OVSTA
Consultant's Security and Telecommunications Test Report
Liberty Vote Democracy Suite 5.19
Read the report at Liberty Vote Systems ↗
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
Security and Telecommunications Test Report
for
California Secretary of State
CAF-23003-STR-01
Prepared for:
Vendor Name Dominion Voting Systems
Vendor System Democracy Suite 5.19
Prepared by:
4720 Independence St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
303-422-1566
www.SLICompliance.com
Accredited by the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) for Selected Voting System Test
Methods or Services
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Copyright © 2025 by SLI ComplianceSM, a Division of Gaming Laboratories International, LLC
Revision History
Date Release Author Revision Summary
July 29th, 2024 1.0 A. Nestico Initial Release
D. Martin
October 11th, 2024 2.0 D. Martin Update for issue resolutions
Disclaimer
The information reported herein must not be used by the client to claim product
certification, approval, or endorsement by NVLAP, NIST, or any agency of the Federal
Government.
Trademarks
• SLI is a registered trademark of SLI Compliance.
• All products and company names are used for identification purposes only and may
be trademarks of their respective owners.
California Certification Page 2 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................................... 4
PHASE I – DOCUMENTATION REVIEW ........................................................................................... 4
2.1.1 SECURITY ................................................................................................................................. 5
6.2 DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS ....................................................... 5
7.2.2 ACCESS CONTROL IDENTIFICATION ............................................................................................ 6
7.3.1 POLLING PLACE SECURITY ........................................................................................................ 6
7.3.2 CENTRAL COUNT LOCATION SECURITY ....................................................................................... 6
7.4.1 SOFTWARE AND FIRMWARE INSTALLATION .................................................................................. 6
7.4.2 PROTECTION AGAINST MALICIOUS SOFTWARE ............................................................................ 8
7.4.3 SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION AND SETUP VALIDATION ..................................................................... 8
7.4.4 SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION.......................................................................................................... 8
7.4.5 SOFTWARE REFERENCE INFORMATION ....................................................................................... 9
7.4.6 SOFTWARE SETUP VALIDATION .................................................................................................. 9
7.8.1 ACCESS CONTROL .................................................................................................................... 9
PHASE II – FUNCTIONAL SECURITY TESTING ............................................................................ 10
2.1.1 SECURITY ............................................................................................................................... 11
2.1.5.1 OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................. 12
5.4.3 IN-PROCESS AUDIT RECORDS .................................................................................................. 13
7.2.1 GENERAL ACCESS CONTROL ................................................................................................... 14
7.2.2 ACCESS CONTROL IDENTIFICATION .......................................................................................... 15
7.2.3 ACCESS CONTROL AUTHENTICATION ........................................................................................ 15
7.2.4 ACCESS CONTROL AUTHORIZATION ......................................................................................... 17
7.3 PHYSICAL SECURITY MEASURES ................................................................................................. 17
7.3.1 POLLING PLACE SECURITY ...................................................................................................... 18
7.3.2 CENTRAL COUNT LOCATION SECURITY ..................................................................................... 19
7.4.1 SOFTWARE AND FIRMWARE INSTALLATION ................................................................................ 19
7.4.2 PROTECTION AGAINST MALICIOUS SOFTWARE .......................................................................... 21
7.4.3 SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION AND SETUP VALIDATION ................................................................... 21
7.4.4 SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION........................................................................................................ 21
7.4.5 SOFTWARE REFERENCE INFORMATION ..................................................................................... 22
7.4.6 SOFTWARE SETUP VALIDATION ................................................................................................ 23
7.6 TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND DATA TRANSMISSION ....................................................................... 27
7.6.1 MAINTAINING DATA INTEGRITY ................................................................................................. 27
7.6.2 ELECTION RETURNS ................................................................................................................ 28
7.7.3 ELECTRONIC AND PAPER RECORD STRUCTURE ........................................................................ 28
7.7.4 EQUIPMENT SECURITY AND RELIABILITY ................................................................................... 29
7.8.2 DATA INTERCEPTION AND DISRUPTION ..................................................................................... 29
PHASE III – TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND DATA TRANSMISSION TESTING.......................... 30
6.1.2 DATA TRANSMISSION ............................................................................................................... 31
California Certification Page 3 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
6.2.1 CONFIRMATION ....................................................................................................................... 32
OPEN-ENDED VULNERABILITY TESTING .................................................................................... 32
7.5.1 OEVT SCOPE AND PRIORITIES ................................................................................................ 33
7.5.2 OEVT RESOURCES AND LEVEL OF EFFORT .............................................................................. 35
7.5.3 CONTEXT OF OEVT TESTING................................................................................................... 37
7.5.4 FAIL CRITERIA ......................................................................................................................... 38
7.5.5 OEVT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................... 39
FINAL REPORT ................................................................................................................................ 40
Overview
This test report provides results for the security and telecommunications testing of
the Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19 (Dominion DS 5.19).
Security and telecommunications testing covered:
• Top-level system design and architecture.
• System documentation and procedures.
• Testing of relevant software and operating system configuration for
pertinent vulnerabilities.
• Testing of hardware, including examination of unused hardware ports
and security measures applied to those ports.
• Testing of system communications, including encryption of data as well
as protocols and procedures for access authorization.
Testing was implemented without any prior knowledge of the source code.
The testing was divided into four phases.
• Phase I – Documentation Review included review of all pertinent
documents for appropriate processes and procedures for implementing
a secure system. This included a review of the system design and
architecture.
• Phase II – Functional Security Testing included testing of relevant
software, operating systems, and hardware configurations.
• Phase III – Telecommunications and Data Transmission Testing
included testing of all telecommunications aspects of the system.
• Phase IV – Open-Ended Vulnerability Testing included open-ended
vulnerability testing of the entire system.
Phase I – Documentation Review
California Certification Page 4 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
During Phase I testing, documentation was reviewed to verify and validate the
following requirements:
• Top-level system design and architecture.
• System documentation and procedures.
During Phase I testing, documentation was reviewed to verify and validate the
following California Voting System Standards (CVSS) requirements:
• 2.1.1 Security
• 6.2 Design, Construction, and Maintenance Requirements
• 7.2.2 Access control identification
• 7.3.1 Polling place security
• 7.3.2 Central count location security
• 7.4.1 Software and firmware installation
• 7.4.2 Protections against malicious software
• 7.4.3 Software distribution and setup validation
• 7.4.4 Software Distribution
• 7.4.5 Software Reference Information
• 7.4.6 Software Setup Validation
See the applicable section below for more details on these requirements and the
review results.
During Phase I testing, an issue log of any errors and omissions found in the
documentation or anomalies encountered was maintained.
2.1.1 Security
System security is achieved through a combination of technical capabilities and
sound administrative practices. To ensure security, all systems shall:
g. Provide documentation of mandatory administrative procedures for effective
system security.
Results: Review of the Technical Data Package (TDP) validated that the
requirement was satisfactorily covered.
6.2 Design, Construction, and Maintenance Requirements
Design, construction, and maintenance requirements for telecommunications
represent the operational capability of both system hardware and software. These
capabilities shall be considered basic to all data transmissions.
