Article of the week Conspiracy Government Politics Social Engineering Technology Top News

Largest Voting Machine Vendor In US Admits Its Systems Had Remote-Access Software Installed

After denying that their voting systems came with remote-access software, the country’s largest voting machine vendor had just come clean.

(TFTP) A bombshell revelation on the security of voting in the United States has just surfaced in the form of a letter from the country’s largest voting machine manufacturer. The company, Election Systems and Software (ES&S) admitted that despite denying previous allegations of its voting systems coming installed with remote-access software, their systems did, indeed, allow for remote connections.

In a letter to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), written in April, but only released this week, the company acknowledged that it had installed software that made the systems remotely accessible from anywhere.


“Prior to the inception of the [Election Assistance Commission] testing and certification program and the subsequent requirement for hardening and at customer’s request, ES&S provided pcAnywhere remote connection software on the [Election-Management System] workstation to a small number of customers between 2000 and 2006,” wrote Tom Burt, ES&S president.

According to Vice reporter, Kim Zetter, “The statement contradicts what the company told me and fact checkers for a story I wrote for the New York Times in February. At that time, a spokesperson said ES&S had never installed pcAnywhere on any election system it sold.”

“None of the employees, … including long-tenured employees, has any knowledge that our voting systems have ever been sold with remote-access software,” the spokesperson said in February. However, this proved to be untrue.

Wyden described the decision to install remote-access software as “the worst decision for security short of leaving ballot boxes on a Moscow street corner.”


For those who may be unfamiliar, PcAnywhere was a remote-access software by Symantec which allowed people to remotely access other computers from anywhere in the world. In 2012, Symantec issued a press release telling all users to disable and uninstall the software after admitting that it had been hacked years prior in 2006 — at the same time ES&S was selling voting systems with PcAnywhere pre-installed on them.

According to ES&S, the remote-access software was so that the company could provide “technical support purposes on county workstations, but this software was not designed to and did not come in contact with any voting machines.”

ES&S refused to elaborate on how many of the systems had the software. However, they claimed that they stopped using it after it was explicitly prohibited in 2007 by the Election Assistance Commission. Whether or not this is true remains a mystery as the company has already proven that it will lie.

According to Newsweek, ES&S has had several blunders in the past, including exposing the personal information of more than 1.8 million Illinois residents in 2017 and in 2011, when machines were “flipping” votes, meaning a voter would select one candidate but a different one would be selected by the machine, which ES&S blamed on a “calibration error.”

Voting in the US, as TFTP has consistently reported, is rife with corruption and fraud. As the 2016 election illustrated, democracy is a sham and those who count the votes, or at least claim to count the votes, decide the outcome.

ES&S is not alone in their controversy either. In 2006, the documentary Hacking Democracy exposed Diebold and their role in rigging elections with their electronic voting machines.


Clinton Eugene “Clint” Curtis is an American attorney, computer programmer and ex-employee of NASA and ExxonMobil, who also exposed election hacking.

Curtis is notable chiefly for making a series of whistleblower allegations about his former employer and about Republican Congressman Tom Feeney, including an allegation that in 2000, Feeney and Yang Enterprises requested Curtis’s assistance in a scheme to steal votes by inserting fraudulent code into touch screen voting systems.

Curtis is seen in the video below testifying under oath in front of the U.S. House Judiciary Members in Ohio.

He tells the members how he was hired by Congressman Tom Feeney in 2000 to build a prototype software package that would secretly rig an election to sway the result 51 / 49 to a specified side.

After watching the video, you’ll know why true change is hard to come by.

Matt Agorist
Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Matt is the founder of The Free Thought Project.

2 Replies to “Largest Voting Machine Vendor In US Admits Its Systems Had Remote-Access Software Installed

  1. This is big news to some but I noticed voting discrepancies increasing since the 1964 election. Now with computer voting they have perfected fraud, in many ways.
    Starting with the year 2000 I believe all the elections were fraudulent. After 2004 I saw no reason to vote any more. The elections are all rigged! When electronic voting is my only option, I refuse to vote.
    At this point I would not trust any election, in any part of the world, where there is no paper trail. All the governments have learned to follow the American ways of faking votes. It is blatantly obvious.
    Yet for most people the deception continues, because they prefer to still believe in the myth of free elections. There is very little opposition to criminal activity in high places by the population, and essentially none by incumbents. The criminals can do anything they want to now…

  2. Thank you so much for your article. It was always my understanding that even if the machines were rigged from afar, good, strong audits and a paper trail would catch the discrepancy. The problem is that when you complain about the lack of compliance with election audits in California, the legislature goes and changes the procedures to make weaker audits instead of stronger ones. They probably were bombarded with details in a bill lumped into a complicated budget and might not even realize what happened. Now the Secretary of State randomly selects one percent of all precincts to audit. What we had was one percent of the ballots, excluding Vote by Mail and Provisionals, audited in precincts that showed a discrepancy that was off by a certain amount, which means a precinct in which people are paying close attention and engaging the election officials.

    Election audits and paper trails are needed in all 50 states in every voting precinct and they should have a uniform standard in order for elections to be certified in each County and State. Mail ballots are 60 percent of voters, so those definitely should be included in the audits. Otherwise, it just does not matter who you vote for because the machines will be hacked. Votes will be flipped.

    Let’s look at a graphic for New Jersey

    This is a glaring example of why we need to also audit vote by mail ballots and provisional ballots. Look how many of the Green Party’s votes were retained by their candidate, Jill Stein. Almost none of them. How likely is it that 35 percent of Greens voted for Hillary Clinton in the General Election when rigged Democratic Primaries are the main reason everybody Dem Exited in the first place? That defies all logic. I’d be willing to bet if there were tougher audits in New Jersey, they would have caught the mistake and the Green Party would have won that state. We will never know for sure because they do not have control of their own voter registration lists. Voters can be temporarily unregistered and then the count can be adjusted for that same number of removed Greens for whatever candidate precincts prefer. Someone can put them back into the system later and nobody would know until they get an e mail from HeadCount saying thank you. This is the same formula for vote flipping that plagues many states. It was curious looking at the numbers of people in variously candidate groups on Facebook alone. Bernie Sanders had more people in his groups and more Facebook groups in the Western USA and Trump definitely dominated New York and other Eastern states in that respect.

    The states won by Clinton did not match the numbers of actual fans on Facebook.
    In Mississippi, she did not even have a group the first time I checked. When I wrote about it, one appeared, but maybe 78 fans compared to Bernie Sanders in the several thousands of fans just does not support her winning that state legitimately.
    Does nobody in the South join Facebook groups to support their candidates? Somebody should give the Democrats there better free cell phones with unlimited internet to at least create the illusion of grassroots support. Otherwise, people like me notice these details and try to draw attention to our rigged system. And then news has to be creates after the fact to support a flawed Russian narrative. Just enforce strong election audits and people will trust the system.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.