Matt Blaze
@mattblaze.org
Scientist, safecracker, etc. McDevitt Professor of Computer Science and Law at Georgetown. So-called expert on election security and a few other things. Slow photographer. RF nerd. Occasionally blogs at https://mattblaze.org/blog
Tomorrow in my election security course we dissect election denial BS, always fun. I'm grateful to the "election truth" conspiracy people for keeping the 2020 dream alive in 2024, giving us a steady stream of new (actually recycled) material. The pillow guy gets old after a while.
Matt Blaze (@[email protected])
Tomorrow is the day in my election security course where we dissect election denial BS, always a fun class. I'm grateful to the "election truth" conspiracy people for keeping the 2020 dream alive in 2...
federate.social
November 24, 2025 at 9:24 PM
Tomorrow in my election security course we dissect election denial BS, always fun. I'm grateful to the "election truth" conspiracy people for keeping the 2020 dream alive in 2024, giving us a steady stream of new (actually recycled) material. The pillow guy gets old after a while.
I really want to know the full story behind this epic hack, and yet I also hope it is never solved.
It's my favorite day! It's the 38th anniversary of the Max Headroom signal broadcast intrusion!
1st incident lasted 25s during the 9PM news on WGN-TV in Chicago; The 2nd, 2hrs later, lasted ~90s on PBS affiliate WTTW during Dr. Who.
You can watch it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqge...
1st incident lasted 25s during the 9PM news on WGN-TV in Chicago; The 2nd, 2hrs later, lasted ~90s on PBS affiliate WTTW during Dr. Who.
You can watch it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqge...
Max Headroom 1987 Broadcast Signal Intrusion Incident
YouTube video by andrew867
www.youtube.com
November 22, 2025 at 7:50 PM
I really want to know the full story behind this epic hack, and yet I also hope it is never solved.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
It's my favorite day! It's the 38th anniversary of the Max Headroom signal broadcast intrusion!
1st incident lasted 25s during the 9PM news on WGN-TV in Chicago; The 2nd, 2hrs later, lasted ~90s on PBS affiliate WTTW during Dr. Who.
You can watch it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqge...
1st incident lasted 25s during the 9PM news on WGN-TV in Chicago; The 2nd, 2hrs later, lasted ~90s on PBS affiliate WTTW during Dr. Who.
You can watch it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqge...
Max Headroom 1987 Broadcast Signal Intrusion Incident
YouTube video by andrew867
www.youtube.com
November 22, 2025 at 6:37 PM
It's my favorite day! It's the 38th anniversary of the Max Headroom signal broadcast intrusion!
1st incident lasted 25s during the 9PM news on WGN-TV in Chicago; The 2nd, 2hrs later, lasted ~90s on PBS affiliate WTTW during Dr. Who.
You can watch it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqge...
1st incident lasted 25s during the 9PM news on WGN-TV in Chicago; The 2nd, 2hrs later, lasted ~90s on PBS affiliate WTTW during Dr. Who.
You can watch it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqge...
Reposted by Matt Blaze
It pains me that people take my work and that of my colleagues out of context - or outright misrepresent it - to make specious claims of election fraud. But it's also critical that we have frank discussions of elections - warts and all - and how to improve them.
November 19, 2025 at 2:52 PM
It pains me that people take my work and that of my colleagues out of context - or outright misrepresent it - to make specious claims of election fraud. But it's also critical that we have frank discussions of elections - warts and all - and how to improve them.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
The unfortunate truth is there's no simple, clean narrative about election security right now. There are real vulnerabilities. Not all states do sufficiently rigorous post-election audits to provide robust assurance. But there's also simply no evidence to support claims that elections are hacked.
November 19, 2025 at 2:50 PM
The unfortunate truth is there's no simple, clean narrative about election security right now. There are real vulnerabilities. Not all states do sufficiently rigorous post-election audits to provide robust assurance. But there's also simply no evidence to support claims that elections are hacked.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
I run the conference to which you appear to be referring, and I'm not sure where you're getting weird the idea that we dont talk about Risk Limiting Audits. In fact, this year Philip Stark (who has served on our board) gave a talk about RLAs and led a workshop on how to conduct them.
November 19, 2025 at 2:48 PM
I run the conference to which you appear to be referring, and I'm not sure where you're getting weird the idea that we dont talk about Risk Limiting Audits. In fact, this year Philip Stark (who has served on our board) gave a talk about RLAs and led a workshop on how to conduct them.
A reminder that if I block you, it’s definitely because I’m afraid of your superior intellect, arguments, and attractiveness. It has nothing to do with your being an annoying, toxic dimwit.
