So secure was the annual contest to fill three director and four officer positions that when one trustee lost his cryptographic key to unlock the results, the error made it impossible.
So secure was the annual contest to fill three director and four officer positions that when one trustee lost his cryptographic key to unlock the results, the error made it impossible.
According to the article they changed the procedure to require 2/3 keys, so at least they learned that lesson.
Which is stupid, since the reason they had 3/3 was that two people could not collaborate to change the results, which they now can with 2/3.
Should have been changed to 3/5 instead.
Exactly, it’s worse all around.
And it’s not like it’s hard to use a different configuration; the threshold and total number of keys are just parameters of the algorithm.