Slashdot Mirror


US Voting Server At Heart of Russian Hack Probe Mysteriously Wiped (theregister.co.uk)

A computer at the center of a lawsuit digging into Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election has been wiped. "The server in question is based in Georgia -- a state that narrowly backed Donald Trump, giving him 16 electoral votes -- and stored the results of the state's vote-management system," reports The Register. "The deletion of its filesystem data makes analysis of whether the system was compromised impossible to ascertain." From the report: There is good reason to believe that the computer may have been tampered with: it is 15 years old, and could be harboring all sorts of exploitable software and hardware vulnerabilities. No hard copies of the votes are kept, making the electronic copy the only official record. While investigating the Kennesaw State University's Center for Election Systems, which oversees Georgia's voting system, last year, security researcher Logan Lamb found its system was misconfigured, exposing the state's entire voter registration records, multiple PDFs with instructions and passwords for election workers, and the software systems used to tally votes cast. Despite Lamb letting the election center knows of his findings, the security holes were left unpatched for seven months. He later went public after the U.S. security services announced there had been a determined effort by the Russian government to sway the presidential elections, including looking at compromising electronic voting machines.

In an effort to force the state to scrap the system, a number of Georgia voters bandied together and sued. They asked for an independent security review of the server, expecting to find flaws that would lend weight to their argument for investment in a more modern and secure system. But emails released this week following a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that technicians at the election center deleted the server's data on July 7 -- just days after the lawsuit was filed. The memos reveal multiple references to the data wipe, including a message sent just last week from an assistant state attorney general to the plaintiffs in the case. That same email also notes that backups of the server data were also deleted more than a month after the initial wipe -- just as the lawsuit moved to a federal court. It is unclear who ordered the destruction of the data, and why, but they have raised yet more suspicions of collusion between the Trump campaign team, the Republican Party, and the Russian government.

31 of 431 comments (clear)

  1. insecure voting machines by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bet you'll find plenty of insecure voting machines around. There is absolutely no reason to have those things connected to the Internet.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:insecure voting machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is no mystery about who wiped the machine or how it got wiped. The question is, why isn't someone being charged with evidence tampering?

      I'm sure the people who support Drumpf have already started their own noise to try to turn this into some kind of non-issue. And most people won't give a darn either way. This country is screwed.

    2. Re:insecure voting machines by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Funny

      Bet you'll find plenty of insecure voting machines around.

      Tell them they're pretty or handsome and doing a really good job. That'll help their self-esteem.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    3. Re: insecure voting machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Even if it were a matter of regular maintenance it would - best case - be negligent. As soon as they got sued it became legally relevant and your maintenance schedule needs to be delayed.

      But it's certainly suspiciously bad timing. They were sued because the system was too old and badly maintained and secured. So maintenance wasn't a high priority for many years and now suddenly they wipe it?
      Certainly worth investigating.

  2. Re:Like Hillary's server was? by quantaman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hillary's server was wiped, and the circumstances under which is was wiped (and who decided to do what when) was thoroughly investigated and no one was charged (though the admin probably should have been), and the files were recovered.

    Hopefully this server wiping is as thoroughly investigated.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  3. Russians not necessary by ejtttje · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Black box voting machines make it easy for election officials to throw the results however they pleased. Let's skip the Russian conspiracy theories when good ol' domestic corruption is more than enough to explain suspiciously wiped servers.

    1. Re:Russians not necessary by king+neckbeard · · Score: 3

      No, what he's saying is that it's more likely that there was internal corruption than external hacking. The voting machines have been insecure for over a decade, if not more, and politicians have been corrupt longer than we have history. The Russia hysteria is to cover the DNC's bad behavior and to explain away how Clinton lost to the worst candidate ever. The answer was that she was the worst candidate that the Dems have produced, and she was running on the status quo with an electorate more pro-change than the one that elected Obama.

