DOMINION & SMARTMATIC VOTING MACHINES

Both companies use the same software and have same vulerabilities

ICS Advisory (ICSA-22-154-01)

Vulnerabilities Affecting Dominion Voting Systems ImageCast X

Original release date: June 03, 2022

Legal Notice

All information products included in https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ics are provided "as is" for informational purposes only. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within. DHS does not endorse any commercial product or service, referenced in this product or otherwise. Further dissemination of this product is governed by the Traffic Light Protocol (TLP) marking in the header. For more information about TLP, see https://us-cert.cisa.gov/tlp/.

1. SUMMARY

This advisory identifies vulnerabilities affecting versions of the Dominion Voting Systems Democracy Suite ImageCast X, which is an in-person voting system used to allow voters to mark their ballot. The ImageCast X can be configured to allow a voter to produce a paper record or to record votes electronically. While these vulnerabilities present risks that should be mitigated as soon as possible.

Exploitation of these vulnerabilities would require physical access to individual ImageCast X devices, access to the Election Management System (EMS), or the ability to modify files before they are uploaded to ImageCast X devices. Jurisdictions can prevent and/or detect the exploitation of these vulnerabilities by diligently applying the mitigations recommended in this advisory, including technical, physical, and operational controls that limit unauthorized access or manipulation of voting systems. Many of these mitigations are already typically standard practice in jurisdictions where these devices are in use and can be enhanced to further guard against exploitation of these vulnerabilities.

2. TECHNICAL DETAILS

2.1 AFFECTED PRODUCTS

The following versions of the Dominion Voting Systems ImageCast X software are known to be affected (other versions were not able to be tested):

• ImageCast X firmware based on Android 5.1, as used in Dominion Democracy Suite Voting System Version 5.5-A

• ImageCast X application Versions 5.5.10.30 and 5.5.10.32, as used in Dominion Democracy Suite Voting System Version 5.5-A

  • NOTE: After following the vendor’s procedure to upgrade the ImageCast X from Version 5.5.10.30 to 5.5.10.32, or after performing other Android administrative actions, the ImageCast X may be left in a configuration that could allow an attacker who can attach an external input device to escalate privileges and/or install malicious code. Instructions to check for and mitigate this condition are available from Dominion Voting Systems.

Any jurisdictions running ImageCast X are encouraged to contact Dominion Voting Systems to understand the vulnerability status of their specific implementation. 

2.2 VULNERABILITY OVERVIEW

NOTE: Mitigations to reduce the risk of exploitation of these vulnerabilities can be found in Section 3 of this document.

2.2.1    IMPROPER VERIFICATION OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC SIGNATURE CWE-347

The tested version of ImageCast X does not validate application signatures to a trusted root certificate. Use of a trusted root certificate ensures software installed on a device is traceable to, or verifiable against, a cryptographic key provided by the manufacturer to detect tampering. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to install malicious code, which could also be spread to other vulnerable ImageCast X devices via removable media. 

CVE-2022-1739 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.2.2    MUTABLE ATTESTATION OR MEASUREMENT REPORTING DATA CWE-1283

The tested version of ImageCast X’s on-screen application hash display feature, audit log export, and application export functionality rely on self-attestation mechanisms. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to disguise malicious applications on a device.

CVE-2022-1740 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.2.3    HIDDEN FUNCTIONALITY CWE-912

The tested version of ImageCast X has a Terminal Emulator application which could be leveraged by an attacker to gain elevated privileges on a device and/or install malicious code.

CVE-2022-1741 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.2.4    IMPROPER PROTECTION OF ALTERNATE PATH CWE-424

The tested version of ImageCast X allows for rebooting into Android Safe Mode, which allows an attacker to directly access the operating system. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to escalate privileges on a device and/or install malicious code.

CVE-2022-1742 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.2.5    PATH TRAVERSAL: '../FILEDIR' CWE-24

The tested version of ImageCast X can be manipulated to cause arbitrary code execution by specially crafted election definition files. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to spread malicious code to ImageCast X devices from the EMS. 

