Cybersecurity Expert Confirms and Provides Examples of How SQL Software Can Be Used on Voting Machines to Alter Results

Prior to the 2020 Presidential Election, notable Democrat leaders, such as President Obama, and election experts, such as Harri Hursti in the HBO documentary “KillChain” claimed that voting machines were extremely vulnerable and could be manipulated, often without leaving a trace.  However, after President Trump received the most votes of any incumbent President and our election system was flooded with “universal” mail-in ballots in the name of COVID safety, the tuned changed.  The cries for election integrity and the banning of the machines all subsided.  The same Democrat leaders began shouts of “safest election ever”.

Last week, cybersecurity expert Mark Cook showed in a shocking real-time demonstration, that not only were voting machines vulnerable, but specifically that machines could be manipulated and, shockingly, without leaving a trace of the manipulation.

No specific evidence of this happening in the 2020 Election was provided but his examples of how this could happen were shocking.

On the Conservative Daily Podcast, Cook demonstrated just two of the nearly countless ways data could be altered in elections.

The first example demonstrated showed the use of SQL which has been found on voting machines across the country and is not on the list of certified software used in the voting system.

The Gateway Pundit reported on the SQL Software found on machines in Michigan and Pennsylvania back in June 2021.

BREAKING: Antrim Co. Forensic Report BOMBSHELL Reveals Dominion Machines Were Set At 68.05% Error Rate…Meaning 68.05% Of Ballots Could Be Sent Out For Mass Adjudication, Giving Individuals Or Machines Ability To Change 68.05% Of Votes

Joe Hoft reported back in June 2021 that the SQL data found on the Dominion machines can be read and manipulated.

BREAKING: Antrim Co. Forensic Report BOMBSHELL Reveals Dominion Machines Were Set At 68.05% Error Rate…Meaning 68.05% Of Ballots Could Be Sent Out For Mass Adjudication, Giving Individuals Or Machines Ability To Change 68.05% Of Votes

This software allows back-end access that bypasses any security and logging/tracking features that would and should exist in the application software itself.

In last week’s demonstration, Cook only had to click on the software from the Start Menu of the Windows operating system, click the Connect button, then was allowed access to the voting system database without having to enter any special password.  After a few more clicks and four key presses on the keyboard, Cook was able to flip the results of an election.

The second example demonstrated by Cook was the use of USB’s to make changes to election data.  Cook showed how simply just plugging in a pre-programmed USB stick could leverage this utility to alter the results in the SQL database contained in the Election Management System. Clearly, this use of USBs is not certified in elections.

According to Cook, neither method and use of SQL has any business on any election system.

Below are two demonstrations Cook performed on the Conservative Daily Podcast.  In the first example, Cook is able to insert the USB stick.  You then seen a command prompt appear and run the script to manipulate the database.  Cook said that he deliberately made this visible and slowed it down so we could see first hand how it works.  Easy as that.  Plug and play:

In the second demonstration below, Cook uses a smartphone to manipulate the database with relative ease.  He states that he didn’t even put a password in to access the management software.

“Every part of this process, I’m expecting it to stop me.  I’m shocked every time I’m able to get further and further into this thinking ‘how on earth did someone set up a system that is this insecure?  That the citizens think it’s actually secure.  And the election officials are sitting there telling their friends and family and their citizens that they represent that the systems are secure when they are lying without even knowing it.”

There has been no shortage of stories involving “human error” or “technical glitches” involving USB cards.  Perhaps the most notable though is the story from Gregory Stenstrom in Delaware County, PA.

Stenstrom testified during the Gettysburg hearings in November 2020 that he witnessed an election worker, later identified as Jeff Savage, putting USB vDrives into at least 24 of the tabulators and claims up to 120,000 ballots should be called into question.  President Trump was leading Joe Biden by over 650,000 votes after Election night in Pennsylvania.

In a FOX News article, Stenstrom is quoted as saying:

“I personally observed USB cards being uploaded to voting machines by the voting machine warehouse supervisor on multiple occasions,” Stenstrom testified. “This person is not being observed, he’s not a part of the process that I can see, and he is walking in with baggies of USBs.

I literally begged multiple law enforcement agencies to go get the forensic evidence from the computers. It’s a simple process. It wouldn’t have taken more than an hour to image all 5 machines. That was never done despite my objections and that was three weeks ago.

Delaware County uses Hart Intercivic voting machines, so the demonstration by Cook may not apply to these machines, however, he has not been afforded the opportunity to test the vulnerability of their software.

In September 2020, before the election took place, a warehouse “election-staging site” in Philadelphia was broken into.  The only thing stolen was the laptop of an employee of ES&S, the voting machine manufacturer, and some USB drives.  While this is not the same software as what Cook demonstrated, it is a vulnerability nonetheless that may be exploited in those machines as well.

The opportunity was there.  The security of the election systems physically and surrounding the systems is lacking or totally absent.  There is evidence that election results can be altered if a bad actor is given access to the records.  

The post Cybersecurity Expert Confirms and Provides Examples of How SQL Software Can Be Used on Voting Machines to Alter Results appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.