Diaz: “Forensic Audit” in Nevada County – Unnecessary

“The California Secretary of State and several counties, including Nevada County, are receiving a large number of calls and correspondence requesting ‘forensic audits’ of elections,” according to Diaz’ statement that is posted on YubaNet. “When someone calls for a ‘forensic audit’ they’re essentially asking for an independent third party to come into our election systems, review our logs, machines, and source code, and physically dissect the equipment.

“A ‘forensic audit’ is not authorized under California law. It is an intrusive process that adds an unsecured, non-authorized entity into our election systems — compromising our entire chain of custody and risking the security of our elections. Any unauthorized access to the proprietary components, including hardware, firmware, and software of voting system equipment, is a violation of the contract terms with the voting system vendors.

“If forensic audits were conducted, the county would be required to replace the existing election equipment: voting machines, computers, software, and related electronic equipment. We would have to purchase new voting equipment after every forensic audit. The current election system equipment cost Nevada County approximately $600,000 to obtain. We have two elections every two years, at least.  In short, county taxpayers would have to spend at least $600,000 after every such audit, with costs rising all the time.”

The rest of the article is here.

Author: jeffpelline

Jeff Pelline is a veteran editor and award-winning journalist - in print and online. He is publisher of Sierra FoodWineArt magazine and its website SierraCulture.com. Jeff covered business and technology for The San Francisco Chronicle for 12 years, and he was a founding editor and Editor of CNET News for eight years, among other positions. Jeff has a bachelor's degree from UC Berkeley and a master's from Northwestern University. His hobbies include sailing, swimming, and trout fishing in the Sierra.

3 thoughts on “Diaz: “Forensic Audit” in Nevada County – Unnecessary”

  1. “Receiving calls” does not sound like it carries any weight at all. If it can not be forced by an outside party, so what? It’s quite possible those callers are merely seeking a “thorough and transparent” audit, which is a step above a recount. It’s also possible the vendors can step in to reassure the voting public that their systems are absolutely, unequivocally clean. It seems to me, anyway.

  2. The system is already “thorough and transparent.” Those calling for forensic audits are mostly echoing the Trump strategy of trying to discredit the process and cast doubt, all to support the Big Lie of a stolen election and validate voter suppression efforts. The problem with these blatant attempts at electioneering is that it will legitimize future attempts to overturn elections based on nothing more than the losers not liking the results. The insurrection of 1/6 is an example that could very easily become the norm both nationally and locally. Very third world despotic.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s