Data and security breaches are becoming increasingly common, highlighting the vulnerabilities of existing messaging and communications platforms. Devising computational tools and systems that better protect sensitive data against malicious attacks is therefore of utmost importance.

Researchers from several institutes worldwide recently developed Quarks, a new, decentralized messaging network based on blockchain technology. Their proposed system could overcome the limitations of most commonly used messaging platforms, allowing users to retain control over their personal data and other information they share online.

    • interolivary@beehaw.org
      2·
      1 year ago

      Without some sort of zk mechanism, the machines “bundling” local votes still know the votes. If you have a small district, then it may be possible to figure out who voted for who.

      Trust me, there’s been a lot of research into doing electronic voting and generally the consensus is that a “regular” blockchain would be a terrible choice.

      Personally I don’t trust electronic voting at all and think paper ballots are the way to go

        • interolivary@beehaw.org
          1·
          1 year ago

          Yeah it seems like people are generally inclined to trust electronic voting more than paper ballots, when the reality is that the vast, vast majority of electronic voting systems are so utterly borked that it’s possible to pretty trivially change election results, often without leaving any trace of the tampering.

          The Hursti Hack is the classic example, and by no means the only one. Incidentally the person that hack’s named after, Harri Hursti, is a family friend. He caught me trying to crack passwords on his UN*X shell box (with a dictionary cracking tool, probably Crack) in the early 90’s when I was a teenage nerdlet with too much free time and not enough brains 😅

    • tombuben@beehaw.org
      1·
      1 year ago

      If you need the person to walk somewhere, physically show a voter ID to someone to be let into a private area where they receive their private key in a machine for them to then vote remotely, wouldn’t it be easier just to remove the entire technology part of the equation and just make them put a piece of paper inside an envelope in that private area, so that they can then put that piece of paper into a public ballot box right after?

      Electronic voting is a bad idea in general, blockchain isn’t going to fix that.

        • tombuben@beehaw.org
          1·
          1 year ago

          But you don’t want that either. This opens up a way for people to demand others to prove they voted a certain way - I.e. abusive family could force all family members to vote the same. Paper ballots shouldn’t ever be identifiable back to anyone.