CVE-2022-1743 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.2.6    EXECUTION WITH UNNECESSARY PRIVILEGES CWE-250

Applications on the tested version of ImageCast X can execute code with elevated privileges by exploiting a system level service. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to escalate privileges on a device and/or install malicious code.

CVE-2022-1744 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.2.7    AUTHENTICATION BYPASS BY SPOOFING CWE-290

The authentication mechanism used by technicians on the tested version of ImageCast X is susceptible to forgery. An attacker with physical access may use this to gain administrative privileges on a device and install malicious code or perform arbitrary administrative actions.

CVE-2022-1745 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.2.8    INCORRECT PRIVILEGE ASSIGNMENT CWE-266

The authentication mechanism used by poll workers to administer voting using the tested version of ImageCast X can expose cryptographic secrets used to protect election information. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to gain access to sensitive information and perform privileged actions, potentially affecting other election equipment.

CVE-2022-1746 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.2.9    ORIGIN VALIDATION ERROR CWE-346

The authentication mechanism used by voters to activate a voting session on the tested version of ImageCast X is susceptible to forgery. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to print an arbitrary number of ballots without authorization.

CVE-2022-1747 has been assigned to this vulnerability. 

2.3 BACKGROUND

• CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SECTORS Government Facilities / Election Infrastructure

• COUNTRIES/AREAS DEPLOYED: Multiple

• COMPANY HEADQUARTERS LOCATION: Denver, Colorado

2.4 RESEARCHER

J. Alex Halderman, University of Michigan, and Drew Springall, Auburn University, reported these vulnerabilities to CISA.

3. MITIGATIONS

CISA recommends election officials continue to take and further enhance defensive measures to reduce the risk of exploitation of these vulnerabilities. Specifically, for each election, election officials should: 

• Contact Dominion Voting Systems to determine which software and/or firmware updates need to be applied. Dominion Voting Systems reports to CISA that the above vulnerabilities have been addressed in subsequent software versions.

• Ensure all affected devices are physically protected before, during, and after voting.

• Ensure compliance with chain of custody procedures throughout the election cycle. 

• Ensure that ImageCast X and the Election Management System (EMS) are not connected to any external (i.e., Internet accessible) networks.

• Ensure carefully selected protective and detective physical security measures (for example, locks and tamper-evident seals) are implemented on all affected devices, including on connected devices such as printers and connecting cables.

• Close any background application windows on each ImageCast X device.

• Use read-only media to update software or install files onto ImageCast X devices.

• Use separate, unique passcodes for each poll worker card.

• Ensure all ImageCast X devices are subjected to rigorous pre- and post-election testing.

• Disable the “Unify Tabulator Security Keys” feature on the election management system and ensure new cryptographic keys are used for each election.

• As recommended by Dominion Voting Systems, use the supplemental method to validate hashes on applications, audit log exports, and application exports.

• Encourage voters to verify the human-readable votes on printout. 

• Conduct rigorous post-election tabulation audits of the human-readable portions of physical ballots and paper records, to include reviewing ballot chain of custody and conducting voter/ballot reconciliation procedures. These activities are especially crucial to detect attacks where the listed vulnerabilities are exploited such that a barcode is manipulated to be tabulated inconsistently with the human-readable portion of the paper ballot. (NOTE: If states and jurisdictions so choose, the ImageCast X provides the configuration option to produce ballots that do not print barcodes for tabulation.)

Contact Information

For any questions related to this report, please contact the CISA at:

Email: CISAservicedesk@cisa.dhs.gov
Toll Free: 1-888-282-0870

For industrial control systems cybersecurity information:  https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ics 
or incident reporting:  https://us-cert.cisa.gov/report

CISA continuously strives to improve its products and services. You can help by choosing one of the links below to provide feedback about this product.

https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ics/advisories/icsa-22-154-01

'Online and vulnerable': Experts find nearly three dozen U.S. voting systems connected to internet

A team of election security experts used a “Google for servers” to challenge claims that voting machines do not connect to the internet and found some did.

