Real Arizona Audit Results

[RockyStar]

Follow the link as my copy and paste didn't turn out format wise like the report but all the info is there.

https://www.thrivetimeshow.com/wp-conte ... 069701.pdf


Maricopa County Forensic Audit Volume I: Executive Summary & Recommendations
Work Performed For:
Arizona State Senate 1700 W Washington St Phoenix, AZ 85007

1 DOCUMENTOVERVIEW
This document includes the Executive Summary of the Maricopa County Forensic Audit, a listing of findings within the
Findings Summary, as well as Recommendations based on our work in the audit.
For more details about the Methodology & Operations of the audit, please see “Maricopa County Forensic Audit – Volume II – Methodology and Operations”.
For more details about the Findings of the report, or to review the results from the hand-tallying of the 2.1 million ballots, please see “Maricopa County Forensic Audit – Volume III – Result Details”.
2 EXECUTIVESUMMARY
The preamble to our Constitution reminds us that our nation is always pursuing greater perfection, seeking to establish “... a more perfect Union” so that we can “...secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”. Nothing is more essential in establishing liberty than free and fair elections. To that end, Cyber Ninjas was engaged by the Arizona Senate to audit the 2020 General Election and determine the outcome of the election and in what areas legislative reform is required to ensure that our elections are indeed free and fair in the future.
This audit has been the most comprehensive and complex election audit ever conducted. It involved the hand counting of 2.1 million ballots, a forensic paper inspection of them, a forensic review of the voting machines, and most important, an in-depth analysis of the voter rolls and the 2020 General Election final files.
Many of the issues in the election can be traced back to two primary causative factors: mail-in voting and improper voter registration management. More than 80% of the ballots cast in Maricopa were via mail.
The guarantee of the secret ballot is not only a right that applies to the voter themself, but it is also a right guaranteed to the rest of those voting in the election that that person’s ballot is secret and therefore cannot have come under any undue influence. Mail-in voting eliminates secrecy in voting as it is impossible to control or know who a voter shares their ballot with and what is done with it prior to it being mailed-in or dropped off.
57,734 ballots with serious issues were identified in the audit. These issues include improper voter registration, improper votes, and discrepancies in the registration. This is a conservative estimate, as there were other identified problems that were not quantified nor included in that total, likely resulting in a much larger number of flawed ballots. Additional issues identified: backdated registrations, multiple voter registrations linked to the same voter affidavit, voters without records in a commercial database, and printing defects rendering thousands of ballots as suspicious.
In the 2020 presidential election, the margin of victory was only 10,457 votes, a small fraction of the 57,734 ballots with known issues. Again, this is almost 6 times the margin of victory in the Presidential race and is multiples of the margin of victory in other races. Based on these factual findings, the election should not be certified, and the reported results are not reliable.
Major issues identified:
• There were more than 10,000 double votes across county lines
• Tens of thousands of ballots cast from individuals who had moved prior to the election and could not have
physically received their ballots, legally.
© 2021 Cyber Ninjas FOR ARIZONA SENATE USE ONLY Page 1 of 7

• None of the systems related to elections integrity had numbers that would balance and agree with each other.
• The voter rolls and the registration management process itself have many data integrity issues. For instance, over 200 individuals were easily identifiable as likely being the same person but having two different Voter IDs and voting twice in the election.
o Without access to the County’s detailed records including personally identifiable information and
registration systems it is more likely there were many tens of thousands of improper votes in the election from double voters, deceased voters, voters for which we can find no trace in the public records nor association to their voting address, moved voters, etc.
• Proper voter registration law and procedures were not followed.
o There were unexplained large purges of registered voters, right after the election, of people who had
voted in the election.
o There was back dating of registrations, adjustments made to historical voting and voter records,
unexplained linking of voter registration affidavits to multiple voters and more.
• Files were missing from the Election Management System (EMS) Server.
• Ballot images on the EMS were corrupt or missing.
• Logs appeared to be intentionally rolled over, and all the data in the database related to the 2020 General
Election had been fully cleared.
• On the ballot side, batches were not always clearly delineated, duplicated ballots were missing the required
serial numbers, originals were duplicated more than once, and the Auditors were never provided Chain-of- Custody documentation for the ballots for the time-period prior to the ballot’s movement into the Auditors’ care. This all increased the complexity and difficulty in properly auditing the results.
• There were substantial statistically significant anomalies identified in the ratio of hand-folded ballots, on- demand printed ballots, as well as a statistically significant increase in provisional ballot rejections for a mail- in ballot already being cast, suggestive of mail-in ballots being cast for voters without their knowledge.
The 2005 Report on Federal Election Reform, which was an effort led by democrats, stated the following regarding mail- in voting:
“While vote by mail appears to increase turnout for local elections there is no evidence that it significantly expands participation in federal elections. Moreover it raises concerns about privacy as citizens voting at home may come under pressure to vote for certain candidates and it increases the risk of fraud.”
Managing an election conducted almost entirely by mail is a difficult endeavor and raises numerous issues which would be much less likely to occur if most voting was in-person.
Had Maricopa County chosen to cooperate with the audit, many of the obstacles faced in the audit could have been overcome. By the County withholding subpoena items, their unwillingness to answer questions as is normal between auditor and auditee, and in some cases actively interfering with audit research, the County prevented a complete audit. This did not stop the primary goal of offering recommendations for legislative reform to the Arizona Senate, but it did leave many questions open as to the way and manner that the 2020 General Election was conducted.
3 FINDINGSUMMARY
The following is a list of findings covered within the report. Details on all these findings as well as the results of the hand-
tallying can be found in the document “Maricopa County Forensic Audit – Volume III – Results Details”.
© 2021 Cyber Ninjas FOR ARIZONA SENATE USE ONLY Page 2 of 7