California Certification Page 5 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.2.2 Access Control Identification
a. The voting system shall identify users and processes to which access is
granted and the specific functions and data to which each entity holds
authorized access.
b. Voting system equipment that implements role-based access control shall
support the recommendations for Core RBAC in the ANSI INCITS 359-2004
American National Standard for Information Technology Role Based Access
Control document.
c. Voting system equipment shall allow the administrator group or role to
configure the permissions and functionality for each identity, group, or role
to include account and group/role creation, modification, and deletion.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.3.1 Polling Place Security
For polling place operations, manufacturers shall develop and provide detailed
documentation of measures to enable poll workers to physically protect and
perform orderly shutdown of voting equipment to counteract vandalism, civil
disobedience, and similar occurrences.
The measures shall allow the immediate detection of tampering with vote casting
devices and precinct ballot counters.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.3.2 Central Count Location Security
Manufacturers shall develop and document in detail the measures to be taken in a
central counting environment. These measures shall include physical and
procedural controls related to the handling of ballot boxes, preparing of ballots for
counting, counting operations and reporting data.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.4.1 Software and Firmware Installation
The system shall meet the following requirements for installation of software,
including hardware with embedded firmware:
California Certification Page 6 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
a. Air Gap Architecture
i. Every voting system shall be capable of being deployed in a segregated
dual-installation architecture to protect against propagation of viruses.
The architecture shall allow elections officials to use one or more,
permanent server(s) and set of central-office voting devices, known to be
running unaltered, certified software and firmware to create memory
cards before each election and to use another, physically separate
“sacrificial” server and set of voting devices after the election to tabulate
results and generate reports. The architecture shall allow transfer of the
election definition and tally database from the permanent server(s) to the
sacrificial server using a write-once medium, such as a CD-R. The
voting system architecture shall allow each installation to use its own
Ethernet network, port server, and central-office vote-recording units,
including any DRE and optical scan units, permitting the two
installations to be segregated and air-gapped to ensure that there are
no cross connections. An air gap is established by keeping two
installations/networks physically separate and seeing that no device
attached to the sacrificial installation/network is connected (directly or
indirectly) to the first network, ensuring that data cannot flow from one
installation/network to the other.
ii. The TDP for the voting system shall provide full procedures and
instructions, to be incorporated into the Official Use Procedures for the
voting system, to implement the segregated dual-installation
architecture.
b. Voting and Tabulating Units
i. If software is resident in the system as firmware, the manufacturer shall
require and state in the system documentation that every device is to be
retested to validate each ROM prior to the start of elections operations.
ii. To prevent alteration of executable code, no software shall be
permanently installed or resident in the voting system unless the system
documentation states that the jurisdiction must provide a secure physical
and procedural environment for the storage, handling, preparation, and
transportation of the system hardware.
iii. The voting system bootstrap, monitor, and device-controller software
may be resident permanently as firmware, provided that this firmware
has been shown to be inaccessible to activation or control by any means
other than by the authorized initiation and execution of the vote counting
program, and its associated exception handlers.
iv. The election-specific programming may be installed and resident as
firmware, provided that such firmware is installed on a component (such
California Certification Page 7 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
as a computer chip) other than the component on which the operating
system resides.
v. After initiation of Election Day testing, no source code or compilers or
assemblers shall be resident or accessible.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.4.2 Protection against Malicious Software
Voting systems shall deploy commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) protection against
the many forms of threats to which they may be exposed such as file and macro
viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and logic bombs.
Manufacturers shall develop and document the procedures to be followed to
ensure that such protection is maintained in a current status. Virus and malware
protection software and updates shall be installed using transportable portable
media only and shall not be installed by download from the Internet.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.4.3 Software Distribution and Setup Validation
Subsections 7.4.4, 7.4.5, and 7.4.6 specify requirements for the distribution of
voting system software and the setup validation performed on voting system
equipment. These requirements are applicable to voting systems that have
completed certification testing.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.4.4 Software Distribution
The manufacturer shall document all software including voting system software,
third party software (such as operating systems and drivers) to be installed on
the certified voting system, and installation programs.
a. The documentation shall have a unique identifier (such as a serial number
or part number) for the following set of information: documentation, software
manufacturer name, product name, version, the certification application
number of the voting system, file names and paths or other location
information (such as storage addresses) of the software.
b. The documentation shall designate all software files as static, semi-static or
dynamic.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
California Certification Page 8 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
7.4.5 Software Reference Information
(Pertinent excerpt being addressed from CVSS requirement 7.4.5)
a. The manufacturer shall provide the NSRL, any California certified escrow
facility, pursuant to Title 2, Division 7, Chapter 6 of the California Code of
Regulation, and the Office of the Secretary of State with a copy of the
software installation disk, including the executable binary images of all third-
party software. Further, the manufacturer shall deposit the source code,
tools, and documentation, to allow the complete and successful compilation
of a system in its production/operation environment.
i. The manufacturer shall document that the process used to verify the
software distributed on unalterable storage media is the certified
software by using the reference information provided by the NSRL or
other designated repository before installing the software.
c. The manufacturers shall document to whom they provide voting system
software.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.4.6 Software Setup Validation
g. Setup validation methods shall verify the contents of all system storage
locations (e.g., system registers, variables, files, etc.) containing election
specific information (e.g., ballot style, candidate registers, measure
registers, etc.).
ii. The manufacturer shall document the default values of all system
storage locations that hold election specific information.
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
7.8.1 Access Control
The accredited testing laboratory shall conduct tests of system capabilities and
review the access control policies and procedures submitted by the manufacturer
to identify and verify the access control features implemented as a function of the
system.
Specific activities to be conducted by the S-ATA shall include:
a. A review of the manufacturer’s access control policies, procedures and
system capabilities to confirm that all requirements have been addressed
completely.
California Certification Page 9 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Results: Review of the TDP validated that the requirement was satisfactorily
covered.
Phase II – Functional Security Testing
Phase II testing included:
• Testing of relevant software and operating system configurations for
pertinent vulnerabilities.
• Testing of hardware, including examination of unused hardware ports
and the security measures applied to those ports.
During Phase II, functional tests were exercised in order to verify and validate the
following CVSS requirements:
• 2.1.1 Security
• 2.1.5 System Audit
• 5.4.3 In-process Audit Records
• 7.2.1 General access control
• 7.2.2 Access control identification
• 7.2.3 Access control authentication
• 7.2.4 Access control authorization
• 7.3 Physical security measures
• 7.3.1 Polling place security
• 7.3.2 Central count location security
• 7.4.1 Software and firmware installation
• 7.4.2 Protection against malicious software
• 7.4.3 Software distribution and setup validation
• 7.4.4 Software distribution
• 7.4.5 Software Reference Information
• 7.4.6 Software Setup Validation
• 7.6 Telecommunications and data transmission
• 7.6.1 Maintaining Data Integrity
• 7.6.2 Election Returns
• 7.8.1 Access Control
• 7.8.2 Data Interception and Disruption
See the applicable section below for more details on these requirements and the
test results.
California Certification Page 10 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
An issue log of any errors, omissions, or anomalies found in the documentation
was maintained.