According to a team of 10 independent cybersecurity experts who specialize in voting systems and elections. While the voting machines themselves are not designed to be online, the larger voting systems in many states end up there, putting the voting process at risk.

That team of election security experts say that last summer, they discovered some systems are, in fact, online.

“We found over 35 [voting systems] had been left online and we’re still continuing to find more,” Kevin Skoglund, a senior technical advisor at the election security advocacy group National Election Defense Coalition, told NBC News.

“We kept hearing from election officials that voting machines were never on the internet,” he said. “And we knew that wasn't true. And so we set out to try and find the voting machines to see if we could find them on the internet, and especially the back-end systems that voting machines in the precinct were connecting to to report their results.”

Skoglund and his team developed a tool that scoured the internet to see if the central computers that program voting machines and run the entire election process at the precinct level were online. Once they had identified such systems, they contacted the relevant election officials and also provided the information to reporter Kim Zetter, who published the findings in Vice’s Motherboard in August.

The three largest voting manufacturing companies — Election Systems &Software, Dominion Voting Systems and Hart InterCivic — have acknowledged they all put modems in some of their tabulators and scanners. The reason? So that unofficial election results can more quickly be relayed to the public. Those modems connect to cell phone networks, which, in turn, are connected to the internet.

The largest manufacturer of voting machines, ES&S, told NBC News their systems are protected by firewalls and are not on the “public internet.” But both Skoglund and Andrew Appel, a Princeton computer science professor and expert on elections, said such firewalls can and have been breached.

“AT&T and Verizon and so on try and protect as best they can the security of their phone network from the rest of the internet, but it’s still part of the internet,” Appel explained. “There can still be security holes that allow hackers to get into the phone network.”

The 35 systems Skoglund’s team found represent a fraction of total voting systems nationwide, though he believes they only captured a portion of the systems that are or have been online. Earlier this week, Skoglund showed NBC three election systems were still online even after officials had been told they were vulnerable.

For election systems to be online, even momentarily, presents a serious problem, according to Appel.

“Once a hacker starts talking to the voting machine through the modem, the hacker cannot just change these unofficial election results, they can hack the software in the voting machine and make it cheat in future elections,” he said.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, which provides cybersecurity frameworks for state and local governments and other organizations, recommends that voting systems should not have wireless network connections.

Skoglund said that they identified only one company among the systems they detected on line, ES&S. ES&S confirmed they had sold scanners with wireless modems to at least 11 states. Skoglund says those include the battleground states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida.

While the company’s website states that “zero” of its voting tabulators are connected to the internet, ES&S told NBC News 14,000 of their DS200 tabulators with online modems are currently in use around the country.

NBC News asked the two other major manufacturers how many of their tabulators with modems were currently in use. Hart said that it has approximately 1,600 such tabulators in use in 11 counties in Michigan. Dominion did not respond to numerous requests from NBC News for their sales numbers.

'Vulnerable to hacking'

With the 2020 presidential election only ten months away, Appel and Skoglund believe all modems can and should be removed from election systems.

“Modems in voting machines are a bad idea,” said Appel. “Those modems that ES&S [and other manufacturers] are putting in their voting machines are network connections, and that leaves them vulnerable to hacking by anybody who can connect to that network.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/online-vulnerable-experts-find-nearly-three-dozen-u-s-voting-n1112436

Heed Jimmy Carter on the Danger of Mail-In Voting

‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” That quote isn’t from President Trump, who criticized mail-in voting this week after Wisconsin Democrats tried and failed to change an election at the last minute into an exclusively mail-in affair. It’s the conclusion of the bipartisan 2005 report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker III.

