8.07 - Revision history

Neil thibodaux: /* Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025) */

2026-08-25T19:14:57Z

Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:14, 25 August 2026
Line 21:		Line 21:
	The Green Book's <u>emphasis on fraud and information security</u> as separate risk assessment activity is intentional. MC may be able to defer to the Arizona Secretary of State's Election Procedure Manual as general steps taken to ensure the integrity of election results. Fraud occurs when loopholes are identified and exploited by the fraudsters. The implementers of election services (i.e., Arizona Counties) are better positioned to detect fraud and assess the risk of fraud because they are handling the data, not the state. Hence, governance gaps may be identified from patterns of poor assessment and response to risk with respect to election fraud and information security.		The Green Book's <u>emphasis on fraud and information security</u> as separate risk assessment activity is intentional. MC may be able to defer to the Arizona Secretary of State's Election Procedure Manual as general steps taken to ensure the integrity of election results. Fraud occurs when loopholes are identified and exploited by the fraudsters. The implementers of election services (i.e., Arizona Counties) are better positioned to detect fraud and assess the risk of fraud because they are handling the data, not the state. Hence, governance gaps may be identified from patterns of poor assessment and response to risk with respect to election fraud and information security.

	~~==== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ====~~		==== [[Dropbox Collection (2020)\|Maricopa Dropbox Collection (2020)]] ====
	~~Additional details regarding this aspect of my story are available in a subsection titled Contract with the Motor Vehicle Department (MVD).~~

	In 2024, the Arizona Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes, issued a '''press release on September 30, 2024''', which described how over 218,000 voter registration records were adversely impacted during the collection of data by the MVD and subsequent transfer to the MC Recorders Office. The press release states, "Staff and experts from the Secretary of State’s Office are continuing to work with MVD to investigate if additional voters are impacted, or if other similar errors stemming from improperly coded Proposition 200 rules exist. We will continue to keep the public informed of developments if and when we have accurate, confirmed information to share." The Information Security Risk was real based on the number of corrupted records identified. Yet, MC managers and legal team had no written agreements between them and the MVD. Contrary to the Green Book, there is no evidence to suggest MC recognized the significance of elevated risk associated with receiving data from an external entity, which was the MVD.

	===== [[Dropbox Collection (2020)\|Maricopa Dropbox Collection (2020)]] =====
	Governance issues identified from [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation] of Arizona Senate allegations of Maricopa County Election Department - Drop Box Collections issues. The inspector notes a USPS Inspector reported 56,226 early ballots were undeliverable.		Governance issues identified from [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation] of Arizona Senate allegations of Maricopa County Election Department - Drop Box Collections issues. The inspector notes a USPS Inspector reported 56,226 early ballots were undeliverable.

Line 38:		Line 33:

	The AZ AG's inspector's notes is silent on the storage of 56,226 undelivered early ballots. Were they stored in a secure location? Was the storage of undelivered early ballots addressed in a written agreement between MC Elections and USPS?		The AZ AG's inspector's notes is silent on the storage of 56,226 undelivered early ballots. Were they stored in a secure location? Was the storage of undelivered early ballots addressed in a written agreement between MC Elections and USPS?
			==== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ====
			Additional details regarding this aspect of my story are available in a subsection titled Contract with the Motor Vehicle Department (MVD).

			In 2024, the Arizona Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes, issued a '''press release on September 30, 2024''', which described how over 218,000 voter registration records were adversely impacted during the collection of data by the MVD and subsequent transfer to the MC Recorders Office. The press release states, "Staff and experts from the Secretary of State’s Office are continuing to work with MVD to investigate if additional voters are impacted, or if other similar errors stemming from improperly coded Proposition 200 rules exist. We will continue to keep the public informed of developments if and when we have accurate, confirmed information to share." The Information Security Risk was real based on the number of corrupted records identified. Yet, MC managers and legal team had no written agreements between them and the MVD. Contrary to the Green Book, there is no evidence to suggest MC recognized the significance of elevated risk associated with receiving data from an external entity, which was the MVD.

Neil thibodaux: /* Election Anomalies */

2026-08-25T16:08:50Z

Election Anomalies

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:08, 25 August 2026
Line 17:		Line 17:

	=== Election Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===
			The Green Book's Principle 8 addresses Assess Fraud, Improper Payment, and Information Security Risk. Obviously, improper payments is not a concern during the Assessment of Election Anomalies. However, improper payments by MC county may exist, but would require a separate assessment.

