— Brad Friedman
The Computer Security Group at the University of California Santa Barbara (UCSB) has released a short, chilling video demonstrating how a single person can hack an election on a touch-screen voting system — even one with a so-called “Voter Verifiable Paper Trail” (VVPAT) added to it — in such a way that it is highly unlikely that the manipulation would ever be detected by either the public or election officials.
The video which shows “just examples of the different ways in which the system can be compromised” is the latest in a similar string of such demonstrations that have been released over the last two years, all showing how easily electronic voting systems can be tampered with, often undetectably.
In the UCSB video posted below, the hack of Sequoia voting system being prepared for use in an entire county, is done in approximately 3 seconds, by a single person with simple insider access and a $10 USB thumb drive. Every machine used in the county, in such a case, would be effected. Moreover, the viral hack would not be discovered by pre-election “Logic and Accuracy” testing — in cases were election officials actually bother to perform such tests prior to elections — nor would it likely be discovered even in the event of a complete, 100% post-election audit of the touch-screen “paper-trail” records.
The hack demonstration, prepared by the UCSB scientists as part of California’s 2007 Top-to-Bottom Review” of all of the state’s e-voting systems, also reveals how so-called “security seals” placed on such machines after they’ve been programmed for an election, can be easily defeated without detection…
How and Why It Was Done…
The landmark California study, which employed dozens of the world’s top computer scientists and security experts, was commissioned by Sec. of State Debra Bowen. The first-of-its-kind, independent state analysis, included hack tests — so-called, “Red Team” attacks — to analyze the security of the e-voting systems. All of the systems studied were easily defeated by the testers.
The UCSB group was in charge of the analysis of voting machines made by Sequoia Voting Systems.
The methods used in the hack of a Sequoia Edge direct recording electronic (DRE, touch-screen) system — a system which includes the Sequoia Verivote paper-trail printer, as seen in the video — were original described in the Red Team security analysis [PDF] of the Sequoia systems as published by the Secretary of State.
The video demonstrating the voting system manipulation was prepared at the same time, but had not been released publicly until now, despite the UCSB Security Group having encouraged the Secretary of State’s office to do so for some time. The scientists involved in the tests declined to speak on the record as to their reasons for releasing it on their own at this time.
“We found a number of major flaws that can be exploited to compromise the integrity, confidentiality, and availability of the voting process,” explains the UCSB website where the video was released. “In particular, we developed a virus-like software that can spread across the voting system, modifying the firmware of the voting machines.”
The page goes on to explain that “The modified firmware is able to steal votes even in the presence of a Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT).”
In addition to the hack of the paper-trail touch-screen system, the UCSB scientists also demonstrate, in the video, how the Sequoia Edge touch-screen voting system may be accessed and manipulated even after so-called “security seals” have been applied to the machine following pre-election programming. The members of the team in the demonstration are seen access the system, while the plastic “security seals” are remain undisturbed in the process.
“Security seals” of this type, as used in California and elsewhere — seen being easily defeated in the video — have been cited by election officials and voting machine companies alike as key to the secure use of electronic voting machines such as the one seen being hacked in the video above.
E-Voting “Fatally Flawed”…
“The video shows how one can use a simple USB key to infect the laptop used to prepare the cards that initialize the various voting devices. As a result, the cards are loaded with a malicious software component,” UCSB explains.
“When a card is inserted in a voting terminal, the malicious software exploits a vulnerability in the terminal loading procedure and installs a modified firmware, effectively ‘brainwashing’ the terminal. Later, when the terminal is used by the voters to cast their votes, the firmware uses a number of different techniques to modify the contents of the ballots being cast”
The UCSB Security Group page notes that electronic voting systems are exceedingly vulnerable to malicious manipulation of the type demonstrated in their video.
“While most critical systems are continuously scrutinized and evaluated for safety and correctness, electronic voting systems are not subject to the same level of scrutiny,” they write.
“A number of recent studies have shown that most (if not all) of the electronic voting systems being used today are fatally flawed, and that their quality does not match the importance of the task that they are supposed to carry out.”
The Latest of Many Such E-Vote Hack Demonstrations…
The Sequoia Edge system seen being hacked in the video above is the same type of system on which The BRAD BLOG had revealed another serious flaw, just days before the 2006 general election. As we reported at the time, a yellow button on the back of each voting machine (as can be seen in the UCSB video as well) can be pressed in such a way as to put the system into “manual mode,” allowing for an unlimited number of votes to be cast by a single individual.