      Trump didn't win. Hillary lost. The Clinton wing needs to die off, and the Bernie wing needs to take over. Until that happens, the Dems put themselves at a disadvantage despite demographics and policy opinion actually being considerably left of them.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re:Russians not necessary by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Clinton lost to a fucking game show host. The problem isn't Russian hackers, it's the power structure in major western nations is isolated from reality, and thus they get their asses kicked by populists. Populist left easily beats populist right, but populist right beats establishment left. Establishment left sabotages populist left, and gets beaten by populist right. The Clintons and the Blairs are responsible for votes being close enough that foreign interference could even possibly affect results. The Dems could have nominated a ham sandwich and received 300 electoral votes against Trump.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Russians not necessary by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only problem with giving the Democrats the roto rooter treatment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., is Americans expect everything now, it must happen yesterday and cleaning out the Democrats much like cleaning out the Republicans will take at least 6 years. Two minor elections and one full election. Not that it wont be chaotic fun to do so but too many Americans expect it served up a platter for them, someone else to clean up their mess.

      I don't get, look how much fun it has been screwing over the establishment and making them look as stupid and clumsy as clowns in a clown car. This is the best time to enjoy politics, sure the outcomes at the moment aren't all that flash but you can see them literally falling apart in a blind panic, collapsing in the pile of bullshit the have crafted out of US politics.

      Being a reformist is always way meaner than being a revolutionary. Revolutions tend to lead to one thing only, another revolution. The Reformists use the power of the state to clean the state and once started becomes pretty much impossible to stop. We are not fighting the authorities but backing those with honour and integrity and allowing them to do the job they want to do and providing them with the support and information to do that job. The best way to fight crime of any sort is for the authorities and the public to work together and that takes patience, cooperation and clear thought, the willingness to do the hard yards to get the touch down.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:Russians not necessary by CapOblivious2010 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      See, this is why electronic vote counting is such an abysmal idea. It's not just that the vote totals can theoretically be hacked (though that's bad enough), it's that there's simply NO WAY to prove the totals WEREN'T hacked. If a group of people decides that the election was hacked, there's no real evidence one way or the other. This undermines faith in the system REGARDLESS of whether the election was or was not hacked!

      So we're putting the foundations of our system of consensual government at risk just to save 1 sheet of paper every 4 years? Look, I'm all for saving the environment, but is this really the best way to do it? Maybe the newspapers can agree to sell ONE LESS PAGE of advertising on ONE DAY out of every 1,461 days instead? Or maybe we can all agree to buy one less book in our lifetimes? Or maybe we just agree that this is one situation that really IS worth "killing trees" for!

      But however we justify it to ourselves, can we PLEASE go back to paper ballots?

    5. Re:Russians not necessary by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Republicans lost too. Their party was infiltrated by the alt-right. They can't work with Trump. The fallout from his election is going to be hurting them for years.

      We tried to warn them.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  4. Obligatory by spaceman375 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Voting Machines: https://xkcd.com/463/

    --
    On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
  5. Re:Like Hillary's server was? by OrangeTide · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hopefully this server wiping is as thoroughly investigated.

    I won't hold my breath.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  6. Nothing to see here by quonset · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Move along. Ignore the man behind the curtain. Electronic voting systems are perfectly safe. There's no need to keep any paper records because the machines never make mistakes and are secure from intrusion.

    There's never been a case where voting machines have been compromised. How do we know? Because we say so.

  7. Re:Nothing narrow about Trump's win in Georgia by dltaylor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Liar, moron, or just didn't even read the summary?

    The data was wiped AFTER the suit was filed.

  8. Re:aha by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If it was ordered by a Republican, it would be the first thing mentioned.

    Why would it have to be mentioned? The Georgia Secretary of State is responsible for elections there, top-to-bottom (he's a Republican). The Governor of Georgia is a Republican. The state legislature is controlled by Republicans. The Attorney General of Georgia is a Republican. Republicans control every single state-wide lever of power.

    The server was wiped after voting rights activists filed a lawsuit against the Republican Secretary of State. The reason for the lawsuit? To force the Republican Secretary of State to have the server independently analyzed.

    So, please explain why and how "Dems are burning the evidence" in this case? And how did they manage to get a server, and all of its backups simultaneously wiped when they were under Republican control.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  9. Re:They always tell the truth so this is fine by MoaDweeb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    7 years? If he gets through this term; if he gets re-elected.

