>>14605698 (lb)
I agree.
I think the router issue is a big lose/lose for MC because it will corroborate that either Dominion (I think, in AZ) routed ports on the county routers, or that the access was via other access points provided directly by Dominion. The latter would be something along the lines of the rumors that thermostats were access points.
Simply put, using your computer at home as an example, the access logs on your computer show visits to some spoopy site. Your computer is the destination and the access logs on it record the originating IP.
You could try to say that your neighbor hacked your machine and everything came through his router. If you talk your neighbor into not giving up his router to check the logs, and you don't give up yours, you can keep a reasonable doubt scenario in play.
The audit knows there was WAN access. In the AZ case, it may be that the MC routers show port forwarding specifically from the originating IP and port at Dominion to MC voting hardware. If not, the access had to come from other, not yet defined , named or publicized equipment.
Either case is damning for MC. CyberNinjas knows where the access originated and on which MC hardware it was delivered to. They just need to verify which "door" it took to get into the system. Very possible MC is trying to obscure the fact that they either allowed Dominion WAN access to their routers and network behind them, or they allowed Dominion to install their own APs to obtain access. The only way to do that is not give up the routers for an inspection.