2.1.1 Security
System security is achieved through a combination of technical capabilities and
sound administrative practices. To ensure security, all systems shall:
a. Provide security access controls that limit or detect access to critical system
components to guard against loss of system integrity, availability,
confidentiality, and accountability.
b. Provide system functions that are executable only in the intended manner
and order, and only under the intended conditions.
c. Use the system's control logic to prevent a system function from executing if
any preconditions to the function have not been met.
d. Provide safeguards in response to system failure to protect against
tampering during system repair or interventions in system operations.
e. Provide security provisions that are compatible with the procedures and
administrative tasks involved in equipment preparation, testing, and
operation.
f. Incorporate a means of implementing a capability if access to a system
function is to be restricted or controlled.
g. Provide documentation of mandatory administrative procedures for effective
system security.
Testing performed: The overall functionality of the system was assessed based
on these six overreaching functional security requirements:
1. All access control mechanisms will be examined to determine if they are
adequate to guard against system integrity, availability, confidentiality, and
accountability.
2. The system functions will be examined to determine that the system
functions in only the intended manner.
3. All system control logic will be examined to determine if system functions
can be executed without preconditions to the functions being met.
4. Examination of the systems safeguards in response to system failures to
determine if there is protection against tampering during a system repair or
interventions.
5. Confirm that the security provisions are compatible with procedures,
administrative tasks during equipment preparation, and election system
testing and operation.
6. Determine if system capabilities can be implemented during system
functions while the system is restricted or controlled.
California Certification Page 11 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing resulted in the requirements 2.1.1.b, and 2.1.1.c, being
identified as partially met. Certain components could be configured to
prevent the Event Log from recording data as expected. However, users can
easily verify the status of event logging by checking the Event Viewer. If the
Event Log is prevented from recording, the Event Viewer will indicate the
Event Log status and identify which user performed specific actions. Testing
was performed and confirmed that the status of the event logging service
can be identified by browsing directly to the Event Viewer and confirming the
associated error message. The overall associated security risk is classified
as low severity due to documented procedural mitigations, limiting account
usage to non-administrative user accounts during day-to-day usage, and the
ability to identify the Event Log status and identify which user performed
specific actions.
2.1.5.1 Operational Requirements
Audit records shall be prepared for all phases of election operations performed
using devices controlled by the jurisdiction or its contractors. These records rely
upon automated audit data acquisition and machine-generated reports, with
manual input of some information. These records shall address the ballot
preparation and election definition phase, system readiness tests, and voting and
ballot-counting operations. The software shall activate the logging and reporting of
audit data as described below.
a. Voting system equipment shall record activities through an event logging
mechanism.
b. Voting system equipment shall enable file integrity protection for stored log
files as part of the default configuration.
c. The voting system equipment logs shall not contain information that, if
published, would violate ballot secrecy or voter privacy or that would
compromise voting system security in any way.
e. Voting system equipment shall log all normal and abnormal events.
i. Voting system equipment shall ensure that event logging cannot be
disabled.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
California Certification Page 12 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Results: Testing concluded that the system’s configuration was insufficient
to fully meet the requirements of sections 2.1.5.1.e, 2.1.5.1.e.i. Certain
components could be configured to prevent the Event Log from recording
data as expected. However, users can easily verify the status of event
logging by checking the Event Viewer. If the Event Log is prevented from
recording, the Event Viewer will indicate the Event Log status and identify
which user performed specific actions. Testing was performed and
confirmed that the status of the vent logging service can be identified by
browsing directly to the Event Viewer and confirming the associated error
message. The overall associated security risk is classified as low severity
due to documented procedural mitigations, limiting account usage to non-
administrative user accounts during day-to-day usage, and the ability to
identify the Event Log status and identify which user performed specific
actions.
5.4.3 In-process Audit Records
iv. Notification of system login or access errors, file access errors, and
physical violations of security as they occur, and a summary record of
these events after processing.
Testing performed: As all other requirements were being tested, the Audit log
was reviewed to verify that appropriate records were recorded for the events
occurring.
The examination also included:
• Attempts to modify or corrupt audit logs / records.
• Attempts to disable or turn off audit logging capabilities.
• Attempts to falsify audit logs located on removable election media.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing concluded that the system’s configuration was insufficient
to fully meet the requirements. Certain components could be configured to
prevent the Event Log from recording data as expected. However, users can
easily verify the status of event logging by checking the Event Viewer. If the
Event Log is prevented from recording, the Event Viewer will indicate the
Event Log status and identify which user performed specific actions. Testing
was performed and confirmed that the status of the vent logging service can
be identified by browsing directly to the Event Viewer and confirming the
associated error message. The overall associated security risk is classified
as low severity due to documented procedural mitigations, limiting account
usage to non-administrative user accounts during day-to-day usage, and the
California Certification Page 13 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
ability to identify the Event Log status and identify which user performed
specific actions.
7.2.1 General Access Control
a. Voting system equipment shall provide access control mechanisms
designed to permit authorized access to the voting system and to prevent
unauthorized access to the voting system.
i. Access control mechanisms on the Election Management System (EMS)
shall be capable of identifying and authenticating individuals permitted to
perform operations on the EMS.
b. Voting system equipment shall provide controls that permit or deny access
to the device’s software and files.
c. The default access control permissions shall implement the minimum
permissions needed for each role or group identified by a device.
d. The voting device shall prevent a lower-privileged process from modifying a
higher-privileged process.
e. An administrator of voting system equipment shall authorize privileged
operations.
f. Voting system equipment shall prevent modification to or tampering with
software or firmware through any means other than the documented
procedure for software upgrades.
Testing performed:
• System wide authentication checks, including both positive and negative
testing. To verify that the systems under examination allowed
authorized users the ability to complete tasks while preventing all
unauthorized users from accessing critical controls or processes.
• Attempts to access systems files or software via an unauthorized
method or process.
• System wide permission checks to determine if user accounts and
passcodes only allowed the appropriate levels of permission / roles to
perform the task at hand.
• Examined Solution specific users and roles to confirm permissions and
task / actions.
• Attempts to escalate privileges from a lower privileged account in an
attempt to perform or access roles or tasks not specifically assigned to
users.
California Certification Page 14 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
• Examined the system to determine if the software or firmware could be
tampered with or modified through other means besides the
documented procedure.
• Enumerated each system as able, pulling audit logs, firewall rules,
running processes, network configurations, user lists, security settings.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA).
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.2.2 Access Control Identification
a. The voting system shall identify users and processes to which access is
granted and the specific functions and data to which each entity holds
authorized access.
b. Voting system equipment that implements role-based access control shall
support the recommendations for Core RBAC in the ANSI INCITS 359-2004
American National Standard for Information Technology Role Based Access
Control document.
c. Voting system equipment shall allow the administrator group or role to
configure the permissions and functionality for each identity, group, or role
to include account and group/role creation, modification, and deletion.
Testing performed:
• Confirmed that the documented users and roles are the same as those
documented in the TDP.
• Confirmed all solution roles and responsibilities.
• Confirmed administrative group’s roles and permissions.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.2.3 Access Control Authentication
The following authentication requirements apply to all voting system equipment.
a. Voting system equipment shall authenticate users prior to granting them
access to system functions or data.