November 14, 2025 at 9:05 PM
A reminder that if I block you, it’s definitely because I’m afraid of your superior intellect, arguments, and attractiveness. It has nothing to do with your being an annoying, toxic dimwit.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
a lot of people regretting the 'this shoulda been an email' advice rn lol
November 13, 2025 at 3:57 AM
a lot of people regretting the 'this shoulda been an email' advice rn lol
Reposted by Matt Blaze
My mentions here currently consist of a steady barrage of election deniers challenging me to prove the negative proposition that the 2024 election wasn't stolen (which is not how it works).
So if I miss your reasonable, non-shouty post to me, I apologie.
So if I miss your reasonable, non-shouty post to me, I apologie.
November 13, 2025 at 6:49 PM
My mentions here currently consist of a steady barrage of election deniers challenging me to prove the negative proposition that the 2024 election wasn't stolen (which is not how it works).
So if I miss your reasonable, non-shouty post to me, I apologie.
So if I miss your reasonable, non-shouty post to me, I apologie.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
About me: I'm an election security expert with two decades of experience. I've led comprehensive security assessments on behalf of states of their voting tech. I've testified in congress several times about election vulnerabilities. I run a major election security conference.
The claims are BS.
The claims are BS.
November 12, 2025 at 12:08 AM
About me: I'm an election security expert with two decades of experience. I've led comprehensive security assessments on behalf of states of their voting tech. I've testified in congress several times about election vulnerabilities. I run a major election security conference.
The claims are BS.
The claims are BS.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
The only differences between these claims about 2024 and the claims that the election was stolen from Trump in 2020 are:
- The losing candidate isn't amplifying the BS this time.
- No one stormed the Capitol this time
- No one is offering discount coupons for lumpy mail-order pillows this time.
- The losing candidate isn't amplifying the BS this time.
- No one stormed the Capitol this time
- No one is offering discount coupons for lumpy mail-order pillows this time.
November 12, 2025 at 12:12 AM
The only differences between these claims about 2024 and the claims that the election was stolen from Trump in 2020 are:
- The losing candidate isn't amplifying the BS this time.
- No one stormed the Capitol this time
- No one is offering discount coupons for lumpy mail-order pillows this time.
- The losing candidate isn't amplifying the BS this time.
- No one stormed the Capitol this time
- No one is offering discount coupons for lumpy mail-order pillows this time.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
There ARE real vulnerabilities in some of our election infrastructure, and this is absolutely a problem that we should fix (and on which significant progress has been made). But the mere existence of vulnerabilities is not evidence of fraud.
November 11, 2025 at 11:53 PM
There ARE real vulnerabilities in some of our election infrastructure, and this is absolutely a problem that we should fix (and on which significant progress has been made). But the mere existence of vulnerabilities is not evidence of fraud.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
They also have no credible theory of how this massive-scale fraud was supposedly carried out, eiither technically or logistically. They just make vague observations about a few know vulnerabilities in some systems, with no indication that even these were actually exploited.
It's supremely weak tea.
It's supremely weak tea.
November 11, 2025 at 11:50 PM
They also have no credible theory of how this massive-scale fraud was supposedly carried out, eiither technically or logistically. They just make vague observations about a few know vulnerabilities in some systems, with no indication that even these were actually exploited.
It's supremely weak tea.
It's supremely weak tea.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
They're conning statistically unsophisticated, disappointed voters with impressive-looking, but meaningless, "analysis" that tell people what they want to believe.
Then they challenge you to prove a negative - "if this is wrong, just show there WASN'T fraud". That's not how it works.
Then they challenge you to prove a negative - "if this is wrong, just show there WASN'T fraud". That's not how it works.
November 11, 2025 at 11:38 PM
They're conning statistically unsophisticated, disappointed voters with impressive-looking, but meaningless, "analysis" that tell people what they want to believe.
Then they challenge you to prove a negative - "if this is wrong, just show there WASN'T fraud". That's not how it works.
Then they challenge you to prove a negative - "if this is wrong, just show there WASN'T fraud". That's not how it works.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
In particular, all they're doing is "analyzing" precinct and mail-in voting tailles from different places and claiming the results are "suspicious". Except:
- They aren't. They're readily explained by unsurprising demographic differences.
- Even if they were, that's not how you show fraud.
- They aren't. They're readily explained by unsurprising demographic differences.
- Even if they were, that's not how you show fraud.
November 11, 2025 at 11:34 PM
In particular, all they're doing is "analyzing" precinct and mail-in voting tailles from different places and claiming the results are "suspicious". Except:
- They aren't. They're readily explained by unsurprising demographic differences.