NOTE: Ballots Impacted is intended to give a gauge on the potential impact for the finding. While it is based on the number of ballots impacted by the finding, it is not generally expected that any single finding would completely favor a candidate. In many cases there could be legitimate and legal votes within the Ballots Impact amount. For more details, please see the write-up for the finding within Volume III.
© 2021 Cyber Ninjas FOR ARIZONA SENATE USE ONLY Page 3 of 7

Finding Name
Phase
Ballots Impacted
Severity
Mail-in Ballots Voted from Prior Address
Potential Voters that Voted in Multiple Counties
More Ballots Returned by Voter Than Received Election Management System Database Purged Election Files Deleted
Corrupt Ballot Images
Official Results Does Not Match Who Voted
More Duplicates Than Original Ballots
In-Person Voters Who Had Moved out of Maricopa County Voters Moved Out-of-State During 29-Day Period Proceeding Election
Missing Ballot Images
Failure to Follow Basic Cyber Security Practices Subpoenaed Equipment Not Provided Anonymous Logins
Dual Boot System Discovered
EMS Operating System Logs Not Preserved
Votes Counted in Excess of Voters Who Voted
Voters not part of the Official Precinct Register Ballots Returned Not in the Final Voted File Duplicated Ballots Incorrect & Missing Serial Numbers Mail-In Ballot Received without Record of Being Sent Voters With Incomplete Names
Deceased Voters
Audit UOCAVA Count Does Not Match the EAC Count Late Registered Voters with Counted Votes
Date of Registration Changes to Earlier Date Duplicate Voter IDs
Multiple Voters Linked by AFFSEQ
Double Scanned & Counted Ballots
UOCAVA Electronic Ballots Double Counted Duplicate Ballots Reuse Serial Numbers
EMS Operating System Logs Not Preserved
Election Data Found from Other States
Audit Interference
Batch Discrepancies
Commingled Damaged and Original Ballots
Early Votes Not Accounted for In EV33
High Bleed-Through Rates on Ballots
Improper Paper Utilized
Inaccurate Identification of UOCAVA Ballots
Voter History
Voter History Certified Results Voting Machine Voting Machine Voting Machine Certified Results Ballot Certified Results
Voter History
Voting Machine Voting Machine Voting Machine Voting Machine Voting Machine Voting Machine Certified results Voter History Certified Results Ballot
Certified Results Voter History Voter History Ballots
Voter History Voter History Voter History Voter History Ballot
Ballot
Ballot Voter History Voter History Ballot Ballot Ballot Certified Results Ballot Ballot Ballot
23,344 Critical 10,342 Critical 9,041 High N/A High N/A High N/A High
3,432 Medium 2,592 Medium 2,382 Medium
2,081 Medium
N/A Medium N/A Medium N/A Medium N/A Medium N/A Medium N/A Medium 836 Low 618 Low 527 Low 500 Low 397 Low 393 Low 282 Low 226 Low 198 Low 194 Low 186 Low 101 Low
50 Low 6 Low 6 Low
N/A Low
N/A Low
N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational
© 2021 Cyber Ninjas FOR ARIZONA SENATE USE ONLY
Page 4 of 7

