1. Introduction:
In presentations, I have expressed concerns regarding a GAPING HOLE in QUALITY CONTROL with respect to our elections in Delaware. Specifically, we do not perform publicly viewed, post-election, Risk Limiting Audits (RLAs) on our systems that process our Absentee and Early Vote ballots. Based on 2022 results, that means over 20% of our vote is not subject to this critical quality control step. This makes our systems more vulnerable to a specific type of algorithmic cheating I will lightly refer to as The Old Fliparoo. This class of algorithms provides “bad actors” one of the Easiest and Most Efficient Means of Rigging an Election, while at the same time providing them With the Least Chance of Actually Getting Caught if they can infiltrate. To those who say we are protected a story comes to mind. God told the Lobster I have good news and bad news. The good news is I have given you a hard shell and claws for great protection. The bad news is I also made you the tastiest morsel in the ocean. Without RLA’s the Fliparoo….is the tastiest morsel in the ocean.
I have also argued that Logic and Accuracy Tests that are required to ensure the systems are programmed properly…. can’t actually do that. This time, I don’t say it. I show it. It’s no longer hypothetical. I give you a working voting system that does it….right in front of you.
The machine provided comes with all the functionality needed for the cheater. If you open the file and play with the machine, 1.) You will get to be the Voter and “Cast your Vote”. 2.) You will be able to play the roll of the Department of Elections. You will be able to “design the ballot”, and “reset the election”. 3.) You also get to play the role of a notorious cheater and input in the parameters that allow you to both, “Pass” the DOE’s Logic and Accuracy Test, and then implement the steal, so your candidate wins. 4.) Finally, you can be one of those integrity guys, or alternatively the QC guy for the cheater and review the “Cast Vote Records”. In doing so you may either get clues as to whether something strange happened in the election or if the machine is cheating properly as designed depending on your perspective. Finally you’ll get to see the Improper Programming that vendors won’t let you see. If you poke around the “Developers” tab you can find it in the Excel file.
It is not necessary to open and play with the machine as the article stands alone with “screen shots” and the description of operation but it is not nearly as fun. I hope this expands your understanding of the problems, and illustrates what needs, and can be done to fix the problem, now.
2. Introducing: The Cheat-O-Matic 100K (DE): Election System!
2.1 Project Scope:
So you think creating an election system is a big expensive complex task right? Ughhhh….no. In the big world of computers, election math and the concept of adding 1 to a prior total is pretty small potatoes. I told a buddy I wanted to create a voting “system” with certain algorithmic cheating capabilities. I said just do it in an “Excel” workbook, because Excel is one of the most widely used programs on earth. From the time of verbal specification to actual product, about an hour. You could stretch it to 1.5 hrs if you include chit-chat between two friends on the phone. I owe him a beer. Better yet Excel programming is his business and he can do from very simple to very complex system work. If you need such work, let me know and I will get you his contact information.
2.2 The Program:
The program itself is attached as part of this article. If you have Excel on your computer you can open and play with it a bit and become an election systems “expert”. It’s a real powerhouse. It does one race with two candidates. It does use a “macro” so if Excel asks for approval when you open it… you have to say yes. Disclaimer: Now, I don’t want me or my friend to get into one of those “no good deed goes unpunished” situations so how about a legal disclaimer. I think it works right, and I don’t think it has any bugs or worms but neither he or I warrant a damn thing. Use it for fun and education at your own risk. The link to the file is here: The Cheat-O-Matic
2.3 The Interface(s)
The entire set of interface(s) for 1.) The Voter, 2.) The Department of Elections, and the 3) The Cheater including operator instructions and a friendly reminder to the Cheater are shown in this screenshot that is Exhibit A.
3.2 Total Votes Cast:
In the real election systems, the “Total Votes Cast” shown as “26” above for the Cheat-O-Matic will show up all throughout the day for a certain geography on the “Electronic Poll Books” and each machine. The election workers can see that. The “Challengers” can see that. By the way, you cheaters that are worried about the slick Challengers out there who are going to count the number of people that enter the polling location and to see if it matches Total Votes cast….don’t worry, when you do The Old Fliparoo, ballots aren’t added or subtracted, just flipped so this number will be correct and it won’t get caught.