California Certification Page 15 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
b. When private or secret authentication data is stored in voting system
equipment, the data shall be protected to ensure that the confidentiality and
integrity of the data is not violated.
c. Voting system equipment shall allow the administrator group or role to set
and change passwords, pass phrases, and keys.
d. Voting system equipment shall allow privileged groups or roles to be
disabled and allow new individual privileged groups or roles to be created.
e. Voting system equipment shall lock out groups, roles, or individuals after a
specified number of consecutive failed authentication attempts within a
predefined time period.
f. Voting systems shall allow the administrator group or role to configure the
account lock out policy, including the time period within which failed
attempts must occur, the number of consecutive failed access attempts
allowed before lock out, and the length of time the account is locked out.
g. If the voting system uses a username and password authentication method,
the voting system shall allow the administrator to enforce password
strength, histories, and expiration.
h. The voting system shall allow the administrator group or role to specify
password strength for all accounts, including minimum password length, use
of capitalized letters, use of numeric characters, and use of non-
alphanumeric characters.
i. The voting system shall enforce password histories and allow the
administrator to configure the history length.
j. Voting system equipment shall ensure that the username is not used in the
password.
k. Voting systems shall provide a means to automatically expire passwords in
accordance with the voting jurisdiction’s policies.
Testing performed:
• Attempts to access system functions and resources without successful
authentication to the operating system or Dominion DS 5.19 system.
• Attempts to find extra authentication data from system storage including
hard drives, USB, Compact Flash, and Secure Digital (SD) removable
media.
• Verified the system equipment allows the administrator to change all
passwords, pass phrases, and keys, if applicable.
• Verified that the system(s) have the ability to lock out accounts after a
specified number of failed authentication attempts.
California Certification Page 16 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
• Confirmed and tested the system’s password complexity, strength,
lockout, history, length, and expiration requirements.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.2.4 Access Control Authorization
a. Voting systems shall ensure that only authorized roles, groups, or
individuals have access to election data.
b. Voting systems shall explicitly authorize the subject’s access based on
access control lists or policies.
c. Voting systems shall explicitly deny the subject’s access based on access
control lists or policies.
During the examination, the access control authorization capabilities of all the
systems were examined to determine if the systems sufficiently provided controls
for authorization.
Testing performed:
• Verified that the system only allows authorized roles, groups, and
individuals access to election data.
• Verified that the system has access levels based on roles, control lists,
or policies.
• Verified that the system successfully denies access to the system based
on roles, lists, or policies.
• All the systems successfully protected the system BIOS settings from
tampering which prevented all attempts to boot from unauthorized
devices and system configuration settings from being changed at a
BIOS level.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.3 Physical Security Measures
a. Any unauthorized physical access shall leave physical evidence that an
unauthorized event has taken place.
California Certification Page 17 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
b. Voting systems shall only have physical ports and access points that are
essential to voting operations and to voting system testing and auditing.
c. An event log entry that identifies the name of the affected device shall be
generated if a component connected to a piece of voting system equipment
is disconnected while polls are open.
d. Ports disabled while polls are open shall only be re-enabled by authorized
administrators.
e. Access points, such as covers and panels, shall be secured by locks or
tamper evident seals or tamper resistant countermeasures shall be
implemented so that system owners can monitor access to voting system
components through these points.
f. Ballot boxes shall be designed such that any unauthorized physical access
results in physical evidence that an unauthorized event has taken place.
During the examination of the physical security measures, all the systems were
physically secured as they normally would be during a live election.
Testing performed:
• Attempts to circumvent all physical security features, including picking of
locks and attempts to circumvent or bypass security seals and security
screws.
• Examined and tested all ports and connectors.
• Disconnected devices and examined audit logs, as applicable, to
determine if auditing of device disconnection was present.
• Identified and examined every cover, panel, and access compartment.
• Attempts to circumvent all ballot boxes to add, remove, or destroy paper
ballots.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.3.1 Polling Place Security
For polling place operations, manufacturers shall develop and provide detailed
documentation of measures to enable poll workers to physically protect and
perform orderly shutdown of voting equipment to counteract vandalism, civil
disobedience, and similar occurrences.
The measures shall allow the immediate detection of tampering with vote casting
devices and precinct ballot counters.
California Certification Page 18 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Testing performed: Tests were performed to verify that the documented
measures provide adequate polling place security, including:
• Physical examination of ballot box security.
• Verification of documented procedures
• Confirmed physical characteristics of device protection including locks,
security seals, and cases.
• Attempted loading of modified election data
• Examined ballot printers for the ability to manipulate printer settings.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.3.2 Central Count Location Security
Manufacturers shall develop and document in detail the measures to be taken in a
central counting environment. These measures shall include physical and
procedural controls related to the handling of ballot boxes, preparing of ballots for
counting, counting operations and reporting data.
Testing performed: Tests were performed to verify that the documented
measures provide adequate central count location security, including:
• Confirmed physical characteristics of device protection including locks,
security seals, and cases.
• Examined EMS and ICC desktop configurations to verify that the
desktops provided secure network communications between devices.
• Examined EMS and ICC desktop configurations to verify that
unauthorized users were not able to access operating system
components.
• Verified that the EMS and ICC desktop configurations were not able to
be manipulated through the ability to boot to unauthorized devices or
circumvent in-place access controls.
• Verified all COTS equipment such as scanners and printers.
Applicable to: ImageCast® Central (ICC)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.4.1 Software and Firmware Installation
(Pertinent excerpt being addressed from CVSS requirement 7.4.1)
California Certification Page 19 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
The system shall meet the following requirements for installation of software,
including hardware with embedded firmware:
b. Voting and Tabulating Units
ii. To prevent alteration of executable code, no software shall be
permanently installed or resident in the voting system unless the system
documentation states that the jurisdiction must provide a secure physical
and procedural environment for the storage, handling, preparation, and
transportation of the system hardware.
iii. The voting system bootstrap, monitor, and device-controller software
may be resident permanently as firmware, provided that this firmware
has been shown to be inaccessible to activation or control by any means
other than by the authorized initiation and execution of the vote counting
program, and its associated exception handlers.
iv. The election-specific programming may be installed and resident as
firmware, provided that such firmware is installed on a component (such
as a computer chip) other than the component on which the operating
system resides.
v. After initiation of Election Day testing, no source code or compilers or
assemblers shall be resident or accessible.
Testing performed:
• Confirmed solutions air gap architecture including, but not limited to,
private Ethernet networking configurations and protections and the
ability to protect the system against foreign software being introduced to
the system.
• Confirmed that the Dominion DS 5.19 system contained no source
code, compilers, or assemblers.
• Confirmed that all boot operations were password protected and that
the Dominion DS 5.19 system’s monitoring and device controller
software is inaccessible to activation or control.
• Confirmed that none of the software is permanently installed or resident
in the Dominion DS 5.19 system.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
California Certification Page 20 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
7.4.2 Protection against Malicious Software
Voting systems shall deploy commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) protection against
the many forms of threats to which they may be exposed such as file and macro
viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and logic bombs.
Manufacturers shall develop and document the procedures to be followed to
ensure that such protection is maintained in a current status. Virus and malware
protection software and updates shall be installed using transportable portable
media only and shall not be installed by download from the Internet.
Testing performed: Tests were performed to verify that COTS products are
implemented to protect against malicious software, as described in voting system
manufacturer documentation, including:
• Verifying protection against malicious software and files.
• Ability to run unauthorized software.
• Ability to run unauthorized scripts (PowerShell, Python, Batch).