			The Green Book's <u>emphasis on fraud and information security</u> as separate risk assessment activity is intentional. MC may be able to defer to the Arizona Secretary of State's Election Procedure Manual as general steps taken to ensure the integrity of election results. Fraud occurs when loopholes are identified and exploited by the fraudsters. The implementers of election services (i.e., Arizona Counties) are better positioned to detect fraud and assess the risk of fraud because they are handling the data, not the state. Hence, governance gaps may be identified from patterns of poor assessment and response to risk with respect to election fraud and information security.

	==== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ====		==== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ====

Neil thibodaux: /* Maricopa County Signature Verification (2020) */

2026-08-23T21:50:56Z

Maricopa County Signature Verification (2020)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:50, 23 August 2026
Line 23:		Line 23:
	In 2024, the Arizona Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes, issued a '''press release on September 30, 2024''', which described how over 218,000 voter registration records were adversely impacted during the collection of data by the MVD and subsequent transfer to the MC Recorders Office. The press release states, "Staff and experts from the Secretary of State’s Office are continuing to work with MVD to investigate if additional voters are impacted, or if other similar errors stemming from improperly coded Proposition 200 rules exist. We will continue to keep the public informed of developments if and when we have accurate, confirmed information to share." The Information Security Risk was real based on the number of corrupted records identified. Yet, MC managers and legal team had no written agreements between them and the MVD. Contrary to the Green Book, there is no evidence to suggest MC recognized the significance of elevated risk associated with receiving data from an external entity, which was the MVD.		In 2024, the Arizona Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes, issued a '''press release on September 30, 2024''', which described how over 218,000 voter registration records were adversely impacted during the collection of data by the MVD and subsequent transfer to the MC Recorders Office. The press release states, "Staff and experts from the Secretary of State’s Office are continuing to work with MVD to investigate if additional voters are impacted, or if other similar errors stemming from improperly coded Proposition 200 rules exist. We will continue to keep the public informed of developments if and when we have accurate, confirmed information to share." The Information Security Risk was real based on the number of corrupted records identified. Yet, MC managers and legal team had no written agreements between them and the MVD. Contrary to the Green Book, there is no evidence to suggest MC recognized the significance of elevated risk associated with receiving data from an external entity, which was the MVD.

	===== [[~~Signature Verification~~\|Maricopa ~~County Signature Verification~~ (2020)]] =====		===== [[Dropbox Collection (2020)\|Maricopa Dropbox Collection (2020)]] =====
	Governance issues identified from [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation] of Arizona Senate allegations of Maricopa County - ~~Signature Verification Process~~ issues. The inspector notes a USPS Inspector reported 56,226 early ballots were undeliverable.		Governance issues identified from [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation] of Arizona Senate allegations of Maricopa County Election Department - Drop Box Collections issues. The inspector notes a USPS Inspector reported 56,226 early ballots were undeliverable.

	It is important to note undeliverable ballots in the wrong hand could be fraudulently completed and then submitted in a drop box. Undelivered mail does not change the contents of the envelope; a good ballot was being mailed by MC but intercepted by USPS as being undeliverable.		It is important to note undeliverable ballots in the wrong hand could be fraudulently completed and then submitted in a drop box. Undelivered mail does not change the contents of the envelope; a good ballot was being mailed by MC but intercepted by USPS as being undeliverable.

Neil thibodaux: /* Maricopa County Signature Verification (2020) */

2026-08-22T19:59:33Z

Maricopa County Signature Verification (2020)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:59, 22 August 2026
Line 33:		Line 33:

	The USPS describes how a data file of 56,226 addresses for the undelivered mail were provided to MC Elections and Runbeck Election Services. Again, the inspector's notes were generic in terms of the describing the USPS intent but did not provide any documentation to describe the chain of custody transfer of their data file to any specific person at MC Elections or Runbeck Election Services. Was this USPS transfer of a data file containing addresses for undelivered early ballots contained within any written agreement between MC and the USPS? Especially, the transfer of sensitive data between two third parties (USPS to Runbeck) without any MC involvement. How could MC determine if their data and Runbecks data files were the same, when considering that data corruption may somehow be exploited by fraudsters.		The USPS describes how a data file of 56,226 addresses for the undelivered mail were provided to MC Elections and Runbeck Election Services. Again, the inspector's notes were generic in terms of the describing the USPS intent but did not provide any documentation to describe the chain of custody transfer of their data file to any specific person at MC Elections or Runbeck Election Services. Was this USPS transfer of a data file containing addresses for undelivered early ballots contained within any written agreement between MC and the USPS? Especially, the transfer of sensitive data between two third parties (USPS to Runbeck) without any MC involvement. How could MC determine if their data and Runbecks data files were the same, when considering that data corruption may somehow be exploited by fraudsters.

			The AZ AG's inspector's notes is silent on the storage of 56,226 undelivered early ballots. Were they stored in a secure location? Was the storage of undelivered early ballots addressed in a written agreement between MC Elections and USPS?

Neil thibodaux: /* The Anomalies */

2026-08-22T19:44:56Z

The Anomalies

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:44, 22 August 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:
	====== No examples are available ======		====== No examples are available ======

	=== ~~The~~ Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===

	==== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ====		==== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ====

Neil thibodaux: /* The Anomalies */

2026-08-22T19:40:36Z

The Anomalies

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:40, 22 August 2026
Line 22:		Line 22:

	In 2024, the Arizona Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes, issued a '''press release on September 30, 2024''', which described how over 218,000 voter registration records were adversely impacted during the collection of data by the MVD and subsequent transfer to the MC Recorders Office. The press release states, "Staff and experts from the Secretary of State’s Office are continuing to work with MVD to investigate if additional voters are impacted, or if other similar errors stemming from improperly coded Proposition 200 rules exist. We will continue to keep the public informed of developments if and when we have accurate, confirmed information to share." The Information Security Risk was real based on the number of corrupted records identified. Yet, MC managers and legal team had no written agreements between them and the MVD. Contrary to the Green Book, there is no evidence to suggest MC recognized the significance of elevated risk associated with receiving data from an external entity, which was the MVD.		In 2024, the Arizona Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes, issued a '''press release on September 30, 2024''', which described how over 218,000 voter registration records were adversely impacted during the collection of data by the MVD and subsequent transfer to the MC Recorders Office. The press release states, "Staff and experts from the Secretary of State’s Office are continuing to work with MVD to investigate if additional voters are impacted, or if other similar errors stemming from improperly coded Proposition 200 rules exist. We will continue to keep the public informed of developments if and when we have accurate, confirmed information to share." The Information Security Risk was real based on the number of corrupted records identified. Yet, MC managers and legal team had no written agreements between them and the MVD. Contrary to the Green Book, there is no evidence to suggest MC recognized the significance of elevated risk associated with receiving data from an external entity, which was the MVD.

			===== [[Signature Verification\|Maricopa County Signature Verification (2020)]] =====
			Governance issues identified from [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation] of Arizona Senate allegations of Maricopa County - Signature Verification Process issues. The inspector notes a USPS Inspector reported 56,226 early ballots were undeliverable.

			It is important to note undeliverable ballots in the wrong hand could be fraudulently completed and then submitted in a drop box. Undelivered mail does not change the contents of the envelope; a good ballot was being mailed by MC but intercepted by USPS as being undeliverable.

			The USPS Inspector describes how the 56,226 ballots were scanned into an "Address Change Service File" for later use. If this was performed during the election, was chain of custody documented to ensure the same number of ballots to be scanned left the scanning facility. Was this USPS scanning function addressed in any written agreement between MC and the USPS?

			The USPS Inspector did not provide any documentation to prove that chain of custody was documented when theses ballots were turned over to BlueEarth Secure Destruction Process to confirm all 56,226 ballots were destroyed. If these ballots were destroyed during the election, any ballots siphoned off by wrongdoers at BlueEarth could be used for fraudulent voting. The services of this third party, without any contract with MC County, could impact fraud. Was this USPS scanning function addressed in any written agreement between MC and the USPS?