At the central systems accessible by the DOE they can not only see the total votes cast throughout the state but they also know the party and name of each voter credited as casting a vote by any method up to that point in time. In theory nobody is supposed to know which candidate each voter voted for and no such aggregate totals are supposed to be available until after the polls close.
During an election, the DOE provides this “have voted” data to the political parties. One narrative used to justify this practice is that the parties can use the information to try to “Get Out The Vote” (GOTV). Volunteers can call, txt or otherwise try to contact people that up to that point in time have not cast a vote. While that may be the accepted narrative, as a public service announcement, the folks at Cheat-O-Matic point out that such data might coincidentally provide cheaters a good estimate of how many votes, if any, they might need to steal the “win” for their candidate(s).
3.3 Recorded Votes:
In a “normal” election you will not see any individual “candidate” results during the day. After the polls close they will let you see the “Recorded Votes”. On Exhibit A these are highlighted in red. For the individual “Day of In Person” voting machines, the candidate Recorded Vote summaries will be printed out on paper register tapes after the polls close. Many such tapes are hung in the windows of the voting locations.
3.4 Actual Votes: Real voting machines do not have a function like the Cheat-O-Matics “Actual Votes” display highlighted in Green. I think that is very inconsiderate and just not very consumer friendly. If they did, everything would be so easy but real machines only report the Recorded Votes. Now, if there are Risk Limiting Audits……..and to the extent of the sample size of the audits,…… and to the extent the audits are robust and can’t be beat by cheaters……and pending the actual results of the audits……you may have “some” confidence that the Recorded Votes = Actual Votes. I mean I sorta think that’s the whole idea behind those publicly viewed RLA’s.
3.5 The Department of Elections (DOE) Tasks:
The DOE has an important tasks to perform in an election. On the Cheat-O-Matic the DOE performs two.
3.5.1 Design the Ballot: They need to write the name of the actual candidates where it says “Candidate A” and “Candidate B”. If you “right click” with the cursor on those buttons they will be “selected” and you can both edit the candidate’s name or move the location of the buttons. Have you figured it out yet? As it sits, the cheating program is designed to “flip” votes from Candidate A, the candidate on the left side of the ballot, to Candidate B on the right side of the ballot. By reversing the location of the buttons and changing names you could flip votes from the candidate on the right to the candidate on the left.
Now you cheaters this can be useful in a different way. If you know your candidate is getting crushed in the polls you don’t even need to turn on The Old Fliparoo. By relabeling names and changing the position you could just have all Recorded Votes for Candidate B votes be counted for Candidate A or vice versa just by the design of the Ballot. You wouldn’t need a flipping algorithm at all. (Caution, this method of cheating could be discovered in the LAT if the public show up and you don’t know how to rig the test deck). Worried about getting caught. No problem. If people discover “incorrect” labeling remember, incorrect is subjective. I think if you say some technical jargon like, “oopsie”, “glitch”, “human-error” there will be no problems, just don’t blame the machines. Blaming the machines can get you in trouble. OK, if you are done playing with those buttons you did it. You just “designed the ballot”.
Note: While the Cheat-O-Matic is an “In Person” voting device, in real systems the DOE also has to “Design the Ballot” for the machines that scan the Absentee and Early Ballots too.
3.5.2 Reset Election The DOE has another important job with the Cheat-O-Matic. They push the button that says “Reset Election”. When that happens all the numbers on Exhibit A, and the table in worksheet tab named “Cast Vote Records” (see below) get “cleared” and you are ready for the next election. Go ahead. Press the button and feel the power. All the information is gone along with the hopes and dreams of those pesky Election Integrity folks trying to figure out anomalies in the data and pushing for audits. That’s it, push the button and squash-em like bugs. In real systems, the information from past elections has been found to remain on the systems.
