In New Hampshire, a cybersecurity firm found troubling security bugs — and the Ukrainian national anthem — written into a voter database built with the help of an overseas subcontractor.

 

The revelation prompted the state to take a precaution that is rare among election officials: It hired a forensic firm to scour the technology for signs that hackers had hidden malware deep inside the coding supply chain.

 

The probe unearthed some unwelcome surprises: software misconfigured to connect to servers in Russia and the use of open-source code — which is freely available online — overseen by a Russian computer engineer convicted of manslaughter, according to a person familiar with the examination and granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about it.

 

None of the findings amounted to evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said, and the company resolved the issues before the new database came into use ahead of the presidential vote this spring.

 

I wonder what they'd have to find to consider it "evidence of wrongdoing"?  And why such a forensic audit is rare among election officials?

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/01/us-election-software-national-security-threats-00176615

 

Those damn Russians will do anything to get Trump back into the White House.

7 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Those damn Russians will do anything to get Trump back into the White House.

 

Hey, I'm open to the possibility that both sides cheat and the reason Trump's pissed off is because he didn't get his money's worth.   And Hillary, too.

 

But don't try to tell me there's no cheating going on.

 

Edit:  I should correct that.  It's not both sides.  It's all sides.  Because I can think of a dozen countries, half a dozen alphabet agencies, and quite a few corporations that may be programming their own version of the Ukrainian National Anthem into the sauce.  Over the interweb, which we were told is impossible.

 

Edited September 3, 20242 yr by impulse

The extreme bias by almost all of the mainstream media, is enough to make an election unbalanced and unfair. 

39 minutes ago, impulse said:

In New Hampshire, a cybersecurity firm found troubling security bugs — and the Ukrainian national anthem — written into a voter database built with the help of an overseas subcontractor.

 

The revelation prompted the state to take a precaution that is rare among election officials: It hired a forensic firm to scour the technology for signs that hackers had hidden malware deep inside the coding supply chain.

 

The probe unearthed some unwelcome surprises: software misconfigured to connect to servers in Russia and the use of open-source code — which is freely available online — overseen by a Russian computer engineer convicted of manslaughter, according to a person familiar with the examination and granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about it.

 

None of the findings amounted to evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said, and the company resolved the issues before the new database came into use ahead of the presidential vote this spring.

 

I wonder what they'd have to find to consider it "evidence of wrongdoing"?  And why such a forensic audit is rare among election officials?

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/01/us-election-software-national-security-threats-00176615

 

The irony being that election officials in New Hampshire, in order to avoid conspiracy theories, decided not to select the widely used Dominion system. 😁

Instead they chose a new and inexperienced supplier..

8 minutes ago, candide said:

The irony being that election officials in New Hampshire, in order to avoid conspiracy theories, decided not to select the widely used Dominion system. 😁

Instead they chose a new and inexperienced supplier..

 

Terrible. Experience in cheating should be mandatory.

18 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Terrible. Experience in cheating should be mandatory.

Your usual dose of B.S.! 😃

1 hour ago, impulse said:

the company resolved the issues before the new database came into use ahead of the presidential vote this spring.

 

'Nuff said.

 

States administer elections.

 

In 2022, 70% voted by hand-marked paper ballot, 23% voted by matching which marks a paper ballot, and 7% by Direct Recording Electronic machines.

 

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-ELECTION/VOTING/mypmnewdlvr/

 

 

Harris is plus 7 in this left-leaning state with 4 electoral college votes.

 

Trump is still likely to win. What will yousay  then? "Oh the election was fine."

 

 

Calm down.

2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Hey, I'm open to the possibility that both sides cheat and the reason Trump's pissed off is because he didn't get his money's worth.   And Hillary, too.

 

But don't try to tell me there's no cheating going on.

 

Edit:  I should correct that.  It's not both sides.  It's all sides.  Because I can think of a dozen countries, half a dozen alphabet agencies, and quite a few corporations that may be programming their own version of the Ukrainian National Anthem into the sauce.  Over the interweb, which we were told is impossible.

 

It seems you believe that an election system which contains vulnerabilities is the same as actual evidence of cheating.  While the former may be true in some instances, the latter is not. 

 

 

This what the Dems are worried about.

 

This is a false flag operation by the Trump team prepping for Nov 5 and another resounding loss.

2 hours ago, impulse said:

In New Hampshire, a cybersecurity firm found troubling security bugs — and the Ukrainian national anthem — written into a voter database built with the help of an overseas subcontractor.

 

The revelation prompted the state to take a precaution that is rare among election officials: It hired a forensic firm to scour the technology for signs that hackers had hidden malware deep inside the coding supply chain.

 

The probe unearthed some unwelcome surprises: software misconfigured to connect to servers in Russia and the use of open-source code — which is freely available online — overseen by a Russian computer engineer convicted of manslaughter, according to a person familiar with the examination and granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about it.

 

None of the findings amounted to evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said, and the company resolved the issues before the new database came into use ahead of the presidential vote this spring.

 

I wonder what they'd have to find to consider it "evidence of wrongdoing"?  And why such a forensic audit is rare among election officials?

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/01/us-election-software-national-security-threats-00176615

 

Oh my God!!! Oh my God!!! They're doing it again!!!!!

1 hour ago, Berkshire said:

It seems you believe that an election system which contains vulnerabilities is the same as actual evidence of cheating.  While the former may be true in some instances, the latter is not. 