• Attempts to circumvent Whitelisting technology.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.4.3 Software Distribution and Setup Validation
Subsections 7.4.4, 7.4.5, and 7.4.6 specify requirements for the distribution of
voting system software and the setup validation performed on voting system
equipment. These requirements are applicable to voting systems that have
completed certification testing.
Testing performed: This requirement is met by successful validation of 7.4.4,
7.4.5 and 7.4.6.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing determined that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.4.4 Software Distribution
The manufacturer shall document all software including voting system software,
third party software (such as operating systems and drivers) to be installed on
the certified voting system, and installation programs.
California Certification Page 21 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
a. The documentation shall have a unique identifier (such as a serial number
or part number) for the following set of information: documentation, software
manufacturer name, product name, version, the certification application
number of the voting system, file names and paths or other location
information (such as storage addresses) of the software.
b. The documentation shall designate all software files as static, semi-static or
dynamic.
Testing performed: During the examination of the Dominion DS 5.19 solution,
the systems were reviewed to confirm:
• Verification and examination of third-party software for vulnerabilities.
• Verification and examination of all software and file paths.
• Confirmation of unique identifiers of software.
• Examination of static, semi-static, and dynamic content of the systems.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing determined that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.4.5 Software Reference Information
b. The voting system equipment shall be designed to allow the voting system
administrator to verify that the software is the certified software by
comparing it to reference information produced by the NSRL or another
designated repository.
Testing performed: Tests were performed to verify that the software can be
verified to meet the National Software Reference Library (NSRL) reference
information, including:
• Verification of trusted build process.
• Verification and examination of system verification process for integrity
checking the certified software.
• Verified the process for certifying system software.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
California Certification Page 22 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
7.4.6 Software Setup Validation
a. Setup validation methods shall verify that only authorized software is
present on the voting equipment. Authorized software is COTS software
components needed to run the voting system and voting software
components identified by the manufacturer as authorized.
b. The manufacturer shall provide a method to comprehensively list all
software files that are installed on voting systems.
i. This method shall list version names and numbers for all application
software on the voting system.
ii. This method should list the date of installation for all application software
on the voting system.
c. Setup validation methods shall include a software verification method that
ensures that the voting system software has not been modified illegitimately.
i. The voting systems shall include any supporting software and hardware
necessary to conduct the software verification method.
ii. The manufacturer shall document the process used to conduct the
software verification method.
iii. The software verification method shall not modify the voting system
software on the voting system.
d. Voting systems shall include a software verification method that either
verifies software prior to installation or a method that verifies software using
an external interface. Voting systems may include both software verification
methods. Voting systems may provide ancillary setup validation methods,
including methods for verifying or identifying installed software, other than
those described in this section. There are no specific requirements for
ancillary setup validation methods. However, any method intended to serve
as the voting system software verification method must meet the
requirements outlined in this section.
e. Voting systems which implement a software verification method that verifies
software prior to installation shall meet the following requirements.
i. The voting system shall contain no more than one method for installing,
updating, or removing software on a system.
o Voting system equipment shall prevent processes from installing
software except for the one specific software installation process
identified by the manufacturer.
California Certification Page 23 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
o The voting system manufacturer shall document the procedures for
installing, updating, and removing voting system software,
configuration files, and data files.
o Voting system equipment shall prevent processes from installing,
updating or removing software while the polls are open.
o Voting system equipment shall prevent the execution of software not
installed using the specified software installation process.
ii. The voting system shall only allow authenticated administrators to install
software on voting equipment. The voting system shall present the
administrator with a description of the software change being performed,
including:
o A list of all applications and/or file names being updated.
o The type of action performed on each application and/or file (e.g.,
new application/file, deletion or overwriting of existing file).
iii. Voting system equipment shall store the current version identification of
all software installed on the voting system equipment.
o The current version identification shall be included as part of reports
created by the voting system equipment.
o The current version identification shall be displayed as part of the
voting system equipment start up process.
iv. The process for installing, updating and removing software shall make
software changes based on information contained in software update
packages. Software update packages shall minimally contain the
following information:
o A unique identifier for the software update package.
o Names of the applications or files modified during the update
process.
o Version numbers of the applications or files modified during the
update process.
o Any software prerequisites or dependencies for the software involved
in the update.
o A description of the type of action performed on each application
and/or file (e.g., new application/file, deletion or overwriting of existing
file).
o The binary data of any new or updated files involved in the update
process.
California Certification Page 24 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
v. The software update package shall be formatted in a non-restrictive,
publicly available format. Manufacturers shall provide a specification
describing how they have implemented the format with respect to the
manufacturer’s specific voting devices and data, including such items as
descriptions of elements, attributes, constraints, extensions, syntax and
semantics of the format, and definitions for data fields and schemas.
vi. Software update packages shall be digitally signed by using a NIST
approved algorithm with a security strength of at least 112 bits.
vii. The software installation process shall verify digital signatures, software
version identification, software prerequisites and dependencies, and
manufacturer specific authorization information associated with the
software before the software is installed. The software installation
process shall not install software with invalid digital signatures, version
numbers, or manufacturer specific authorization information, and shall
not install software on systems that do not meet the update requisites.
viii. The voting system shall have the capability to prevent the installation of
previous versions of applications or files.
ix. The software installation process shall result in information being stored
in the voting system equipment’s log such that altering or deleting log
entries or the log was detected.
x. The minimum information to be included in the voting system equipment
log shall be:
o Success or failure of the software installation process.
o Cause of a failed software installation (such as invalid version
identification, digital signature, etc.).
o Application or file name(s), and version number(s).
o A description of the type of action performed on each application
and/or file (e.g., new application/file, deletion or overwriting of existing
file).
o A cryptographic hash of the software update package using FIPS
1402 level 1 or higher validated cryptographic module.
f. If software is verified after being installed on the voting system equipment,
the voting system equipment shall provide an external interface to the
location of the voting system software for software verification purposes.
i. The external interface:
o Shall be protected using tamper evident techniques.
California Certification Page 25 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
o Shall have a physical indicator showing when the interface is
enabled and disabled.
o Shall be disabled during voting.
o Should provide a direct read-only access to the location of the voting
system software without the use of installed software ii. The
verification process should be able to be performed using COTS
software and hardware available from sources other than the voting
system manufacturer.
o If the process uses hashes or digital signatures, then the verification
software shall use a FIPS 140-2 level 1 or higher validated
cryptographic module.
o The verification process shall either (a) use reference information on
unalterable storage media received from the repository or (b) verify
the digital signature of the reference information on any other media.
g. Setup validation methods shall verify the contents of all system storage
locations (e.g., system registers, variables, files, etc.) containing election
specific information (e.g., ballot style, candidate registers, measure
registers, etc.).
i. The manufacturer should provide a method to query the voting system to
determine the value contained in all system storage locations containing
election specific information.
Testing performed: Tests were performed to verify that the installation process for
each system component is robust and maintains the integrity of the voting system.
These tests included:
• Confirmed process for verification of Dominion Desktop and device
software.
• Verified system installation processes and procedure.
• Verified system trusted build procedures.