Missing Subpoena Items
No Record of Voters in Commercial Database Out of Calibration Ballot Printers Real-Time Provisional Ballots
Voter Registration System Audit Access Questionable Ballots
Ballot Voter History Ballot Voter History Voter History Ballot
N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational N/A Informational
4 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following sections outline the key recommendations that were determined over the course
4.1 Elimination of Universal Mail-in Voting
of this audit.
Universal Mail-in Voting statutes should be repealed, and absentee ballots only allowed in the strictest of circumstances for military personnel stationed outside of Arizona as well as doctor verified individuals who are not physically able to make it to a polling location.
4.2 Result Reconciliation
Legislation should be considered that does not allow an election to be certified until the Official Canvas and the Final Voted File is fully reconciled. Furthermore, full records for every ballot sent, ballot received, ballot rejected, and ballot voided should have to be fully reconciled within a defined period after the election.
4.3 Voter Registration
Legislation should be enacted that centralizes voter registration at the state level tied into the State’s motor vehicle and identification system ensuring that voters are registered under their full legal name and that they have only a single residential address with the state and one mailing address if applicable.
4.4 Voter Rolls
Legislation should be enacted that links voter roll registration to changes in driver’s licenses or other state identification, as well as requiring the current voter rolls be validated against the United States Postal Service (USPS) National Change of Address (NCOA) at a predefined period prior to every election. Any voter roll software should validate that there is only one entry in the state database per identification number, such as a driver’s license number.
Laws already exist for interstate reporting of changes in residence, addresses, and driver’s licenses. Tying voter roll registration to these forms of identification would greatly increase the likelihood that voter registration details would be kept up to date. Individuals are much more likely to remember their license needs to be updated immediately than voter registration, and since most states now offer the ability to register to vote when getting a license, license updates could also update voter rolls.
It is recommended that the voter rolls be validated against the NCOA both 30 days or more prior to the election, in addition to a week before absentee ballots are sent out, along with requiring absentee voters to register prior to every election. This check would not be utilized to purge the rolls, but to validate that an absentee ballot should be sent prior to that ballot going out..
© 2021 Cyber Ninjas FOR ARIZONA SENATE USE ONLY Page 5 of 7

In addition, legislation should be considered to require the voter rolls to periodically be compared against ERIC, the Social Security’s Master Death List, or other commercially available tools that gives access to this information. Failure to do this at least once a year should come with financial penalties.
4.5 Election Software
Legislation should be considered that would require applications developed and utilized for voter rolls or voting to be developed to rigorous standards that ensure the confidentiality and integrity of the systems. Specifically, its recommended that the Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS) Level 3 be applied to all applications associated with voter rolls or voting and that it be required that this be fully validation no less than once every two years. Part of this testing should be explicitly testing a programming interface access to validate that no external party has the capability to manipulate the voter rolls.
Furthermore, it should be required that whoever builds the software be required to rotate vendors doing the OWASP ASVS Level 3 assessment a minimum of once every four years, with a rotation of no less than three vendors before returning back to a vendor utilized in the past.
The vendor who performs this work must be willing to attest that their assessment fully covered the ASVS Level 3 requirements that there are no critical or high vulnerabilities detected, and that there is a remediation plan for any moderate risk vulnerabilities.
4.6 Voting Machines
Legislation should be considered that would prohibit connecting tabulators, or the Election Management System Servers or similar equipment from being connected to the internet or any other mechanism that could allow remote access to these systems.
Furthermore, County employees should have access to all administrative functions of all election equipment and have sufficient access to independently validate any configuration items on the device without requiring the involvement of any 3rd party vendor.
In addition, electronic voting machines must always have a paper backup of all ballots which can be used to confirm that votes were cast as intended; and these machines must be regularly maintained according to the vendors recommended maintenance schedule. Failing to do so should have a financial impact on the County.
Legislation should be considered that would require that paper stocks utilized on election day should conform to manufacturer recommendations to ensure that the paper that has been tested in the device is what is actually utilized to cast votes.
4.7 Election Audits
Legislation should be considered that creates an election audit department in charge of regularly conducting audits on a rotating basis across all counties in Arizona after elections. This department should validate that the County follows all processes and procedures outlined in the Elections Procedure Manual (EPM) and have the ability to financially impact the County for repetitive EPM failures, or other failures that make auditing more difficult.
Legislation should be considered that requires batches of ballots to be clearly labeled, separated from each other in a manner where they cannot easily mix together, and easily connected to the batches run through the tabulation
© 2021 Cyber Ninjas FOR ARIZONA SENATE USE ONLY Page 6 of 7

equipment for easy auditing of the system. Failure to follow these practices should have financial implications for the County.
Legislation should be considered with have financial and criminal penalties for purposely inhibiting a legislative investigation, or an officially sanction audit of an election.
4.8 Ballots
Legislation should be considered that will make ballot images and the Cast Vote Record artifacts from an election that is publicly published within a few days of the results being certified for increased transparency and accountability in the election process.
Legislation should further be considered that would require all ballots to be cast on paper by hand utilizing paper with security features such as watermarks or similar technology; with a detailed accounting of what paper(s) and the quantities utilized for any given election cycle.
Absentee voting should incorporate an objective standard of verification for early voter identification, similar to the ID requirements required for in person voting.
© 2021 Cyber Ninjas FOR ARIZONA SENATE USE ONLY Page 7 of 7