 

Much the same as every MSM, Hillary, and the Dems believed after taking the L in 2016.   There were dozens of MSM articles about the vulnerability of the machines after 2016 and even more after 2018 midterms.   Google them.   Not to mention montages of Dems claiming Trump and the Russkies cheated.   

 

Crickets, though, after 2020.  Why is that?

 

 

Edited September 3, 20242 yr by impulse

5 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

Harris is plus 7 in this left-leaning state with 4 electoral college votes.

 

Trump is still likely to win. What will yousay  then? "Oh the election was fine."

 

Yes, as it should be, and should have been in 2020 but for massive election interference and fraud.

3 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Much the same as every MSM, Hillary, and the Dems believed after taking the L in 2016.   There were dozens of MSM articles about the vulnerability of the machines after 2016 and even more after 2018 midterms.   Google them.   Not to mention montages of Dems claiming Trump and the Russkies cheated.   

 

Crickets, though, after 2020.  Why is that?

 

 

The usual MAGA false equivalence tactics.

 

There may have been a few complaints in 2016  but, unlike the Republicans about the 2020 election, there was no organised and wide campaign to claim that the vote counting was not right because elections had been rigged by massive voter fraud. 

 

BTW, It's Trump who claimed in 2016 and 2017 that  the count was not right because of massive voter fraud! 😀

26 minutes ago, DougieMax said:

Yes, as it should be, and should have been in 2020 but for massive election interference and fraud.

Ridiculous debunked conspiracy theory. 😀

11 hours ago, candide said:

The usual MAGA false equivalence tactics.

 

Yeah, you don't see us libtards chiming in about voter suppression and gerrymandering on the right.

 

OK, maybe it's time to counter all this Dead People Voting nonsense here.

 

 

 

 

17 hours ago, Cameroni said:

Oh my God!!! Oh my God!!! They're doing it again!!!!!

Voter Fraud what a joke.  You find nothing , but you love throwing money at these useless investigations, Dems outnumber Repubtards , just the way it is , No electoral college never a republican president 

12 hours ago, DougieMax said:

Yes, as it should be, and should have been in 2020 but for massive election interference and fraud.

Sources beside Qanon and Truth Social and Faux entertainment 

15 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Much the same as every MSM, Hillary, and the Dems believed after taking the L in 2016.   There were dozens of MSM articles about the vulnerability of the machines after 2016 and even more after 2018 midterms.   Google them.   Not to mention montages of Dems claiming Trump and the Russkies cheated.   

 

Crickets, though, after 2020.  Why is that?

 

 

Your too impulsive go back to sleep with that imagination 

Just now, Irish star said:

Sources beside Qanon and Truth Social and Faux entertainment 

 

How about sworn statements from 18 states and 126 congressmen?  Refer to the Texas lawsuit, and the amicus briefs that ensued.

   says it all !

5 minutes ago, Irish star said:

Dems outnumber Repubtards

 

so battle of the demorats and repubtards. sounds about right. 

3 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

How about sworn statements from 18 states and 126 congressmen?  Refer to the Texas lawsuit, and the amicus briefs that ensued.

Mention Texas immediately Ignored , Biggest Violators , most  registration interference and voter suppression 

2 minutes ago, stoner said:

 

so battle of the demorats and repubtards. sounds about right. 

Wake and Bake Good Morning, you an Indie huh or just Hating on everything 

4 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

How about sworn statements from 18 states and 126 congressmen?  Refer to the Texas lawsuit, and the amicus briefs that ensued.

 

Yawn.

 

One state, Texas, suing another state Pennsylvania arguing PA doesn't know how to run an election.

 

Please stop the nonsense.

 

The Supreme Court issued orders on December 11, declining to hear the case on the basis that Texas lacked standing under Article III of the Constitution to challenge the results of the election held by another state.

 

-Wiki

9 minutes ago, Irish star said:

Wake and Bake Good Morning, you an Indie huh or just Hating on everything 

 

They all scum. Rich get richer. Our system is totally broken. They are all sell outs to special interest.

12 minutes ago, Irish star said:

Wake and Bake Good Morning, you an Indie huh or just Hating on everything 

 

More like bedtime blast. 

14 minutes ago, Irish star said:

Wake and Bake Good Morning, you an Indie huh or just Hating on everything 

 

I mean speak of the devil...the timing on this is glorious.

 

 

16 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

One state, Texas, suing another state Pennsylvania arguing PA doesn't know how to run an election.

 

Please stop the nonsense.

 

If that's what you believe, you don't have a clue.  It was more than just PA.  And 126 congressmen agreed in a sworn statement, along with 18 states. 

 

And I would add that the SCOTUS specifically stated they didn't judge the merits or the facts of the case.  Just the standing.

Edited September 4, 20242 yr by impulse

2 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

If that's what you believe, you don't have a clue.  It was more than just PA.  And 126 congressmen agreed in a sworn statement, along with 18 states. 

 

And I would add that the SCOTUS specifically stated they didn't judge the merits or the facts of the case.  Just the standing.

 

 

You referred to Texas v. Pennsylvania. No clue what you now mean by "It was more than just PA."?

 

126 "congressmen" signing onto a mad plot to stop the peaceful transfer of power is hardly indicative of anything.

 

"Standing" is important. Even a nine-year-old recognizes how silly it is for one state to try and tell another state how to hold an election.