Concerns about vote-buying have a long history in the U.S. They helped drive the move to the secret ballot, which U.S. states adopted between 1888 and 1950. Secret ballots made it harder for vote buyers to monitor which candidates sellers actually voted for. Vote-buying had been pervasive; my research with Larry Kenny at the University of Florida has found that voter turnout fell by about 8% to 12% after states adopted the secret ballot.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/heed-jimmy-carter-on-the-danger-of-mail-in-voting-11586557667

Smartmatic

In 1997, three engineers, Antonio Mugica, Alfredo José Anzola and Roger Piñate, began collaborating in a group while working at Panagroup Corp. in Caracas, Venezuela. Following the 2000 United States presidential election and its hanging chad controversy in Florida, the group proposed to dedicate a system toward electoral functions Smartmatic was officially incorporated on 11 April 2000 in Delaware by Alfredo José Anzola.Smartmatic then established its headquarters in Boca Raton, Florida with seven employees.[8][9] After receiving funds from private investors, the company then began to expand.

Expansion

Smartmatic was a little-known firm with no experience in voting technology before it was chosen by the Venezuelan authorities to replace the country's elections machinery ahead of a contentious referendum that confirmed Hugo Chávez as president in August 2004.[16] Before the election, Smartmatic was part of a consortium that included a software company partly owned by a Venezuelan government agency.[17] In March 2005,[16] with a windfall of some $120 million from its first three contracts with Venezuela, Smartmatic then bought the much larger and more established Sequoia Voting Systems, which by 2006 had voting equipment installed in 17 states and the District of Columbia.[16] On August 26, 2005, Sequoia Voting Systems announced[18] that Mr. Jack Blaine would serve in the dual role as President of Sequoia Voting Systems and President of Sequoia's parent company, Smartmatic.

Sale of Sequoia Voting Systems

On November 8, 2007, Smartmatic announced that it was divesting ownership of the voting machine company Sequoia Voting Systems. However, in April 2008, Smartmatic still held a $2 million note from SVS Holdings, Inc., the management team which purchased Sequoia Voting Systems from Smartmatic, and at that time Sequoia's machines still used Smartmatic's intellectual property.

SGO Corporation

In 2014, Smartmatic's CEO Antonio Mugica and British Lord Mark Malloch-Brown announced the launching of the SGO Corporation Limited, a holding company based in London whose primary asset is the election technology and voting machine manufacturer. Lord Malloch-Brown became chairman of the board of directors of SGO since its foundation,[ while Antonio Mugica remained as CEO of the new venture. They were joined on SGO's board by Sir Nigel Knowles, Global CEO of DLA Piper, entrepreneur David Giampaolo and Roger Piñate, Smartmatic's COO and co-founder. Malloch-Brown stepped down as chair in December 2020.

The aim of SGO, according to its CEO was "to continue to make investments in its core business (election technology), but it is also set to roll out a series of new ventures based on biometrics, online identity verification, internet voting and citizen participation, e-governance and pollution control.”

Venezuela

Main article: Elections in Venezuela

Smartmatic was the main technology supplier for fourteen Venezuelan national elections. In March 2018, Smartmatic ceased operations in Venezuela.

Venezuelan election turnout figures manipulated by one million votes: election company

LONDON (Reuters) - Turnout figures in Venezuela’s Constitutional Assembly election were manipulated up by least 1 million votes, Smartmatic, a company which has worked with Venezuela since 2004 on its voting system, said on Wednesday.

“We know, without any doubt, that the turnout of the recent election for a National Constituent Assembly was manipulated,” Smartmatic CEO Antonio Mugica said at a news briefing in London. Mugica said Smartmatic, which has provided electronic voting technology for elections around the world, was able to detect the overstated officially announced turnout because of Venezuela’s automated election system.

“We estimate the difference between the actual participation and the one announced by authorities is at least 1 million votes,” he said.

Mugica declined to directly answer whether the manipulated turnout numbers changed the result of the election, in which authorities said 8.1 million people voted.

The election of the legislative super-body has been decried by critics as illegitimate and designed to give the unpopular government of President Nicolas Maduro powers to rewrite the constitution and sideline the opposition-led congress.

Mugica said the authorities in Venezuela would likely not be sympathetic to his comments and that he had not yet passed the evidence to the Venezuela’s electoral council.

The National Elections Council did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

According to internal electoral council data previously reviewed by Reuters, only 3.7 million people had voted by 5:30 p.m. in Venezuela’s election on Sunday.