The hack demonstration video published by the California academics wouldn’t be the first such video to detail exactly how an electronic voting system can be hacked by a single malicious individual. Other notable cases include:
- A 2006 Princeton University study revealed how to carry out a similar viral attack on a Diebold touch-screen voting systems, resulting in the spread of a vote-flipping virus, that would spread from machine to machine after access to just one of them (DISCLOSURE: The machine used in Princeton’s testing was supplied to us by a Diebold insider. We then passed it on to the university for the first such independent study of such a voting system.) Story here, video demo here...
- While the Princeton scientists also demonstrated how the lock on a Diebold touch-screen system could be opened with either a standard hotel mini-bar key — or even a paper clip in about 10 seconds time — another enterprising individual found he was able to fashion a homemade key that would open the Diebold system as well. The key was made after modeling it after a photograph of the key — the same one is used for every Diebold machine — as, incredibly enough, posted on the company’s website. Story here, video here…
- A 2006 HBO documentary, Hacking Democracy, showed a paper-based, Diebold optical-scan tabulator being manipulated in a mock election which flipped the results reported by the system. That landmark hack disclosed still-uncorrected security flaws in all Diebold systems (both touch-screen and optical-scan). The exact same Diebold, paper-based tabulators were used in last January’s anomalous New Hampshire primary. Video here…
- A one-minute 2006 hack demonstration of an e-voting system used in the Netherlands, shows how a key chip can be replaced in such a system in just 60-seconds. PDF analysis here, video here…
“Paper-Trails” Are Meaningless…
The UCSB demonstration of the Sequoia Edge with Verivote hack is notable, however, given that many proponents of electronic voting — including many Democrats and their various public interest group supporters, such as People for the American Way (PFAW), Common Cause, Verified Voting, NYU’s Brennan Center for Justice and others — have argued that adding paper-trails (VVPATs) to such systems would mean that any manipulation of the system would be discovered during an examination of the paper-trails after an election. As the video shows, post-election examinations or audits of touch-screen paper-trail systems hacked in this way, would not easily — if at all — reveal the manipulation.
Following Bowen’s “Top-to-Bottom Review”, touch-screen systems made by Sequoia, Diebold and ES&S were restricted to use of one-per-precinct only, in order to marginally meet the disabled-accessible voting requirements of the federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA). She also required a 100% hand-count of the paper-trails produced by such systems, even though the UCSB team found that such audits would not necessarily catch voting system manipulation. Many states around the country continue to allow unfettered use of such hackable voting systems. None, other than California, require 100% post-election audits.
A similar DRE system made by Hart InterCivic was allowed for full use, almost inexplicably, after the California testing, in two different counties.
Despite the quickly mounting scientific evidence persuading against the use of such systems in American elections, Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ) and Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) have proposed a number of bills which would allow for the continued use of touch-screen voting systems with paper-trails. The Republican caucuses in each chamber have so far stymied all such legislation, even as they argue in favor of the use of all such electronic systems, with or without the often misleading paper-trails.
MORE COVERAGE: See John Byrne at RAW STORY and Rady Ananda at OpEdNews.
This is likely the most significant and damaging video of Sequoia ever published. It pulls the eyelids off all the lies Sequoia has manufactured about the problems being with voter-errors, poll worker errors, ROV staff errors, but NEVER with the incredibly primative “security” software and hardware barriers erected by Sequoia. Sequoia ALWAYS had the answer – it was to point the finger anywhere but at itself.
It is time for Counties to rise up in unison and sue Sequoia for violation of warranty of merchantability and false advertising. It has never delivered a dependable product, has ALWAYS been extremely vulnerable to insider and Sequoia support fraud, yet seeing it demonstrated so blatantly here makes it all so easy to understand how an election can be flipped in a matter of seconds.
Elections officials, Boards of Supervisors, and election integrity advocates should all be on the same side after viewing these two videos (one is 9 minutes and the second one is 7 minutes). It is really critical to stay and watch the second one as well, it shows how the hardware seals are useless against anyone bent on defeating the seals and shows how critical it is to have the machines 100% totally secured at all times. Any “sleepovers” where machines are stored in public locations (like public bathrooms in Riverside!), poll workers’ homes and garages, etc. for up to 10 days or more before the election make them easy targets for any political operatives, of either party.
