Swiss Business Contracted by National Institute for Health to Develop a Patent for Injection of Fake Voters into Election Systems (Switzerland)

Patent US 7,549,049 proves that some of the greatest threats to election integrity aren’t software bugs—they are intentional design features. Internet-based voting systems that lack a verifiable, physical paper trail continue to represent an unacceptable risk to secure elections. It is concerning for the following reasons:

1. It Provides a Built-In Blueprint for Ballot Stuffing The exact mechanism designed to test the system is structurally identical to a ballot-stuffing attack. An insider or a hacker who breaches the voter creation subsystem could generate fake voter IDs with pre-selected ballot choices and inject them into a live election. Because the software is intentionally designed to accept these “test” submissions as real, the fraudulent votes would be computationally indistinguishable from legitimate ones.
2. It Offers Legal Cover for Fraud Perhaps the most profound risk is legal. If a malicious actor were caught injecting fake votes into this system, the patent provides them with the ultimate cover story. They could simply claim they were conducting a legitimate, patented “dynamic audit”. Because the audit trail relies entirely on manual, out-of-band records, forensic investigators would have no systemic way to prove if a “test” injection was legitimate or a malicious attack.
3. A Centralized Single Point of Failure This architecture completely relies on a single “Central Hosting Facility” to manage voter registration, ballot delivery, and vote storage. Furthermore, its security relies on Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) and roaming digital certificates to authenticate voters. If a hacker, corrupt insider, or nation-state compromises this central server or the third-party PKI authority, they would gain global, undetected access to alter ballot definition files, impersonate voters, or manipulate tabulation results before local officials ever download them.
4. It Evades Standard Election Audits Standard election audits, like checking the machine poll tapes against central tallies, fail entirely against this architecture. If the central server or the electronic ballot definition files are poisoned, the system will output manipulated results that perfectly match its own internal, manipulated data