Venezuelan authorities did not respond to a request for comment on that reviewed data.

Reporting by Cassandra Garrison, writing by Guy Faulconbridge; editing by John Stonestreet

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-vote-smartmatic/venezuelan-election-turnout-figures-manipulated-by-one-million-votes-election-company-idUSKBN1AI1KZ

2004 Venezuela recall referendum

Main article: 2004 Venezuelan recall referendum

Venezuela's previously existing laws that were established before Hugo Chávez's Bolivarian Revolution stated that automated voting was required in Venezuela, with United States firm Election Systems & Software and Spanish company Indra Sistemas already being used in the country. In response to a bid process for the 2004 Venezuela recall election initiated by the National Electoral Council (CNE), Venezuela's electoral authority, the SBC Consortium was formed in the third quarter of 2003. The SBC Consortium comprised Smartmatic, Bizta, and telecommunications organization CANTV. For the 2004 elections, the SBC Consortium competed with Indra and other companies, ultimately winning the contract worth $128 million. The voting machines used previously, furnished by Indra Sistemas, were mere ballot scanners having only basic functions for storing cast votes until the end of Election Day, with no feedback whatsoever for the voter. Smartmatic had re-engineered Olivetti lottery machines used in Italy, essentially state-of-the-art PCs, each providing a colour touchscreen, a thermal printer, and advanced programming handling the voting process and printing of VVPAT receipts for the voter to check, and also tally reports and data transmission at voting session closure, with special emphasis on security. Other than the touchscreen (operating under program control), there was no input device or communications in force during Voting Day. Smartmatic's role in the election was to oversee electoral workers' training and the preparation, testing and deployment of voting machines. Bizta sent manual votes in remote areas to software centers and CANTV provided logistical assistance.

2012 Venezuelan presidential election

In October 2012, Smartmatic participated in the elections of 3 countries. In Venezuela, October 7, for the first time in the world, national elections were carried out with biometric voter authentication to activate the voting machines. Out of 18,903,143 citizens registered to vote in the presidential elections, voter turnout was around 81%, both record figures in Venezuelan electoral history.

2017 Venezuelan Constituent Assembly election

Main article: 2017 Venezuelan Constitutional Assembly election

Smartmatic stated that the results of the 2017 Venezuelan Constituent Assembly election were manipulated. On August 2 of 2017, Smartmatic CEO Antonio Mugica stated on a press briefing in London "We know, without a doubt, that the result of the recent elections for a National Constituent Assembly were manipulated," and added "We estimate that the difference between actual and announced participation by the authorities is at least one million votes." The company said that the turnout was off by at least one million votes. Reuters also reported that according to internal CNE documents leaked to the agency, only 3,720,465 votes were cast thirty minutes before polls were expected to close, though polls were open for an additional hour. The company later left Venezuela in 2018.

Venezuela

2004 elections

After the presidential recall referendum of 2004 in Venezuela, some controversy was raised about the use of electronic voting (SAES voting machines) in that country. Studies following the 2004 Venezuela recall elections found that Smartmatic's network was "bi-directional" with data being able to be transferred both ways between Smartmatic devices and the telecommunications company CANTV, with alleged irregularities found between the Smartmatic and Venezuela's National Electoral Council election results. Other independent election monitors claimed fraud and submitted appeals, and statistical evaluations including a peer-reviewed article in 2006 and a special section of 6-peer-reviewed article in 2011 concluded that it was likely that electronic election fraud had been committed. The analysis of communication patterns allowed for the hypothesis that the data in the machines could have been changed remotely, while another of the articles suggested that the outcome could have been altered from about 60% against the sitting president, to 58% for the sitting president. None of such hypotheses was ever confirmed by facts.

Representatives from international election observation agencies attested that the election conducted using SAES was at that time fair, accurate and compliant with the accepted timing and reliability criteria. These agencies included the Carter Center, the Organization of American States (OAS), and the European Union (EU). Jennifer McCoy, Carter Center Director for the Americas, stated that several audits validated the accuracy of the machines. “We found a variation of only 0.1% between the paper receipts and the electronic results. This could be explained by voters putting the slips in the wrong ballot box”.