The second video also shows how the Sequoia Optec 400 C high-speed programmable scanners are also easily (but with a bit more difficulty) hacked in a period of minutes.
No longer can elections officials claim that it can’t happen here, not with Sequoia equipment. This information was released a year ago in the Red Team report from the Secretary of State’s office report, but only now are we seeing it demonstated so vividly. Seeing IS believing.
And NO, it’s not because they (the scientists) had access to all the Sequoia proprietary code and unlimited working time. So do the Sequoia technicians who offer “patches” to be installed whenever they say they are needed, without getting them approved by the Secretary of State. These “patches” could contain exactly the kind of trojan horses demonstrated in the video. And since the ROVs are not allowed to see the software, they are unwitting partners to any scam Sequoia choses to run. The gig is now up – electronic voting machines and electronic counting machines cannot be trusted – do not trust that which you cannot see.
The ONLY way to ensure transparent, accurate and secure elections is to require all paper ballots and hand count them in the precincts on election night before they ever leave the precinct. Post the results with a copy going to the central tabulator (if one is still employed) and then match the hand count against the machine. Hand counts, done twice before ever leaving the precinct (performed by a fresh team of election board members) have a much higher likelihood of being correct than a hackable, manipulitable, programmable black box where no one can see the bits and bites whizzing around in cyberspace. Electrons and Elections don’t mix.
It is frightening and hard to believe that our elections are still mostly at the mercy of such deliberately flawed technology and corrupt government officials.
An article on truthout says that the neocons are already getting ready to steal the vote in Ohio, there must be something that can be done to stop this madness.
This video is too slow, long and methodical to keep the viewer’s attention. I am as rabid about this stuff as anyone, but I was getting bored with it. There needs to be an edited, punched-up version that is only two or three minutes long (with a link to the longer version, possibly).
I agree with Shakespurr. It is WAY too long. We don’t need to see the “voter” punching every possible vote in every scenario. We get the idea.
It can cut to the chase on each of the scenarios, and get the second video contents onto the shortened one b/c it shows the ease with which the seals are defeated and how the Optech 400-C can be compromised.
Otherwise the media won’t do squat with it. Who do we need to get to to see about shortening this up and reissuing it?
So why don’t the Dems just do their own hacking? We’re going to lose a game where the other side cheats and all we can do is raise our hand and meekly say “Hey, they’re cheating, no really…”
So what does Bowen say about this? What is the EAC doing about it? Long story short, what are those ‘in charge’ of ensuring the integrity of the vote doing to address this issue because it is not only Sequoia but the other vendor machines as well?
I say fight fire with fire…I say, I say!
“Leftist” asked:
Because that would be illegal.
What this country needs is several hundred dedicated, reasonably computer-savvy folks with nothing to lose, who will hack voting machines on election day and then confess.
This would be a guaranteed way to 1)ensure recounts of the 11/4/8 vote, and 2)bring to light the ridiculous ease with which one may steal an election.
Of course, the brave hackers would also be prosecuted for voter fraud. Which could be a bummer, I suppose.
Now is the time for all good hackers, crackers, and phreaks to come to the aid of their party.
Dear
FatherlandHomeland Security, the above is intended to use sarcasm and exaggeration to illustrate the plight of the endangered legitimate, counted vote in US elections. I don’t actually expect, nor would I encourage, any person to hack an election on a lark. We all know it is serious business — ask Wally O’Dell.I would never dream of doing that. So please don’t kill me, ‘kay?
This is from Citizens for a Legitimate Gov’t (who I’ve found to be 100% reliable):
WTF!! So now people who have been put out on the street by the bush administration can no longer vote? My head is spinning!!
Retail commerce really solved the problem of accurate record long ago by the expedient of giving the client a hand-held receipt which had to match the record of the machine. HAVA mandates the paper record (See Section 301(a)(2)(B)(i)), so if voters bring their receipts to the neighborhood precinct when the polls close, and match their receipts to the individual records of the machine, it’s an adequate audit. If discrepancies result in fines to the BoE, to be rendered to the offended voter, that should encourage voters to bring in their receipts for matching.
It still isn’t too late to win election integrity. A writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court would do it. Perhaps you can help the following proposal along?
With original jurisdiction in an election fraud lawsuit against the President and a writ of
mandamus within that lawsuit, the Supreme Court (minus Bush appointees Roberts and
Alito) could, before November, order all Boards of Election to guarantee election
integrity with public audit and, in view of the home foreclosure crisis, Election Day
registration.