3.6. The Cheater:
The Cheater Interface is the section below the yellow line. The Cheat-O-Matic, features the “Date-Time Trigger/ Flip” algorithm. The cheater can to input two cheating parameters. They define: 1.) The Date and Time the cheating should start (Date/ Time Trigger) and 2.) the rate at which the votes get taken away from Candidate A and given to Candidate B (Flipped). You can see below that for the election shown, the cheating shouldn’t have started until 11:30 AM on 7/27/24, and once the cheating started, it should have Flipped every 3rd vote cast for Candidate A to Candidate B.
***UPGRADE NOTICE**** V2.0: In response to its valued cheating stakeholders demands, Cheat-O-Matic is working on a version 2.0. That improved version will not only have a “Reset Election” button but will also add a “Close Election” button. It turns out the stakeholders are a bit sensitive to the fact that the “Cheating Interface” and the “Actual Vote” report are right there out in the open for all to see. Now for some odd reason they also don’t like those things even being visible any time after the ballots stop being counted. We at Cheat-O-Matic aim to please, so in the new version the “Actual Vote “ register, and the “Cheating Interface” will be moved to a new tab titled “Legal Terms and Conditions”, to discourage the wrong people from going there during the critical time of use. Also, when you press the new “Close Election” button the “The Cheating Interface” and “Actual Votes” report will be “cleared” as if they weren’t even there. Don’t worry, when you press the “Reset Election” button they will come right back again and be ready for use for the right people.
3.7. The Logic and Accuracy Test: Reminder Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. No really, that’s pretty funny! Oh wait, you were serious…you mean you really don’t know?
The Cheat-O-Matic provides the Cheaters with a friendly reminder regarding the Logic and Accuracy Test (LAT). Most, if not all real Departments of Elections run Logic and Accuracy Tests. These are demonstrations that are designed to ensure that the machines operate correctly, and that they are programmed properly. If they don’t pass the test they shouldn’t be used. This test can be viewed by the public.
A portion of the stated Delaware legal code (Title 15) relating to the Logic and Accuracy test for the equipment used in processing the Absentee and Early Vote ballots is presented below.
§ 5523. Logic and accuracy testing of absentee ballot tabulating equipment; authority of the State Election Commissioner.
(a) The State Election Commissioner, in consultation with the Department offices, shall promulgate rules and regulations relating to logic and accuracy testing of absentee ballot tabulating machines.
(b) Rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to this section shall ensure that:
(1) All machines are thoroughly tested immediately following maintenance and programming thereof to determine whether:
a. The voting system is properly programmed;
Now the Cheat-O -Matic provides a friendly reminder for the Cheaters, to set the “Start Cheating” time to a time that is both after the DOE LAT but before the close of the polls during the election. If the cheating is turned on after the LAT the machine will pass the LAT and the Improper Programming present in the Cheat-O-Matic, will not be revealed. Since the Date and Time of the LAT are published by the DOE well in advance this is not a problem. Obviously, the date/time trigger also needs to be set to either just before the election starts or certainly well before the polls close so it can do its job, flip votes, and you know, cheat…..duhhhh.
4. The State of Delaware Conundrum: While I am having fun here with expressing the perspective of the cheater, let me get back to bering serious for just a moment. I would argue, the State of Delaware may have a problem. You see the legislature has indicated that the LAT shall ensure that “the voting system is properly programmed.” Now that we know how the Cheat-O-Matic works, and that the algorithm would not be turned on to function at the time the LAT is performed, it is clear that the Cheat-O-Matic or any such equipment infected with similar “Improper Programming” would PASS the test. This no longer hypothetical or “in theory”. You have a real working machine in front of you where flips are turned on at a certain time and you can watch it happen.
It can be argued that the DOE has failed in its duty to design a test that can ensure that the voting system is “properly programmed” and therefore if that is recognized it should not be allowed to be used. Now we have another part of the law (not shown) that says we must use the machines. So if we have a part of the law that says we can’t use the machines, and another part that says we must, we have a conundrum. Well just fix the damn test. It’s obvious right? Wrong. It’s actually worse. You can’t design a test that achieves the intent of the legislature and you will see why when I show the actual “Improper Programming” and discuss “Proprietary” software below.