Dr. Tulio Alvarez, who had performed an independent observation of the election which detailed the networks between CNE and Smartmatic, described the Carter Center's findings as "insufficient, superficial and irresponsible".

2005 elections

Prior to the 2005 Venezuela parliamentary election, one technician could work around "the machine's allegedly random storage protocols" and remove voting secrecy. Since the voting systems were Windows-based and only randomized data, the technician was able to download a simple software that could place Windows files in order.[vague] Following this revelation, voter turnout dropped substantially with only 25% of registered Venezuelans voting and opposition parties withdrawing from the election. This resulted in Hugo Chávez's party, as well as his allied parties, to control 100% of Venezuela's National Assembly.

Alleged affiliations with government

Affiliations with Bolivarian government politicians raised suspicions, with instances of an interior vice minister, Morris Loyo Arnáez, being hired to lobby for Smartmatic contracts and with the company paying for the National Electoral Council (CNE) president Jorge Rodríguez and his sister Delcy Rodríguez to stay at the Boca Raton Resort & Club in Boca Raton, Florida. Vice Minister Loyo was paid $1.5 million by Smartmatic as a "sales commission" and his continual payments with the company eventually doubled.

A lawyer who had worked with Rodríguez, Moisés Maiónica, was allegedly employed by Smartmatic in order to provide legal and financial assistance to help with its selection for its 2004 elections. Years after the election in December 2008, Maiónica pled guilty in the United States District Court for attempting to cover up Maletinazo scandal, an incident where Hugo Chávez attempted to finance Cristina Kirchner's 2007 Argentine Presidential Election campaign to influence Argentina's presidential election, with Maiónica stating that he was working for Venezuela's spy agency, the National Directorate of Intelligence and Prevention Services Smartmatic has denied ever having a relationship with Maiónica.

Alleged obfuscation of Venezuelan ownership

Smartmatic's headquarters moved to London in 2012, while it also has offices and R&D labs in the United States, Brazil, Venezuela, Barbados, Panama, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Estonia, and Taiwan.

The Wall Street Journal wrote that "Smartmatic scrapped a simple corporate structure" of being based in Boca Raton "for a far more complex arrangement" of being located in multiple locations following the Sequoia incident.[ Though Smartmatic has made differing statements saying that they were either American or Dutch based, the United States Department of State stated that its Venezuelan owners "remain hidden behind a web of holding companies in the Netherlands and Barbados".

 The New York Times states that "the role of the young Venezuelan engineers who founded Smartmatic has become less visible" and that its organization is "an elaborate web of offshore companies and foreign trusts", while BBC News states that though Smartmatic says the company was founded in the United States, "its roots are firmly anchored in (Venezuela)". Multiple sources simply state that Smartmatic is a Venezuelan company. Smartmatic maintains that the holding companies in multiple countries are used for "tax efficiency".

United States

At local elections in 2006 in Chicago and Cook County, allegations arose that Smartmatic might have ties to the Venezuelan government.[131] These allegations were picked up again in 2020 by a legal representative of President Donald Trump, who accused it of working with the socialist government of Venezuela in order to derail President Trump's reelection.[132] See also here under Venezuela.

2006 local elections

Following the 2004 Venezuelan recall election, Smartmatic acquired Sequoia Voting Systems, one of the leading US companies in automated voting products from the British company De La Rue in 2005. Following this acquisition, U.S. Representative Carolyn B. Maloney requested an investigation to determine whether the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) had followed correct processes to green-light sale of Sequoia to Smartmatic, which was described as having "possible ties to the Venezuelan government". The request was made after March 2006 following issues in Chicago and Cook County, where a percentage of the machines involved were manufactured by Sequoia, and Sequoia provided technical assistance, some by a number of Venezuelan nationals flown in for the event. According to Sequoia, the tabulation problems were due to human error, as a post-election check identified only three mechanical problems in 1,000 machines checked while election officials blamed poor training. Other issues were suspected to be related to software errors linked to the voting system's central computer.

