On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 07:33:05PM +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 11:26:28AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > "Barak A. Pearlmutter" writes:
> >
> > > In the discussion of the "voting secrecy" resolution, people seem to
> > > have assumed that it is impossible for a voting
On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 11:26:28AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Barak A. Pearlmutter" writes:
>
> > In the discussion of the "voting secrecy" resolution, people seem to
> > have assumed that it is impossible for a voting system to be
> > simultaneously secure, tamper-proof, have secret ballots,
"Barak A. Pearlmutter" writes:
> In the discussion of the "voting secrecy" resolution, people seem to
> have assumed that it is impossible for a voting system to be
> simultaneously secure, tamper-proof, have secret ballots, and also be
> end-to-end publicly verifiable meaning transparent
On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 11:31:22AM +, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> In the discussion of the "voting secrecy" resolution, people seem to
> have assumed that it is impossible for a voting system to be
> simultaneously secure, tamper-proof, have secret ballots, and also be
> end-to-end publicly
In the discussion of the "voting secrecy" resolution, people seem to
have assumed that it is impossible for a voting system to be
simultaneously secure, tamper-proof, have secret ballots, and also be
end-to-end publicly verifiable meaning transparent verification of the
final tally, with voters
5 matches
Mail list logo