Certifications? Now some will say, wait, we have “certifications”. When our systems were delivered they met EAC standards. When we checked that the software was the right version and we ran a diagnostics we “certified” the machine before use. While that is nice, it is also IRRELEVANT. We don’t want to rely on the certification of a vendor to ensure our elections. We rely on our DOE and by oversight, the Board of Elections (BOE) to do that. Also, let’s consider whether that is a naïve statement? Don’t you think the vendors are smart enough to have their excuses and lawyers ready? I can just imagine the response from a vendor if “Improper Programming” was discovered, or its presence revealed by audit. The response might go something like this. Hey we gave you perfectly good machines as certified by the EAC. Look, that sticker proves it. We can’t speak to how or when any nefarious programming got there. We’ve admitted in court there is no possible 100% guarantee against being infiltrated or hacked. That could have happened right after the last certification, or the LAT. That is not our problem. We recommended, we told you, that you should implement audits to confirm proper operation so YOU, not US, could certify YOUR elections. We can’t help it if you didn’t do that or worse yet, that you didn’t recognize the vulnerability and didn’t know how to address it. Oh, and if you say it’s our fault we will sue you.
5. IMPROPER PROGRAMMING?
So did the legislators at least have the right concept in mind when they were worried about ensuring proper programming? I mean what does IMPROPER PROGRAMMING look like? Is it complex? Does it look like pages and pages of Egyptian hyroglifics? Do you need years and years of training in computer coding? Well, let’s take a look at the “IMPROPER PROGRAMMING present in the Cheat-O-Matic. It is shown in Exhibit B below. I will not go into go into the detail of the code but will make a few observations:
5.1. Non-Proprietary Code: The Cheat-O-Matic uses non-proprietary code. That’s why I can show it to you above. That is not typically the case. Real voting machine companies argue and make contract requirements that neither the DOE or the State can have access. Even if you understood and knew how to look for Improper Programming, you couldn’t do it if you wanted to. If that’s the case, given what we have now learned about the LATs, it can be argued that the State’s, the BOE’s and the DOE’s ONLY real tool left for assurance of the integrity of our elections are the RLA’s, and so far to me it looks like for the Absentee and Early Vote…we don’t do em.
5.2. Entire Code: The entire code for the Cheat-O-Matic, both the proper and IMPROPER programming fit on about ½ page and the entire width of this page isn’t even used. I just looked online as to when kids start to learn computer coding these days. This is probably in the realm of what many kids grade 8 or higher could do as a project if so inclined. Again, this took a skilled programmer about 1 hour to write after a verbal specification.
5.3. Two-Subroutines : The first section titled “Sub CastVote() is the “subroutine” code that is invoked when the Voter clicks the “Cast Vote” button. The section that starts with “Sub Clear Data” is the code invoked when the Department of Elections presses the “Reset Election” button.
5.4. IMPROPER PROGRAMMING: The last part is a “function” called “Flip”. That programming, and any programming that references that function are “IMPROPER PROGRAMMING and highlighted in RED. There it is. It’s real. It’s a tangible thing. You can point to it.
UPGRADE NOTICE: *******V3.0: While he was reading a draft of this article and the note regarding V2.0 above, my buddy, ughh I mean the Cheat-O-Matic development department, indicated he can make the actual cheating programming code go away with the press of the Close Election button and bring it back with the Reset Election button. Easy peasy.
5.5. Context: The entire programming code for the Cheat-O-Matic is 28 KB worth of memory. The “word” document for this article, while also tiny, take up about 10X that space. Vendors now have storage drives that look exactly like the “dongle” that you use for your wireless keyboard that hold 20,000 X this amount of memory. They cost $1.89. This code is so small, you could put it in as a part of any other program, or thumb drive, and if you didn’t know where or how to look, it would be like looking for a needle in a haystack.
