The other day I received a message from the State Service portal with a proposal to participate in testing remote electronic voting (DEG). It became interesting, began to google and the search engine immediately issued a link to the Khabrov article "Review of the remote electronic voting system of the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation". I got acquainted ... and ... after reading it, I experienced contradictory feelings that resulted in this article, created on the basis of an idea that I described back in 2018 on the change.org website.
Like the advancement of armor among skilled warriors, with completely missing protection from a heavy metal boot in the back a little lower than the back, I sincerely do not understand how it was possible to seriously try to sell the sieve system from the above article to the Khabrovites.
After all, it is obvious that in the process of holding elections a conflict of interests arises between
those in power who do not want to give way to others
those who do not yet have power, but want to get it
those who have settled well under the current government and do not want to change anything.
ordinary citizens, caring for the principles of the turnover of power and the observance of their electoral rights.
And the main problem of any electoral system is the representatives of the first group, because those in power have access to the data of all residents of the country, which can be used to form the flow of fake ballots. There is a huge admin resource. There is access to budget money. There is a security apparatus and a pocket court system at hand.
How is the system proposed by the CEC protected from the election organizer? Yes, no way. And after reading this article to the end, you will understand why.
, , . , , ? , , , , - , «» , ...
, …
, «» … :)
, – , – .
, , … , …
, , - . , , - . , , .
, , . . – .
, , - , - , , , , .
, «» , :
« » (F)
. No 666, No 777, , , - «» (T)
( ) (F)
« » - , (M)
, - , , (T)
(M-T)
(M)
, (T)
. . (M-T)
. , , , , (F)
, (M)
– , , (F)
« » (F)
«» - , (M)
:
(M)
(F)
(T)
ACID , :
Immutability. . (1)(M)
Accuracy. . (2)(F)
Countability. , . (3)(T)
, «IAC» – , . , IAC (Immutability)*, .
, «IAC».
iac-
. , , , (, ) . , ( ). , , - .
, , , . , .
. , , «» . , , . , , - , , , . , ! , .
, Accuracy .
, , . , . , , , .
, , . - , , . , , - , , , .
, , . , Immutability. , , . , , . Immutability «100%».
, , , . . , , VPN- . , .
, , , :
. , , . , , . - .
. , , . , . -, , , . , , ( Countability)
, , . .
. , , , . , Accuracy. , . , , , « » . , , .
, - , . , , , . . , , .
, . , . , . . , , - -.
, - , .
, , . /. , , , . , , , , -. , . .
, «IAC», :
,
, . .
, , . , . , .
, , , .
, - . , .
, . - .
:
* - . 200 , )
:
1) « »