You are correct which is why i said almost impossible. I would never claim anything as 100% unhackable… but first you would need to find all the servers the vote block chain is on… and if you get this far undetected, you would then need to hack more than 50% of the servers to manipulate the data in a way the block chain thinks the corrupt data is the correct/majority data
Okay fair enough. And I’m not trying to call you out or anything, just genuinely curious.
I see these sort of bad faith players like USPS advocating for this sort of thing and I can’t help but wonder if the goal is to build faith under the pretense of “unhackable” only to use that as cover to hack it. I mean, this go around, they only had to say it was the most secure election ever without even having a basis for saying so.
The key, is that the system has to be truly decentralized… because if is controlled only by one entity, then it will always be at risk to potential bad actors…
I agree and that’s sort of what I mean. I don’t consider it decentralized if a singular entity has access and potential control over the entire ledger or at least a majority. That’s hypothetical of course.
You are correct which is why i said almost impossible. I would never claim anything as 100% unhackable… but first you would need to find all the servers the vote block chain is on… and if you get this far undetected, you would then need to hack more than 50% of the servers to manipulate the data in a way the block chain thinks the corrupt data is the correct/majority data
Okay fair enough. And I’m not trying to call you out or anything, just genuinely curious.
I see these sort of bad faith players like USPS advocating for this sort of thing and I can’t help but wonder if the goal is to build faith under the pretense of “unhackable” only to use that as cover to hack it. I mean, this go around, they only had to say it was the most secure election ever without even having a basis for saying so.
The key, is that the system has to be truly decentralized… because if is controlled only by one entity, then it will always be at risk to potential bad actors…
I agree and that’s sort of what I mean. I don’t consider it decentralized if a singular entity has access and potential control over the entire ledger or at least a majority. That’s hypothetical of course.