    If the USA votes Trump in for a second term then your decline into irrelevance will fall off a cliff. Such insanity should be punished.

    --
    New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
  10. Re:aha by ClickOnThis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Voting results for federal elections -- at the individual ballot level -- must be kept for 22 months after the election. The servers got wiped after just 8 months.

    I'm thinking this is a clear violation of election law. IANAL but, given the timing of the destruction of the records -- mere days after the lawsuit was filed -- I wonder whether it's also obstruction of justice.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  11. Re:They always tell the truth so this is fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "but all Trump has to do is fire Mueller, and that investigation is over." So what you're saying is you're a moron. See you at the gallows, traitor lol. Bring your long necktie! #Winning!

    Firing the guy investigating you is basically the next thing to admitting guilt, particularly when the reason given was that they felt bad how they treated Hillary. I actually talked to a guy at work. He believed that you had to successfully stop an investigation for it to be obstruction of justice. That is not the law. Here is the quote from wikipedia.

    Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsified, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under Title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

    Note that it doesn't say success. Mueller is spotless. There is no plausible reason to fire him other than to obstruct justice. I think at that point enough republicans might support impeachment, since getting rid of him asap allows them to recover sooner.

    I wouldn't be at all disappointed if Trump fired enough people until he could get rid of Mueller. I think it would signal his end, with all the evidence Mueller and the Senate/House collected used to speed along his removal. Firing Comey should have been enough to start the process, but the republicans wanted power more than they wanted to do what was right. Note that I don't agree that Comey should have revealed all he did, when he did, but to think Trump fired him because he disapproved is beyond nonsense.

    Also, just think. Comey prepared for the day of his possible firing, though didn't really expect it. Just think how prepared Mueller must be now...

    Come to think of it, Trump's attempts to influence the outcome of the investigation by calling it all fake news, and attempting to discredit everyone who disagrees, could be seen as a form of obstruction.

  12. Re:Can you say "FalseFlag" by Democrats w/ zero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    * I've lived over 1/2 a century & NEVER in my life have I seen such utter STUPIDITY over a Presidential Election in the USA!

    Alzheimer's is a bitch.

  13. Re:Like Hillary's server was? by jrumney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, lets equate emails with voting records and use this news to flog a dead horse. Distract and dodge. Works every time, and the best bit is, you don't even need to do it yourself, an army of tribal supporters are willing to do your work for you on internet discussion spaces everywhere.

  14. Calm down... there was a backup by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 5, Informative

    The non-clickbaity side of the story (a statement from Center for Elections Systems at Kennesaw State University, who had possession of the server) is here:

    "In March 2017, a Center for Election Systems’ server involved in an alleged data breach was turned over to the FBI. While the server was in the possession of the Bureau, a forensic image or copy of all the data on the server was made and held by the agency. Following the notification from the FBI that no data was compromised and the investigation was closed, the server was returned to the University’s Information Technology Services group and securely stored. In accordance with standard operating procedures, an after-action report was prepared. This report outlined hardware improvements for the Center, including repurposing the impacted server and surplusing servers that had exceeded end of life. As part of the report, the original server that had been investigated by the FBI was designated to be repurposed, and the drives on the server were erased and the server made available for alternative uses."

    "As noted by the subpoena filed today by the Attorney General’s Office, the data and information that was on the server in question has been and is still in the possession of the FBI and will remain available to the parties in the event it is determined to be relevant in the pending litigation."

    So (a) the feds already investigated and found no evidence the server was compromised, and (b) they still have their forensic image of the server. This seems a lot more like litigants and journalists huffing and puffing than it does a real issue.

    1. Re: Calm down... there was a backup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      You don't find it odd that the server was wiped after a lawsuit was filed? You don't find it odd they degaused the backups three times when the lawsuit moved to federal court? Are you for real here? I mean the first wipe could have been morons being morons. But the destruction of the backups? And hey isn't preservation of records in the face of litigation a thing? Even armchair lawyers know that's a thing. Somebody really doesn't want those records examined.

