After reading a letter from Scott Hoaby, I feel compelled to clarify in this letter, why his opinion has no merit at all.
First of all, I have spent a considerable amount of life in the information technology industry. When I read Hoaby's letter about the voting machine being manipulated, I immediately knew his statement and opinion doesn't add up or just simply doesn't make sense at all. It feels like an attempt to confuse readers who are not technology savvy.
For starters, any would-be hackers would hide their IP address if they are attempting to hack any system. Even amateur hackers employ cheap proxy and VPN which can be bought for a few dollars. So if anyone tells you they have hackers' IP addresses from China, Iran, etc., they're most likely making it up, especially in this circumstance, considering hacking the election system is a sophisticated endeavor.
For example, most cyber attacks on the U.S. done by foreign adversaries are done from a rented U.S.-based Server, U.S. IP and routed through multiple layers to hide identity and source. And, no, MAC address of a computer doesn't identify where it is located. Just like the VIN number of your vehicle doesn't help thieves find which grocery store you have last been.
And secondly, one cannot simply go and look up internet traffic to and from the server unless you own the server. Any third party claiming to have Dominion internet traffic, just like those "researchers" Hoaby mentioned, is bogus at best. Even if the traffic is captured it would be encrypted and difficult to know what's in the traffic. And also, it is laughable when the letter says that votes were stored on servers in Germany, Spain, Serbia and Toronto. This doesn't make any sense at all from a design or engineering perspective. Most importantly, Dominion has clearly said the voting machine does not connect to the internet at all.
And assuming, even if votes were altered, it would be detected when the paper record count doesn't match with digital count. Many states require its voting machines to use or generate voter‐verifiable paper records. In case of fraud the anomaly would be detected during routine audit.
Lastly, while no election system is 100% secure and there will always be weakness in the system, it is very unlikely what Hoaby said is remotely going to be true.
Shane Hesse lives in Fargo.
This letter does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.