Dear Friend,
The advantage of a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court to the nation’s Boards of
Elections is that any Board that does not insure true election with a public audit will be in
contempt of the Supreme Court, and, if the writ mandates Election Day registration in
recognition of the mortgage foreclosure crisis, numerous impediments to the right to vote
can be truncated.
Such a writ would involve minimal change. HAVA already mandates the paper record
with the manual audit capacity.* A voter receipt would simply require a duplicate copy
of what the machine has registered. It should cost nothing to have an interested public
observe the counting, posting and reporting of votes at every precinct.
Books, articles, websites, films and at least one thousand page lawsuit have documented
election fraud.
They were powerful forces that won Bush vs Gore in 2000, considering the specious
argument that counting the ballots discarded by chad-gorged machines would violate the
one man-one vote Constitutional prescription. A national mobilization would be needed
to counter those forces in a The People vs The President of the United States lawsuit.
However, with an aroused citizenry and the machinery provided by the Internet
revolution, it should be possible to do this.
What is needed is a prepared lawsuit, a website for establishing support pledges of names
and money, and a widespread initiation of the true election movement. A suggested letter
is below. Please consider taking on this very important chance to win American freedom.
* Help America Vote Act Section 301(a)(2)(B)(i)
Peace,
– Jean G. Braun, South Euclid, Ohio
Letter to Americans
As he made clear in his Democratic nomination acceptance speech, – “ … I argued for more resources
and more troops to actually finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9-11 …â€-
Barack Obama is one with John McCain in fundamental support of the war on terrorism.
Dear Friends,
Currently, the nation has the presidential choice between a major party candidate who supports the
war on terrorism, and a major party candidate who supports the war on terrorism. While the
conventional wisdom posits that no independent or third party candidate can be elected, many
Americans are realizing that that is true because the election process is controlled by only two
parties. Electronic machines which control the movements of ships millions of miles out in space can
only too easily be programmed to give predetermined voting results.
It is a fateful time. American warships carrying weapons of mass destruction sail the seas.
Foreclosures and bankruptcies offer opportunity for a wealth and power elite to buy up more wealth
and power for pennies on the dollar. Deficit spending by government means crushing price inflation
for the people. The nation urgently needs to hear independent voices with independent solutions.
An “original jurisdiction†– meaning the Supreme Court would be the first to try a case, (as in
Florida, 2000) – election fraud lawsuit on George W. Bush, has been prepared and a summary posted
at http://www._______________. In addition to petition for a writ of mandamus ordering all Boards of
Election to guarantee election integrity (** See below), the suit demands monetary compensation in
the amount of $____________________for all U.S. citizens who, by election fraud, have been robbed
of their Democracy birthright.
If sufficient grassroots names and money support such a lawsuit, it can be successfully filed, but a
national mobilization is needed.
If you wish to see this lawsuit succeed, please:
1. Forward this or a similar letter to an address in each of eight institutions in your State:
Third party; peace and justice organization; university or school; business; union; church; civic or
other organization; city government.
2. Canvas your own organization or list, asking members to pledge their name and any
amount of money. Total these and post the number of pledged names and the “bundled†amount of
pledged money in the designated space on the _______________ website.
3. After the filing of the lawsuit, follow further instructions regarding names and funds.
With guarantee of election integrity, “no strings†candidates with needed voices to add to the
national dialogue will have an unprecedented opportunity to be heard. Needless to say, the more
quickly mobilization is achieved, the more quickly a true election movement can succeed. Thank you
in advance for your action.
(Signed)
** Election Integrity by Public Audit must involve the right to vote, integrity of the vote, integrity of the
counting and integrity of the reporting.
Right to Vote: Especially because of the home foreclosure crisis, Election Day registration can be a
simple adjustment of the logistics of provisional voting.
Integrity of the Vote: Supermarket and other retail machines have, for years, guaranteed the integrity
of a transaction by rendering a receipt which can be compared to the official record. Discrepancies
should result in monetary fine of the BoE, to be rendered to the offended voter.
Integrity of the Counting: can best be verified by a public witness to the counting, including receipt
comparison, at every neighborhood precinct, immediately after the polls close.
Integrity of the Reporting: can best be verified by immediate public announcing and posting of
precinct level totals at each precinct, enabling each candidate to count his/her own votes.
unholy election fraud! Batman, what should we do?
to the Brad Blog!!