  15. Re:Like Hillary's server was? by Sique · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One statement does not contradict the other. If the FBI never served a formal request to investigate the physical server, it won't have had access to it. And still the DNC never had denied the FBI access to the server.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  16. Re:Does not get much more sketchy by sjames · · Score: 3, Informative

    You're nearly 30 years out of date. On '80s era HDs, it's true, a single overwrite of the data would leave traces sufficient that given some very expensive equipment and a very expensive analysis, the data could be recovered. On modern drives, even a single overwrite with zeros is sufficient to make the data irretrievable.

  17. Re:Like Hillary's server was? by jellomizer · · Score: 3

    Yawn... Hillary lost the election old news.
    Because having a madman in charge of the country is much better then a lady who poorly managed her IT.

    At this point it isn’t about Clinton or Trump. We had been played for suckers by the Russians. They had shown to push both sides of the political spectrum to be more radicalized just to destabilize the US. So they can wield more power. If Clinton won there would be so much hatred on the right that she would be facing massive battles to push any agenda. Trump is just too stupid to be able to push an agenda even with his party in power.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  18. Re:Nothing narrow about Trump's win in Georgia by ewhac · · Score: 3, Funny

    Liar, moron, or just didn't even read the summary?

    Why not all three?

  19. NO voting machines are connected to the Internet by davide+marney · · Score: 5, Informative

    I am a volunteer poll worker in Virginia. NO vote-tallying equipment is connected to the Internet, anywhere in the U.S. We are not idiots. We have about 230+ years' worth of experience with people trying to throw an election, and we understand -- and mitigate -- the risks.

    This server in Georgia did NOT hold vote counts. It held voter registration records, instructions, and voting equipment passwords.

    Each precinct tallying the votes keeps an independent record of their machines. There are paper backups of voting totals in the form of printed counts and hand-copied summary sheets.

    In my state, we have switched over to machine-counted paper ballots in all precincts. Those scanners do not even have wireless hardware in them, they can only be accessed via ethernet cable. Once a machine is tested and certified for voting, a cover is placed over the ethernet socket and it is sealed with a plastic band.

    I do advocate the use of paper ballots, but not because then humans could do a hand-count of them. Humans are lousy at repetitive tasks. A hand-count of millions of votes would have a margin of error 10x the size of the margin of error of machine-counted votes. In Virginia, when there is a recount, we bring in a completely different set of scanners than were used to originally count the votes, and run the same paper ballots through them. That is a excellent independent count.

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
  20. Re:Like Hillary's server was? by kenh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    a lady who poorly managed her IT

    What? You bought her "aw shucks, gee whiz" performance?

    With malice of forethought she NEVER, EVER logged in or in any way touched a government email account in her entire term as Secretary of State because, being so backwards technically, she found it easier to hire her own IT consultant, have a server built and managed on her own dime, and have to tell everyone she worked with her email was not hrc@state,gov but instead Hillary@hrc45.com?

    Hillary somehow "for simplicity sake" abandoned her official email that she used as a US Senator opting for one run by a guy that does IT work on the side when she stepped into Obama's Cabinet?

    As an Ivy League educated lawyer, who was on the wrong side of dozens and dozens of "he said, she said" lawsuits and investigations, you honestly believe she has no idea how emails can derail a political career?

    --
    Ken
  21. Re:NO voting machines are connected to the Interne by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Manipulating voter registration records can also affect the outcome of an election, particularly in a situation where you are performing mass voter roll purges -- which I believe Georgia did. Tweaking the purge in the partisan way is one of the things that could be hidden by this.

    Many voters who are denied a ballot may not choose to cast a provisional ballot, or come out to vote next time. Although this may seem like they get what they deserve if they're not sufficiently dedicated, voting can be more of a sacrifice for some people, particularly those with limited time to vote and where the polling stations are located inconveniently. If you're risking late for work you might choose just to leave. There have been documented attempts to manipulate turnout by inconveniently locating polling places.

    As far as paper ballots, the obvious choice is optically scanned paper ballots. That said, I have never seen any evidence that human recounters don't perform acceptably. They are not perfect, but neither are machines -- for that matter how could you possibly know if a machine is perfect? In any case human limitations can be dealt with using statistics, to any desirable level of confidence.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  22. Re:Just like Lois Lerner's drives by omnichad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So two groups of people did illegal things. That doesn't diminish this case one bit.