• Examined the desktop environment to confirm that there is no
unauthorized software on the device.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
California Certification Page 26 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
7.6 Telecommunications and Data Transmission
There are four areas that must be addressed by telecommunications and data
transmission security capabilities: access control, data integrity, detection and
prevention of data interception, and protection against external threats.
7.6.1 Maintaining Data Integrity
Voting systems that use telecommunications to communicate between system
components and locations are subject to the same security requirements governing
access to any other system hardware, software, and data function.
a. Voting systems that use electrical or optical transmission of data shall
ensure the receipt of valid vote records is verified at the receiving station.
This should include standard transmission error detection and correction
methods such as checksums or message digest hashes. Verification of
correct transmission shall occur at the voting system application level and
ensure that the correct data is recorded on all relevant components
consolidated within the polling place prior to the voter completing casting of
his or her ballot.
i. Cryptography used to verify the receipt of vote records shall use NIST
approved algorithms with security strength of at least 112 bits. Message
Authentication Code (MAC) keys shall have a security strength of at
least 112 bits.
Testing performed: Tests were performed to verify that data is properly
encrypted, and that receipt is verified, including:
• Security testing captured and examined all network traffic between each
of the separate networked devices and determined that all traffic
between the server and clients utilize encrypted traffic.
• Determined that all results files and election relevant data that is
transmitted or contained in removable media are encrypted or digitally
signed.
• Examination of the desktop isolated networks determined that all
communications between devices require authentication and that any
unauthorized devices accidentally or maliciously added to the secured
networking environments would not be able to interact with the
Dominion Desktop server/client systems.
• Vulnerability scans of desktop systems were conducted both as a
trusted and untrusted machine in the network.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC)
California Certification Page 27 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.6.2 Election Returns
If the voting system provides access to election returns or interactive inquiries, the
system shall:
a. Allow authorized administrators the ability to disable or restrict access to
election returns (for equipment that operates in a central counting
environment). This requirement applies as well to polling place equipment
that contains a removable memory module or that may be removed in its
entirety to a central place for the consolidation of polling place returns.
b. Design voting system software and its security environment such that data
accessible to interactive queries resides in an external file or database
created and maintained by the elections software under the restrictions
applying to any other output report:
i. The output file or database has no provision for write access back to the
system.
ii. Persons whose only authorized access is to the file or database are
denied write access, both to the file or database, and to the system.
Testing performed: Tests were performed to determine that if the system provides
access to election returns or interactive queries, then the authorized administrators
can disable or restrict access, and that the data resides in an external file or
database governed by the voting system. Tests included:
• Attempts to compromise database components to modify or alter
results.
• Attempts to modify or change results files on removable media.
• Attempts to change results in transmission between count server and
client.
• Attempts to physically compromise device and desktop systems in an
attempt to compromise storage media.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.7.3 Electronic and Paper Record Structure
The examination included:
• Verification that all devices and associated components of the voting system
used FIPS 140-2 encryption and was enabled correctly.
California Certification Page 28 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
• Digital signatures are generated using NIST-approved digital signature
algorithms with a security strength of at least 112 bits.
• Additional verification that data at rest and in transit remain encrypted.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA).
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.7.4 Equipment Security and Reliability
The examination included:
• Verification that all printers are physically connected via a standard, publicly
documented printer port using a standard communication protocol.
• That all printer access is secure using tamper-evident seals or physical
security measures.
• That any break or interruption in communication between the voting
machine and printer is detected and recorded in a system event log.
• That the printer cannot communicate with any system or machine other than
the voting machine it is connected to.
• The printer can only function as a printer and contains no network capability.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA).
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
7.8.2 Data Interception and Disruption
For systems that use telecommunications, as provided for in section 6 of the
Standards and consistent with California law, to transmit official voting data, the S-
ATA shall review, and conduct tests of, the data interception and prevention
safeguards specified by the manufacturer in its TDP. The S-ATA shall evaluate
safeguards provided by the manufacturer to ensure their proper operation,
including the proper response to the detection of efforts to monitor data or
otherwise compromise the system.
Individual voter-facing components are not networked, nor do they transmit
individual voting results. This includes ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2). The only telecommunication in use is a
closed ethernet (physically connected) network configuration comprised of the
EMS components at a central count location. Operating system-level transmissions
provided appropriate encryption, receipt validation, and data integrity protections.
California Certification Page 29 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Testing performed: Testing included verification of operating system level
transmissions regarding appropriate encryption, receipt validation, and data
integrity, including:
• Capture and examination of all network traffic between each of the
separate networked devices to determine encryption used for
connection security.
• The examination determined that all results files and election relevant
data either transmitted or contained in removable media are encrypted
or digitally signed.
• Examination of the desktop isolated networks determined that all
communications between devices require authentication and that any
unauthorized devices accidentally or maliciously added to the secured
networking environments would not be able to interact with the
Dominion Desktop server/client systems.
• Vulnerability scanning of desktop systems.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA).
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
Phase III – Telecommunications and Data Transmission
Testing
During Phase III, tests were exercised in order to verify and validate the following
requirements:
• Testing of system communications, including encryption of data, as well
as protocols and procedures for access authorization.
In this phase, tests were exercised in order to verify and validate the following
CVSS requirements:
• 6.1.2 Data Transmission
• 6.2.1 Confirmation
See the applicable section below for more details on these requirements and the
test results.
An issue log of any errors, omissions, or anomalies found in the documentation
was maintained.
California Certification Page 30 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
6.1.2 Data Transmission
These requirements apply to the use of telecommunications to transmit data for the
preparation of the system for an election, the execution of an election, and the
preservation of the system data and audit trails during and following an election.
While this section does not assume a specific model of voting system operations
and does not assume a specific model for the use of telecommunications to
support such operations, it does address the following types of data, where
applicable:
Voter Authentication: Coded information that confirms the identity of a voter
for security purposes for a system that transmits votes individually.
Ballot Definition: Information that describes to a voting machine the content
and appearance of the ballots to be used in an election.
Vote Count: Information representing the tabulation of votes at any level within
the control of the jurisdiction, such as the polling place, precinct or central
count.
List of Voters: A listing of the individual voters who have cast ballots in a
specific election.
Additional data transmissions used to operate a voting system in the conduct of an
election, but not explicitly listed above, are also subject to the requirements of this
section.
Testing performed: All networked devices were scrutinized to determine if
networked systems and the data transmissions between the networked systems
were vulnerable to compromise, and if the data transmissions were encrypted.
Testing included:
• Nessus vulnerability scans were conducted on all equipment that were
connected to the private Dominion DS 5.19 isolated networks, as an
external untrusted entity.
• Testing to confirm that the operating system level transmissions
provided appropriate encryption, receipt validation, and data integrity.
• Testing to confirm that the ability to export Root certificates didn’t
include the private key.
• Network packet capture and analysis, to determine transmission
encryption, and to determine if authentication was performed in the
clear.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
California Certification Page 31 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
6.2.1 Confirmation
Confirmation occurs when the system notifies the user of the successful or
unsuccessful completion of the data transmission, where successful completion is
defined as accurate receipt of the transmitted data. To provide confirmation, the
telecommunications components of a voting system shall notify the user of the
successful or unsuccessful completion of the data transmission. In the event of
unsuccessful transmission, the user shall be notified of the action to be taken.