Following the request, Smartmatic and Sequoia submitted a request to be reviewed by the CFIUS while also denying links to the Venezuelan government.[citation needed] The company disclosed that it was mainly owned by four Venezuelans–Antonio Mugica (788%), Roger Piñate (8.47%), Jorge Massa Dustou (5.97%), and Alfredo José Anzola (3.87%)–with a small amount of shares owned by employees (2.89%). Smartmatic subsequently sold Sequoia and later withdrew from Cook County in December 2006.

'Online and vulnerable': Experts find nearly three dozen U.S. voting systems connected to internet

A team of election security experts used a “Google for servers” to challenge claims that voting machines do not connect to the internet and found some did.

That team of election security experts say that last summer, they discovered some systems are, in fact, online.

“We found over 35 [voting systems] had been left online and we’re still continuing to find more,” Kevin Skoglund, a senior technical advisor at the election security advocacy group National Election Defense Coalition, told NBC News.

“We kept hearing from election officials that voting machines were never on the internet,” he said. “And we knew that wasn't true. And so we set out to try and find the voting machines to see if we could find them on the internet, and especially the back-end systems that voting machines in the precinct were connecting to to report their results.”

Skoglund and his team developed a tool that scoured the internet to see if the central computers that program voting machines and run the entire election process at the precinct level were online. Once they had identified such systems, they contacted the relevant election officials and also provided the information to reporter Kim Zetter, who published the findings in Vice’s Motherboard in August.

The three largest voting manufacturing companies — Election Systems &Software, Dominion Voting Systems and Hart InterCivic — have acknowledged they all put modems in some of their tabulators and scanners. The reason? So that unofficial election results can more quickly be relayed to the public. Those modems connect to cell phone networks, which, in turn, are connected to the internet.

The largest manufacturer of voting machines, ES&S, told NBC News their systems are protected by firewalls and are not on the “public internet.” But both Skoglund and Andrew Appel, a Princeton computer science professor and expert on elections, said such firewalls can and have been breached.

Experts find more than 30 U.S. voting systems connected to internet

2020 presidential election and defamation lawsuits

All the lawsuites against the critics of Dominion and Smartmatic were bogus as the points made at the beginning of this article explain. The corrupt judicial system railroaded Sydney Powell, Lou Dobbs, Rudy Giuliani, FOX News, and many other parties, raking in billions of dollars in their sleazy campaign of defamation.

Smartmatic's global controversies: Follow the money

https://www.manilatimes.net

Jan 31, 2022 — Philippine authorities allege that Smartmatic "is compromised." In the past, the software contractor had been linked with murky ...

As expected, it hasn't taken long since elections for outraged Filipinos to sue Smartmatic for negligence, incompetence, corruption, and unethical behaviour, in violation to various legislations. René Azurin argues:

Charged by the PCS for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019), the 1987 Constitution (Article XI, Section 1), the Government Procurement and Reform Law (R.A. 9184), the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards of Public Officials, and the Automated Election System Law (R.A. 9369) were Jose Melo, Gregorio Larrazabal, Rene Sarmiento, Nicodemo Ferrer, Armando Velasco, Elias Yusoph, Lucenito Tagle, Jose Tolentino, Ester Roxas and James Jimenez of Comelec; Anthony Roxas-Chua III, Timoteo Diaz De Rivera, and Denis Villorente of Comelec’s Technical Evaluation Committee; Cesar Flores and Heider Garcia of Smartmatic; and Jose Mari Antu_ez and Nilo Cruz of TIM. The respondents, according to the complaint, were guilty of "gross negligence and incompetence" and they "committed grave abuse of discretion resulting in the commission of ‘corrupt practices’ and ‘unethical conduct’." More here. Thus another election in which Smartmatic is contracted under suspicious and apparently illegal circumstances, is marred with unreliable results, lack of transparency, corruption. https://infodio.com/content/smartmatic-sued-philippines

\\][//