6. Cast Vote Records:
The Cheat-O-Matic has another feature that can help for quality control. It has “Cast Vote Records” (CVRs). Look at the second tab in the workbook with that name. Real election machines are required by law to have these too and the real format of those is specified in detail. The format of the CVR’s in the Cheat-O-Matic don’t meet the official legal specifications but by reviewing them, and reviewing how they are added to the table each time you press the “Cast Vote” button when voting you will get the idea. The CVR’s remain on the system until the Reset Election button is pressed. The CVR’s for the election I ran with the cheating inputs of Exhibit A, are shown in Exhibit C.
6.1 The Privacy of Your Vote and Cameras at Polling Locatons:
The CVR table shows the sequential recording of the votes with a time stamp. While the CVR’s above are only for 1 voting machine, the CVR’s for a larger systems can be identified down to the machine. A CVR “shouldn’t” have a “Voter ID” or a voters name attached as the persons vote would then no longer be secret.
There is some confusion as to use of cameras in a polling location. In my opinion the lack of understanding of the CVR’s is why. If you had a video, or photo with a time stamp that could associate a person, a time, and machine, then by adding the CVR you could then find out how that person voted. That would not be good. Now, on the other hand, if you need a camera to document a problem with the election equipment, or take a photo of a written note log that you turned in to your inspector and that he signed so you could keep for your records, or video the response of an “official” at crunch time, and the photo will not connect a voter, to a time and a machine I don’t see a problem. Such documentation should be allowed and encouraged, and the DOE, Poll Workers, and Challengers should be trained in these fine points regarding cameras.
6.2 Quality Control and Analysis Value of CVR’s:
So what can we learn from the CVR’s? Examination of the Cheat-O-Matic CVR’s confirm that the Improper Programming was present and it worked exactly as designed so the cheating stakeholders should be happy. You can see that at times before the Date-Time Trigger, no votes were flipped and for each CVR the Actual Vote was the same as the Recorded Vote. After the time trigger, the votes were flipped at the proper rate. Every 3rd actual vote for Candidate A was flipped to a recorded vote for candidate B and those are highlighted in yellow. What a shame, in Actual Votes it was a tie but we know Actual Votes don’t count. With the help of The Old Fliparoo, three actual votes were flipped resulting in a swing impact of 6 votes. The Recorded Votes reflect a 61% / 39% blowout for Candidate B.
A final technical note regarding the Cheat-O-Matic. This looks more like an “In Person” voting machine. Yes, that is correct but recall, all the Early Voting is on such “In Person” machines, and it should be obvious that the similar Improper Programming code could reside on machines that scan, or the central systems that report the “Recorded Votes”.
7. Proper Respect to Candidate A: What a Sport: Now before we move to solutions, can we get a nice round of applause for Candidate A. It’s the Delaware Way! This candidate should be well respected as he/she takes the losers seat in the carriage ride, or walks right next to the righteous winning Candidate B in the “Bury the Hatchet” parade in Georgetown DE after the election. We’re so civil here. There is no shame at all. Come back and try again Candidate A. Maybe do more door knocking next time. Maybe do more fund raising next time. Maybe do more registrations of voters next time. Maybe do more Get Out the Vote next time. All those things are great things to do BUT BEWARE if there are cheaters present, maybe even just one cheater for the Old Fliparoo, please know that they love it when you do those things. They love it when you spend cherished resources doing ANYTHING BUT THOSE ACTIVITIES THAT COULD PREVENT THEM FROM CHEATING! So candidates, what are you doing to prevent cheaters from cheating? Are you pushing for audits? Are you helping to clean the voter rolls as you door knock? Are you taking the right forms with you when you door knock?
8. SO WHAT ARE SOLUTIONS?:
An obvious long-term solution is to get rid of the machines and do hand counts. Maybe that can be done in the future but as stated, our current laws “may” have us in a conundrum.