Testing performed: Testing was performed to verify appropriate confirmation of
data transmission to the user and actions to be taken, if any, including:
• Nessus vulnerability scans were conducted on all equipment connected
to the private Dominion DS 5.19 system networks.
• Operating system level transmissions provide confirmation.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC)
Results: Testing validated that the requirement was satisfactorily covered.
• This requirement was determined to be not applicable for polling place
devices.
• Nessus vulnerability scans were conducted on all equipment that were
connected to the private EMS network. These included the Election
Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication (ADJ), and
ImageCast® Central (ICC).
• Application-level transmissions provided confirmation of transmission.
Open-Ended Vulnerability Testing
Vulnerability testing is an attempt to bypass or break the security of a system or a
device. Like functional testing, vulnerability testing can identify security
weaknesses but cannot verify the security measures in place. As such,
vulnerability testing is leveraged as a part of functional security testing to identify
potential points within the system requiring further review.
Open-ended vulnerability testing (OEVT) is conducted without the confines of a
pre-determined test suite. It instead relies heavily on the experience and expertise
of the OEVT Team Members, their knowledge of the system, its component
devices and associated vulnerabilities, and their ability to exploit those
vulnerabilities.
The goal of OEVT is to discover architecture, design, and implementation flaws in
the system that may not be detected using systematic functional, reliability, and
security testing and which may be exploited to change the outcome of an election,
California Certification Page 32 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
interfere with voters’ ability to cast ballots or have their votes counted during an
election, or compromise the secrecy of the vote.
OEVT also includes attempts to discover logic bombs, time bombs, or other Trojan
Horses that may have been introduced into the system hardware, firmware, or
software for said purposes.
7.5.1 OEVT Scope and Priorities
a. Scope of open-ended vulnerability testing – The scope of open-ended
vulnerability testing (OEVT) shall include the voting system security during
all phases of the voting process and shall include all manufacturer supplied
voting system use procedures. The scope of OEVT includes but is not
limited to the following:
i. Voting system security;
ii. Voting system physical security while voting devices are:
o In storage;
o Being configured;
o Being transported; and
o Being used.
iii. Voting system use procedures.
b. Focus of open-ended vulnerability testing – OEVT Team members shall
seek out vulnerabilities in the voting system that might be used to change
the outcome of an election, to interfere with voters’ ability to cast ballots or
have their votes counted during an election or to compromise the secrecy of
vote.
c. OEVT General Priorities – The OEVT team shall prioritize testing efforts
based on:
i. Threat scenarios for the voting system under investigation;
ii. The availability of time and resources;
iii. The OEVT team’s determination of easily exploitable vulnerabilities; and
iv. The OEVT team’s determination of which exploitation scenarios are
more likely to impact the outcome of an election, interfere with voters’
ability to cast ballots or have their votes counted during an election or
compromise the secrecy of the vote.
v. All threat scenarios must be plausible in that they should not be in
conflict with the anticipated implementation, associated use procedures,
the workmanship requirements (assuming those requirements were all
California Certification Page 33 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
met) or the development environment specification as supplied by the
manufacturer in the TDP;
vi. Open-ended vulnerability testing should not exclude those threat
scenarios involving collusion between multiple parties including
manufacturer insiders. It is acknowledged that threat scenarios become
less plausible as the number of conspirators increases;
vii. It is assumed that attackers may be well resourced and may have
access to the system while under development;
viii. Threats that can be exploited to change the outcome of an election and
flaws that can provide erroneous results for an election should have the
highest priority;
ix. Threats that can cause a denial of service during the election should be
considered very high priority;
x. Threats that can compromise the secrecy of the vote should be
considered of high priority;
xi. A threat to disclosure or modification of metadata (e.g., security audit
log) that does not change the outcome of the election, does not cause
denial of service during the election, or does not compromise the
secrecy of ballot should be considered of lower priority;
xii. If the voting device uses COTS products, then the OEVT team should
also investigate publicly known vulnerabilities; and
xiii. The OEVT team should not consider the voting device vulnerabilities that
require Internet connectivity for exploitation if the voting device is not
connected to the Internet during the election and otherwise. However, if
the voting device is connected to another device which in turn may have
been connected to the Internet (as may be the case of electronic poll
books), Internet based attacks may be plausible and should be
investigated.
Testing performed:
• Confirmation the testing effort was scoped to the priorities outlined
including:
o tester time and materials.
o all COTS hardware and software.
o all custom hardware and software.
o vulnerability ranking and analysis.
o vulnerabilities compromising confidentiality, integrity, or availability.
• Generation of, and testing to, a list of common vulnerabilities for
exploitation.
California Certification Page 34 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA).
Results: Review of the OEVT scope and priorities requirements confirmed
that the test effort was appropriately designed and performed to effectively
test the security of voting system components.
7.5.2 OEVT Resources and Level of Effort
a. OEVT team resources - The OEVT team shall use the manufacturer
supplied Technical Data Package (TDP) and User documentation, have
access to voting devices configured similar to how they are to be used in an
election, and have access to all other material and tools necessary to
conduct a thorough investigation. Materials supplied to the OEVT team shall
include but not be limited to the following:
i. Threat analysis describing threats mitigated by the voting system;
ii. Security architecture describing how threats to the voting system are
mitigated;
iii. High level design of the system;
iv. Any other documentation provided to an EAC voting system testing
laboratory or S-ATA, if applicable;
v. Source code;
vi. Operational voting system configured for election, but with the ability for
the OEVT team to reconfigure it;
vii. Testing reports from the developer and from the testing laboratory
including previous OEVT results;
viii. Tools sufficient to conduct a test lab build; and
ix. Procedures specified by the manufacturer as necessary for
implementation and secure use.
b. Open-ended vulnerability team establishment - The test lab shall establish
an OEVT team of at least 3 security experts and at least one election
management expert to conduct the open-ended vulnerability testing.
c. OEVT Team Composition: Security Experts - The OEVT team shall have at
least one member with 6 or more years of experience in the area of software
engineering, at least one member with 6 or more years of experience in the
area of information security, at least one member with 6 or more years of
experience in the area of penetration testing and at least one member with 6
or more years of experience in the area of voting system security.
California Certification Page 35 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
d. OEVT Team Composition: Election Management Expert - The OEVT team
shall have at least one member with at least 8 years of experience in the
area of election management. The OEVT team shall consult with an
elections expert, designated by the Secretary of State, who is familiar with
election procedures, how the voting systems are installed and used, and
how votes are counted.
e. OEVT team knowledge - The OEVT team knowledge shall include but not
be limited to the following:
i. Complete knowledge of work done to date on voting system design,
research and analysis conducted on voting system security, and known
and suspected flaws in voting systems;
ii. Complete knowledge of threats to voting systems;
iii. Knowledge equivalent to a bachelor’s degree in computer science or
related field;
iv. Experience in design, implementation, security analysis, or testing of
technologies or products involved in voting system; and
v. Experience in the conduct and management of elections.
f. OEVT level of effort: test plan - In determining the level of effort to apply to
open-ended vulnerability testing, the test lab shall take into consideration
the size and complexity of the voting system; any available results from the
“close ended” functional, security, and usability testing activities and
laboratory analysis and testing activities; the number of vulnerabilities found
in previous security analyses; and testing of the voting system and its prior
versions.
g. OEVT level of effort: commitment of resources - The OEVT team shall
examine the system for a minimum of 12 staff weeks.