- Even if they were, that's not how you show fraud.
- They aren't. They're readily explained by unsurprising demographic differences.
- Even if they were, that's not how you show fraud.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
There's a reason that the candidates who supposedly had their offices stolen from them want nothing to do with this nonsense.
November 11, 2025 at 11:22 PM
There's a reason that the candidates who supposedly had their offices stolen from them want nothing to do with this nonsense.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
Asserting that a presidential election outcome was altered is an *extraordinary* claim, and requires significant, compelling evidence to back up. But the "evidence" being presented is nonsense. A bunch of statistics about "voting patters" that don't actually show anything surprising or suspicious.
November 11, 2025 at 11:21 PM
Asserting that a presidential election outcome was altered is an *extraordinary* claim, and requires significant, compelling evidence to back up. But the "evidence" being presented is nonsense. A bunch of statistics about "voting patters" that don't actually show anything surprising or suspicious.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
I would LOVE to believe the "election truth" people who claim the 2024 presidential race results have suspicious anomalies that indicate fraud. Politics aside, it would vindicate warnings from my collegues and that elections systems have serious vulnerabilities.
But there's just nothing there.
But there's just nothing there.
November 11, 2025 at 11:15 PM
I would LOVE to believe the "election truth" people who claim the 2024 presidential race results have suspicious anomalies that indicate fraud. Politics aside, it would vindicate warnings from my collegues and that elections systems have serious vulnerabilities.
But there's just nothing there.
But there's just nothing there.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
One example of the harm of disinformation that the #ConspiracyEntrepreneurs couldn't care less about
bsky.app/profile/than...
bsky.app/profile/than...
In October of 24, we asked Americans how confident they were in our elections. We found that Americans who trust elections are more likely to vote than those that do not.
This is why it matters that people trust elections - election denial can lower participation
statesunited.org/resources/wh...
This is why it matters that people trust elections - election denial can lower participation
statesunited.org/resources/wh...
When Americans Trust Elections, They Are More Likely To Vote - States United Democracy Center
statesunited.org
November 13, 2025 at 3:55 AM
One example of the harm of disinformation that the #ConspiracyEntrepreneurs couldn't care less about
bsky.app/profile/than...
bsky.app/profile/than...
Reposted by Matt Blaze
As the first law professor in the US to teach a Sex Crimes course, I have two words for Megyn Kelly: Just stop.
in case you're wondering how the cope is going www.mediamatters.org/megyn-kelly/...
November 13, 2025 at 3:32 AM
As the first law professor in the US to teach a Sex Crimes course, I have two words for Megyn Kelly: Just stop.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
As someone deeply concerned professionally with securing elections, i think making unfounded claims that elections are being rigged is an extremely harmful grift, that deserves strong condemnation.
November 13, 2025 at 2:19 AM
As someone deeply concerned professionally with securing elections, i think making unfounded claims that elections are being rigged is an extremely harmful grift, that deserves strong condemnation.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
"What's the harm?". The harm is that these supposed "suspicious patterns" aren't actually suspicious, but they're being misleadingly sold to disappointed voters to support a completely baseless conspiracy theory that degrades the democratic process.
November 13, 2025 at 1:46 AM
"What's the harm?". The harm is that these supposed "suspicious patterns" aren't actually suspicious, but they're being misleadingly sold to disappointed voters to support a completely baseless conspiracy theory that degrades the democratic process.
I would LOVE to believe the "election truth" people who claim the 2024 presidential race results have suspicious anomalies that indicate fraud. Politics aside, it would vindicate warnings from my collegues and that elections systems have serious vulnerabilities.
But there's just nothing there.
But there's just nothing there.
November 11, 2025 at 11:15 PM
I would LOVE to believe the "election truth" people who claim the 2024 presidential race results have suspicious anomalies that indicate fraud. Politics aside, it would vindicate warnings from my collegues and that elections systems have serious vulnerabilities.
But there's just nothing there.
But there's just nothing there.
Reposted by Matt Blaze
Loving today's news that the mysterious "fedora man" outside the Louvre heist was actually a 15-year-old museum visitor who dresses like a 1940s French detective all the time, just because. apnews.com/article/louv...
Fedora man unmasked: Meet the teen behind the Louvre mystery photo
Fifteen-year-old Pedro Elias Garzon Delvaux has become an internet sensation after an Associated Press photo captured him outside the Louvre on the day of a crown jewels heist.
apnews.com
November 9, 2025 at 12:16 PM
Loving today's news that the mysterious "fedora man" outside the Louvre heist was actually a 15-year-old museum visitor who dresses like a 1940s French detective all the time, just because. apnews.com/article/louv...