Yes, a paper trail is necessary.

However, unless everyone can observe the code that's used to operate the voting machine, at least everyone who has to verify how it works and that it works, and that it works as it is supposed to do, the whole system's in the toilet.

We here in the U.S. had a huge automated mail routing system built by various contractors, at least one of whom is involved in the autmated voting business now, and it took ten years to get it working properly.

We here in Denver, had a new airport built, which had an automated baggage handling system that was built by one of these contractors, also. It took six years and a second contractor, who essentially rebuilt the entire control system for it, before it was useable.

Large contractors don't do things well. None of them, and nothing!

If everyone got to see how sloppy their code is, they'd tighten it up. If everyone saw how unreliable their hardware is, they'd not produce such rubbish. Right now they can hide behind trade-secrets laws. If the hardware could be patented but had to be published (Patent does mean "open" doesn't it?) and everyone who competed for the job could see what's been done badly by the others, wouldn't it produce a better product?

When all was said and done, we'd have several manufacturers, each of which knew exactly how all the functional blocks in the system had to work and how to make them do so. That would mean that one or another contractor "going under" wouldn't run us out of suppliers.

RE