8.1. Voters: Maybe Consider Having YOUR Ballot AVOID The Old Fliparoo.
I argue that The Fliparoo, would be more likely be found in the systems that process the Absentee and Early Vote ballots due to the lack of the RLA’s so why not just vote in person? That could work! With that said I only talk about one vulnerability to our election systems in this article. If you want to really consider the best way to vote check here: https://delawarecounts.com/p/whats-the-best-method-to-vote-in
8.2 BOE/ DOE?: While one part of the legal code requires that we use the machines, there is no part of the code that says we can’t do hand counts too! We don’t need new laws. There is Title 15 code that provides the DOE with the authority to Promulgate Rules and Regulations. The DOE with BOE oversight may simply need to PLUG THE QC HOLE referenced at the beginning of this article with TIMELY HAND COUNT AUDITS. These could be done on a 100% or sample basis.
Why do I highlight TIMELY? If we have learned anything in the last 4 years we have learned that the courts are resistant to take “election” cases. When they do they can take years. Have you ever asked why? How about conflicts of interest? Once elected officials are placed in office they have an obvious conflict of interest. At best (for them) nothing happens after an audit. At worst a problem is discovered that could shine the light on their election. An investigation has the potential to get them removed from office. Some judges are elected. Attorney Generals are elected. Sheriffs are elected. Gee, I can’t understand why these investigations never really seem to get anywhere. In my opinion any audits done after the certification of an election are too late. There is no reason to delay. These are not rocket science. If done on a sample basis they don’t take significantly more resources. To the extent they meet the requirements of other audits that would have been performed later anyway, they don’t take any additional resources. Why not do them immediately after the polls close before ballots are moved anywhere?
8.3 Concerned Citizens BOE/ DOE: Meetings
While the solutions could be implemented by the BOE/DOE who knows if they are If not many express concern, why should they act? I’m sure they have a lot on their plate. On the other hand if you agree with the analysis above you could show up to a Board of Elections meeting either in person or by phone and respectfully express your concern to the members of the DOE and the BOE in the public session. You will get 3 minutes. If they get enough concern from the public they would probably be happy to help. Alternatively, maybe they could provide additional information to alleviate the concerns? The details regarding the August public meeting can be found here.
https://publicmeetings.delaware.gov/#/meeting/79216
8.4 Concerned Citizens: BOE /DOE Email: After many requests the BOE has finally provided a an email address. That address is StateBoardOfElections@delaware.gov . If you do research that can show specific concerns regarding the integrity of our systems, maybe even connected to references in Title 15 code, write them an email and make them aware of the concerns.
8.5 What am I going to do?
Well, maybe some of all of the above but regarding the Old Fiparoo, I plan to see if I can get even further confirmation that we do not do public audits of the Absentee and Early Vote ballots. So far, I have: 1.) reviewed the Title 15 code, 2.) reviewed the reports of the audits of the “In Person” machines that are published on the DOE site, 3.) asked election officials in open meetings who confirmed that the RLA’s as described above are not done for the Absentee and Early Vote systems.
With that said I also found a section of “Administrative Code” related to our Delaware Elections. The code states that the DOE is required to audit of the Absentee System after February 1st in the year following an Election for whatever good an audit that late would do. Unfortunately there is no specification that such an audit must be done in public, or put on the DOE website, but the audit report is to be presented to the BOE. Is this why we don’t do RLA’s right after the election for Absentee and Early? Isn’t the Administrative Code something that can be changed by the BOE/ DOE?
Even though its timing may make if of limited use I thought if it exists it might tell us something. One BOE member has been reported as not ever remembering getting such a report. I may have missed it but I have never seen a reference to such a report in any BOE meeting minutes. I submitted a FOIA request for a copy of any such reports for the 2020 and 2022 elections. The response was short. “Please be advised that the Department has no public records responsive to your request”. As of this writing, I have still found no evidence any such audits were performed for the elections requested. I don’t know if they were ever performed, or when they were stopped if they were, or why, and by whom? I’ll keep looking for more information and pushing for more hand count audits…………so “they” whoever they are…..can’t do…..The Old Fliparoo.
In the meantime have fun with your Cheat-O-Matic!