Testing performed:
• Confirmation that VSTL resources are compliant with requirements.
• Confirmation of team composition and knowledge compliant with
requirements.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA)
Results: Review of the OEVT resources and level of effort requirements
confirmed that the test team was appropriately equipped to evaluate the
Dominion DS 5.19 voting system’s security. It was confirmed that the
security team was allotted less than 12 staff weeks for testing.
California Certification Page 36 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
7.5.3 Context of OEVT Testing
a. Context of testing - Open ended vulnerability testing shall be conducted
within the context of a process model describing a specific implementation
of the voting system and a corresponding model of plausible threats.
b. Adequate system model - The OEVT team shall verify that the manufacturer
provided system model sufficiently describes the intended implementation of
the voting system.
c. Adequate threat model - The OEVT team shall verify that the threat model
sufficiently addresses significant threats to the voting system. Significant
threats are those that could:
i. Change the outcome of an election;
ii. Interfere with voters’ ability to cast ballots or have their votes counted
during an election; or
iii. Compromise the secrecy of vote. OEVT team may modify the
manufacturer’s threat model to include additional, plausible threats.
Testing performed:
• Confirmation that OEVT testing was performed based on voting system
design, documentation, and implementation procedures.
• Confirmation that the manufacturer provided complete and accurate
information within the TDP and documentation.
• Confirmation that tested system security weaknesses have measurable
impact on critical election data or processes.
• Performed penetration testing on voting system components.
• Utilized functional security findings to identify system security flaws.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA).
Results: Review of the OEVT testing context requirements confirmed that the
test effort tested all appropriate voting system devices and applications and
effectively evaluated threats to the voting system in simulated production
environments. The following list of findings were discovered during open-
ended vulnerability testing.
• Non-voter-facing components were observed to contain operating
system account configurations with a single user account that
contained administrative privileges. The overall risk classification
is low severity with a low likelihood considering documented
California Certification Page 37 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
procedural mitigations, limiting account usage to non-
administrative user accounts during day-to-day usage.
7.5.4 Fail Criteria
a. OEVT fail criteria: violation of requirements - The voting device shall fail
open ended vulnerability testing if the OEVT team finds vulnerabilities or
errors in the voting device that violate requirements in the Standards. While
the OEVT is directed at issues of device and system security, a violation of
any requirement can lead to failure. The S-ATA shall report an OEVT failure
if any of the following are found:
i. Evidence that any single person can cause a violation of a voting system
security goal (e.g., integrity of election results, privacy of the voter,
availability of the voting system), assuming that all other parties follow
procedures appropriate for their roles as specified in the manufacturer’s
documentation;
ii. Manufacturer's documentation fails to adequately document all aspects
of system design, development, and proper usage that are relevant to
system security. This includes but is not limited to the following:
o System security objectives;
o Initialization, usage, and maintenance procedures necessary to
secure operation;
o All attacks the system is designed to resist or detect; and
o Any security vulnerabilities known to the manufacturer.
iii. Use of a cryptographic module that has not been validated against FIPS
140-2;
iv. Ability to modify electronic event logs without detection;
v. A VVPR that has an inaccurate or incomplete summary of the cast
electronic vote;
vi. Unidentified software on the voting system;
vii. Identified software which lacks documentation of the functionality it
provides to the voting device;
viii. Access to configuration file without authentication;
ix. Ability to cast more than one ballot within a voting session;
x. Ability to perform restore operations in Activated State;
xi. Enabled remote access in Activated State; and/or
xii. Ballot boxes without appropriate tamper evidence countermeasures.
California Certification Page 38 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
b. Threat model: failure - Voting systems shall fail open-ended vulnerability
testing if the manufacturer’s model of the system along with associated use
procedures and security controls does not adequately mitigate all significant
threats as described in the threat model. The OEVT team may use a threat
model that has been amended based on their findings in accordance with
7.5.4.3.c.
c. OEVT fail criteria: critical flaws - The voting device shall fail open ended
vulnerability testing if the OEVT team provides a plausible description of
how vulnerabilities or errors found in a voting device, or the implementation
of its security features could be used to:
i. Change the outcome of an election;
ii. Interfere with voters’ ability to cast ballots or have their votes counted
during an election; or
iii. Compromise the secrecy of vote without having to demonstrate a
successful exploitation of said vulnerabilities or errors.
Testing performed:
• Confirmation that testing performed accurately tested to and failed the
appropriate OEVT requirements as described by the CVSS.
• Confirmation that all security findings pertain to specific voting system
components and highlight a failure to mitigate a security threat.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA).
Results: Based on the noted findings, review of all functional security testing
and additional OEVT testing confirmed the failure of OEVT requirements.
However, all findings have been determined to have either no impact on
system security, or are limited to a low severity risk classification.
7.5.5 OEVT Reporting Requirements
a. OEVT reporting requirements - The OEVT team shall record all information
discovered during the open-ended vulnerability test, including but not limited
to:
i. Names, organizational affiliations, summary qualifications, and resumes
of the members of the OEVT;
ii. Time spent by each individual on the OEVT activities;
iii. List of hypotheses considered;
iv. List of hypotheses rejected and rationale;
California Certification Page 39 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.19
California Certification
Security and Telecom Test Report
v. List of hypotheses tested, testing approach, and testing outcomes; and
vi. List and description of remaining vulnerabilities in the voting system:
o A description of each vulnerability including how the vulnerability can
be exploited and the nature of the impact;
o For each vulnerability, the OEVT team should identify any Standards
requirements violated; and
o The OEVT team should flag those vulnerabilities as serious if the
vulnerability can result in the violation of one or more Standards
requirements; a change of the outcome of an election; or a denial of
service (lack of availability) during the election.
Testing performed:
• Confirmation that testing documentation and reports include required
detail.
• Confirmation that testing methodology aligns with industry accepted
penetration testing frameworks.
Applicable to: Election Management System (EMS), ImageCast® Adjudication
(ADJ), ImageCast® Central (ICC), ImageCast® Evolution (ICE), ImageCast® X
(ICX), ImageCast® Precinct2 (ICP2), ImageCast® Voter Activation (ICVA).
Results: Review of the Performed functional security and OEVT testing
confirmed sufficient adherence to OEVT reporting requirements. All findings
resulting from OEVT testing are included in this report.
Final Report
Completion of the CVSS requirements examination and the Open-Ended
Vulnerability Testing (OEVT) portion resulted in five CVSS requirements being
noted as insufficiently met (2.1.1.b, 2.1.1.c, 2.1.5.1.e, 2.1.5.1.e.i, and 5.4.3), and
one security findingwas noted under OEVT (7.5.3). All findings are noted in the
results of their relevant requirements in the sections above. Neither OEVT finding
pertains to a voter-facing device. All findings have either no impact on system
security or are limited to a low severity risk classification.
It should also be noted that proper, secure utilization of the voting system solution
is reliant upon properly trained personnel, as well as following all processes and
procedures set forth by the voting system vendor to ensure properly configured
and secured equipment for use in a live election environment.
End of Security and Telecommunications Test Report
California Certification Page 40 of 40
Security and Telecom Test Report v1.0
Report Number CAF-23003-STR-01