			The USPS describes how a data file of 56,226 addresses for the undelivered mail were provided to MC Elections and Runbeck Election Services. Again, the inspector's notes were generic in terms of the describing the USPS intent but did not provide any documentation to describe the chain of custody transfer of their data file to any specific person at MC Elections or Runbeck Election Services. Was this USPS transfer of a data file containing addresses for undelivered early ballots contained within any written agreement between MC and the USPS? Especially, the transfer of sensitive data between two third parties (USPS to Runbeck) without any MC involvement. How could MC determine if their data and Runbecks data files were the same, when considering that data corruption may somehow be exploited by fraudsters.

Neil thibodaux at 04:47, 22 August 2026

2026-08-22T04:47:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:47, 21 August 2026
Line 9:		Line 9:
	* '''Previous Attribute - [[8.06]]'''		* '''Previous Attribute - [[8.06]]'''
	* '''Next Attribute - [[8.08]]'''		* '''Next Attribute - [[8.08]]'''
	* '''Similar Attributes - [[8.05]]'''
	__FORCETOC__		__FORCETOC__

Neil thibodaux at 04:47, 22 August 2026

2026-08-22T04:47:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:47, 21 August 2026
Line 12:		Line 12:
	__FORCETOC__		__FORCETOC__

	== ~~Examples from~~ Jamie's Story ==
			=== Jamie's Story ===

	====== No examples are available ======		====== No examples are available ======

	== ~~Examples from the~~ Anomalies ==		=== The Anomalies ===

	=== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ===		==== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ====
	Additional details regarding this aspect of my story are available in a subsection titled Contract with the Motor Vehicle Department (MVD).		Additional details regarding this aspect of my story are available in a subsection titled Contract with the Motor Vehicle Department (MVD).

	In 2024, the Arizona Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes, issued a '''press release on September 30, 2024''', which described how over 218,000 voter registration records were adversely impacted during the collection of data by the MVD and subsequent transfer to the MC Recorders Office. The press release states, "Staff and experts from the Secretary of State’s Office are continuing to work with MVD to investigate if additional voters are impacted, or if other similar errors stemming from improperly coded Proposition 200 rules exist. We will continue to keep the public informed of developments if and when we have accurate, confirmed information to share." The Information Security Risk was real based on the number of corrupted records identified. Yet, MC managers and legal team had no written agreements between them and the MVD.		In 2024, the Arizona Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes, issued a '''press release on September 30, 2024''', which described how over 218,000 voter registration records were adversely impacted during the collection of data by the MVD and subsequent transfer to the MC Recorders Office. The press release states, "Staff and experts from the Secretary of State’s Office are continuing to work with MVD to investigate if additional voters are impacted, or if other similar errors stemming from improperly coded Proposition 200 rules exist. We will continue to keep the public informed of developments if and when we have accurate, confirmed information to share." The Information Security Risk was real based on the number of corrupted records identified. Yet, MC managers and legal team had no written agreements between them and the MVD. Contrary to the Green Book, there is no evidence to suggest MC recognized the significance of elevated risk associated with receiving data from an external entity, which was the MVD.

	~~<u>Potential Green Book Deviation</u>~~

	Contrary to the Green Book, there is no evidence to suggest MC recognized the significance of elevated risk associated with receiving data from an external entity, which was the MVD.

Neil thibodaux at 15:02, 18 August 2026

2026-08-18T15:02:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:02, 18 August 2026
Line 13:		Line 13:

	== Examples from Jamie's Story ==		== Examples from Jamie's Story ==
	No examples are available
			====== No examples are available ======

	== Examples from the Anomalies ==		== Examples from the Anomalies ==

	=== [[~~March 12~~, ~~2026: This is How Maricopa County Wants to be Represented in Court~~]] ===		=== [[Fraud Potential (2020, 2022, 2024, 2025)]] ===
	Additional details regarding this aspect of my story are available in a subsection titled Contract with the Motor Vehicle Department (MVD).		Additional details regarding this aspect of my story are available in a subsection titled Contract with the Motor Vehicle Department (MVD).

Neil thibodaux at 14:46, 18 August 2026

2026-08-18T14:46:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:46, 18 August 2026
Line 12:		Line 12:
	__FORCETOC__		__FORCETOC__

			== Examples from Jamie's Story ==
			No examples are available

			== Examples from the Anomalies ==

	=== [[March 12, 2026: This is How Maricopa County Wants to be Represented in Court]] ===		=== [[March 12, 2026: This is How Maricopa County Wants to be Represented in Court]] ===