Voting is secret, so your solution as described wouldn't work, but say you used a one-way hash to verify the vote.
It still wouldn't work in the case of someone voting from a compromised phone, because the confirmation can easily be altered.
So now you've got a system where you need to be in front of two separate devices in order to vote, which I find unlikely to be accepted as a solution because of the inconvenience. And even then, it just means that you need two different viruses. Or find an exploitable flaw in the confirmation system. If you've got control over the machinery (including people) that's running the algorithm, the game is over.
My evidence is that there's never been a widely used system that hasn't been compromised: military installations, nuclear power stations, ATMs, gambling machines.
How could you possibly expect voting to be more secure than all of that, considering that in the above examples they had complete control over the network and the devices, and were hugely motivated and well funded in their security efforts.
Voting is too important to be handed over to a group of people who say "trust us, this time we figured it out". And to take that huge risk for what, just to avoid paper ballots?
It still wouldn't work in the case of someone voting from a compromised phone, because the confirmation can easily be altered.
So now you've got a system where you need to be in front of two separate devices in order to vote, which I find unlikely to be accepted as a solution because of the inconvenience. And even then, it just means that you need two different viruses. Or find an exploitable flaw in the confirmation system. If you've got control over the machinery (including people) that's running the algorithm, the game is over.
My evidence is that there's never been a widely used system that hasn't been compromised: military installations, nuclear power stations, ATMs, gambling machines.
How could you possibly expect voting to be more secure than all of that, considering that in the above examples they had complete control over the network and the devices, and were hugely motivated and well funded in their security efforts.
Voting is too important to be handed over to a group of people who say "trust us, this time we figured it out". And to take that huge risk for what, just to avoid paper ballots?