*

川普： 关于亚利桑那审计的真相

来自马里科帕县法医选举审计第一卷：

【执行摘要和建议】

•执行摘要

【我们的宪法序言提醒我们，我们的国家一直在追求更完美，寻求建立"......一个更完美的联盟"，以便我们能够"......确保自由的祝福给我们自己和我们的后代。" 在维护自由方面，没有什么比自由和公平的选举更重要】

为此，Cyber Ninjas受亚利桑那州参议院委托，对2020年大选进行审计，并确定在哪些领域的立法改革可以加强我们目前的程序，使我们的选举可以继续得到改善，变得 "更完美"。在这样做的过程中，我们的目标是通过确定立法可以解决任何已确定的问题的领域来提高对美国选举的信心。

这次审计是有史以来最全面和最复杂的选举审计。它涉及210万张选票的手工计数，对所有选票进行法医纸质检查，对投票机进行法医审查，以及对选民名册和2020年大选最终文件进行深入分析。

已发现的情况既令人鼓舞，又具有启示性。在积极的一面，提供的手工计票和马里科帕县的官方选举清点结果之间没有实质性的差异。这是一个重要的发现，因为纸质选票是证明选民意图的最佳证据，而且没有可靠的证据表明纸质选票被篡改到任何重要程度。

然而，基于我们的其他发现，

【我们建议立法机构收紧选举程序，以提供更多的确定性，并建议亚利桑那州总检察长进一步审查我们的审计结果，以进行可能的调查】

这些其他发现包括以下内容。

- 与选举有关的各种系统中没有一个数字能够相互平衡和一致。在某些情况下，这些差异是非常大的。

- 似乎有许多27,807张选票是由在选举前搬家的人投的。

- 选举管理系统（EMS）服务器上的文件丢失。

- EMS上的284,412张选票图像被损坏或丢失。

- 日志似乎被故意翻转，数据库中与2020年大选有关的所有数据已被完全清除。

- 在选票方面，批次并不总是清晰的划分，重复的选票缺少所需的序列号，原件被重复了不止一次，而且审计人员从未得到选票进入审计人员手中之前的保管链文件。这一切都增加了正确审计结果的复杂性和难度；并增加了最终结论的模糊性。

- 马里科帕县未能遵循CISA的基本网络安全最佳实践和准则

- 没有遵循软件和补丁协议

- 凭证管理有缺陷：没有分配独特的用户名和密码

- 投票系统的核准程序、通信协议和通信设备的主机和网络活动缺乏基线

The Truth About the Arizona Audit

From the Maricopa County Forensic Election Audit Volume I: Executive Summary & Recommendations

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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 preserving 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 in what areas legislative reform may enhance our current process so that our elections may continue to get better, becoming “more perfect.” In doing so, it was our goal to improve confidence in American elections by identifying areas where legislation could resolve any identified issues.

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 all ballots, a forensic review of the voting machines, and an in-depth analysis of the voter rolls and the 2020 General Election final files.

What has been found is both encouraging and revealing. On the positive side there were no substantial differences between the hand count of the ballots provided and the official election canvass results for Maricopa County. This is an important finding because the paper ballots are the best evidence of voter intent and there is no reliable evidence that the paper ballots were altered to any material degree.

Based on our other findings, however, we recommend that the Legislature tighten up the election process to provide additional certainty going forward, and that several specific findings of our audit be further reviewed by the Arizona Attorney General for a possible investigation. Such other findings include the following:

• None of the various systems related to elections had numbers that would balance and agree with each other. In some cases, these differences were significant.

• There appears to be many 27, 807 ballots cast from individuals who had moved prior to the election.

• Files were missing from the Election Management System (EMS) Server.

• Ballot images 284,412 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; and added ambiguity into the final conclusions.

• Maricopa County failed to follow basic cyber security best practices and guidelines from CISA

• Software and patch protocols were not followed

• Credential management was flawed: unique usernames and passwords were not allocated

• Lack of baseline for host and network activity for approved programs, communications protocols and communications devices for voting systems