“Brad Friedman” said
Oh dear lord. And with that kind of thinking, we will continue to lose elections. OF COURSE it’s against the law, that is not and has never been the issue. The fact is that the typical, passive Democrat approach of simply pointing out something is illegal (if even that) has failed ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TIME thus far. There has not been a SINGLE election in United States history that Rethugs have cheated on that Democrats have successfully overturned. Period. Ergo, my question about whether or not a new and outlandish approach may be in order, such as the one I suggested. Simply pointing out what the law is will NOT work. Period!
Yeah, Brad, if we want them to stop murdering innocents, we should start doing it too, see how they like them apples… and, really, if they think breaking the constitution is no great shakes, they are going to really be upset when we do it.
Actually, “Leftist”, while there is a dim chance such illustrativeness would have its desired effect — say, one in ten million — and I really understand the frustration out there, it bugs me how glib people can be about this stuff.
The glib ones are trolls. This is deadly serious. Over 1 million Iraqis dead.The republicans want US sick and poor. Right now the organic almond growers in Ca. have to spray with chemicals and are losing business. Foreign growers don’t have to spray. Any one who votes for the criminals are criminals themselves.
Brad Said,
“Leftist” asked:
So why don’t the Dems just do their own hacking?
Because that would be illegal.
Well, what about Independents hacking the election for a fictional candidate such as Micky Mouse or Osama Bin Laden? Would it still be illegal then? Even if technically illegal, would it be wrong? If it was done to expose the flaws in the election systems I would acquit if I was on the jury.
The police sell drugs all the time as part of their undercover work when they try to bust meth rings, but their actions aren’t deemed illegal because they are trying to stop a greater crime.
An even better metaphor: during Hillary’s speech at the DNC, everybody got all emotional (including myself) when she invoked Harriet Tubman, and told the audience to “Keep Going!”
Well guess what, stealing(freeing) slaves was against the law but God Bless Harriet Tubman for being willing to break the law, when the law needed breaking.
Hows that for glib?
WHEN the election is hacked for either/or/both Obama and McCain, it will be easily disguised, hidden, and accepted, as these videos show, but if some intrepid hackers rig it for a tie between Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, then it will be immediately confirmed for ALL, that the machines (and the corporations that control them) cannot be trusted.
Molly @16 is right, “this is deadly serious.”
I will tell ya what IS legal and guaranteed under what is left of the Constitution.
REVOLUTION!
Does not matter at all how many times this is pointed out to the criminally complicit MSM, can make all the videos you want, can show all 100 ways every one of these pathetic machines can be hacked and change the entire election in seconds leaving no trace of wrong doing.
Until the proverbial boot heel comes down and down HARD on the necks of all of the MSM by MILLIONS of damn angry and not going to take it anymore American patriots then NOTHING is going to change.
This election WILL be stolen.
The MSM has already steered THEIR chosen candidates into place so basically the S-election has already been stolen.
This country will not survive McSame/Pentecostal Barbie. In a sadistic sorta way I actually hope these nut bags do steal the S-election because maybe when the country completely collapses into a Depression that will make the Great Depression in the 30s look like the Good Ol Days and that 98% finally pulls their freaking heads outa their asses to see the 2% completely unaffected while they are fighting off stray curs at garbage cans to get some offal.
MAYBE then the 98% will WTFU?
Does anyone here “really” think the problem belongs to just ONE party? Really?????
One wonders how many times ACORN will plea, rogue employee this time around?
perhaps the quickest way to get the republicans to support clean ,verifiable elections is to out hack them . If it is as easy as stated in the above article , the election could be altered to show a landslide for Obama , making him the winner , while obviously demonstrating the hackability of electronic voting systems. With such a close election , Republicans would be screaming for election reform . we simply cannot afford to have the neocons steal another presidential election. With global warming rearing its ugly head , time is of the essence.
What happened to those of us who grew up with demonstrations? “And it’s 1-2-3, what are we fighting for, don’t ask me, I don’t give a damn…next stop is Viet Nam”….Ring a bell???? Have we become so complacent as baby boomers we expect someone else to do it for us? We have nothing to fear, but fear itself and I, for one, am tired of living in a country where fear rules. I am taking to the streets today with a friend and beginning my sign carrying protest: “My vote doesn’t count, Diebold’s does.”