> > No electronic scheme can do that: anything that runs in software means that the correctness of the system depends on the experts' word only. > No paper bal

> > No electronic scheme can do that: anything that runs in software means that the correctness of the system depends on the experts' word only. > No paper ballot in box scheme can do that: anything that is run by officials means that the correctness of the system depends on the officials' word only. This comparison is flawed, the entire correctness of a electronic scheme could only be verified by a few experts, whereas in every polling place with a paper ballot, there is a committee, and witnesses of the vote count. Proving the correctness of a paper ballot system such as the one described in [1] is trivial. Ultimately, the correctness doesn't even depends solely on officials: In the course of the day, the polling station officials ask voters whether they want to participate in ballot counting as tellers. Voters can also volunteer to do so ; candidates can nominate tellers as well. [1] http://www.elections-legislatives.fr/en/system.asp http://www.elections-legislatives.fr/en/system.asp (search for "How are the ballots counted"). The presidential elections protocol is the same as the one described here.