise alarm bells that any major supplier is from a foreign country, which
to me says they are out of legal reach or regulation for plausible deniability.
Signal
Testing Rooms
Rooms designed to test electronic devices and block out all external signals are often referred to as environmental chambers or screen rooms. Environmental chambers use radio frequency (RF) shielding to protect devices under test (DUTs) from radio frequency interference, ensuring accurate testing conditions.
Screen rooms, which are essentially large metal enclosures, can be constructed to block electromagnetic signals, making them signal-proof.
The only way
to understand what voting machines are capable of communicating is to perform
tests on the boards in environmental chambers or screen rooms to see what they
are doing, and to understand the purpose of the hardware and software on the
machine in isolation. The manufacturers
will probably claim trade secrets and other excuses to prevent that from
happening, but given the fact that election interference is fundamentally a
form of treason, they should not be allowed to do so. More importantly, no one in their right mind
should allow any election to be conducted using a machine of any kind,
everything should be done with paper and the ballots saved for years to be able
to look back on them for audit purposes to detect fraud. PERIOD.
Data
Density
The next
point is to simply understand how little data is actually required to be
transmitted to the voting machine and the corrupting device to change the
outcome of the votes on that machine. If
5000 people vote in a location and the split between the “for my client” votes
and “against my client” votes are 40/60, you are talking about a margin of 1000
votes that have to be changed. Since each vote can be a simple as box “a” or
box “b” you are talking about a minuscule amount of data to change. All you are doing is flipping over 1 byte of
data to another say 1000 times, just flipping a storage switch 1000 times which
can take place in milliseconds.
Disguising
the Flip
Since the data flip is so minuscule, you would want it to appear as noise. Disguising software code to appear like noise rather than recognizable instructions involves techniques that aim to obfuscate or hide the true nature of the code. Here are some methods that can be employed:
Encryption: Encrypting the software code can make it appear as random data or noise to anyone who intercepts it. Without the decryption key, it's difficult to discern the actual instructions from the encrypted data.
Steganography: This technique involves hiding the code within another seemingly innocent file or data stream. For instance, embedding the code within an image or audio file where it looks like part of the noise or compression artifacts can make it harder to detect.
Polymorphism: This approach involves generating code that mutates with each execution or deployment. The code can change its structure, variable names, and flow while maintaining the same functionality. This makes it difficult for static analysis tools to recognize the pattern or logic.
Code Obfuscation: Obfuscation techniques intentionally make the code difficult to understand or decompile. This can involve renaming variables and functions to meaningless names, inserting dummy code, or using complex control structures that obscure the actual logic.
Dynamic Code Generation: Rather than shipping executable code directly, the software could generate parts of its functionality dynamically at runtime. This makes it harder to analyze since the code is not present in its entirety until execution.
Use of Compression: Compressing the software code can make it appear as compressed data or noise. While this alone might not be sufficient to disguise the code, combining it with encryption or steganography can enhance the disguise.
Custom Binary Formats: Encoding the code in a custom binary format that isn't immediately recognizable can also make it appear as noise to someone attempting to inspect it.
It's
important to note that these techniques are often used in scenarios
where
there's a need to protect intellectual property or secure
communications.
However, using them to conceal malicious software or to bypass security
measures to rig elections while illegal and unethical is provably not
something the intelligence community will not do. In the age of
societal
interference by the government and the courts, believing otherwise is
like believing in the tooth
fairy.
Software
Manipulation
Without a complete, and I would suggest open-source audit of voting machine software, I would not trust voting machine software at all. You may remember the Volkswagen Emissions Scandal
The Volkswagen emissions scandal, also known as Dieselgate, involved the use of software in diesel vehicles to cheat on emissions tests. The software detected when the vehicle was being tested and activated full emissions controls only during the test, but reduced their effectiveness during normal driving, allowing the cars to emit up to 40 times the legal limit of nitrogen oxides (NOx) on the road.
Volkswagen admitted that about 11 million vehicles worldwide were equipped with this software, including 500,000 in the United States and 8 million in Europe. The affected vehicles included various models from Volkswagen, Audi, and Porsche, such as the Volkswagen Jetta, Beetle, Golf, Passat, and Audi A3.
In response to the scandal, Volkswagen faced significant consequences, including fines, lawsuits, and a decline in stock value. The company agreed to spend $10 billion to buy back or fix the affected vehicles in the United States.
Additionally, Volkswagen's CEO Martin Winterkorn resigned, and the company's stock price dropped by about a third.
The scandal raised questions about the legitimacy of emissions testing for diesel vehicles globally, leading to investigations in multiple countries and calls for changes in testing methods. Given the war against citizens, expect no less from your government.