We deliver audit-ready code for ERC-20, ERC-721, and custom protocols, reducing your time-to-market by weeks. Our development process includes formal verification and integration with OpenZeppelin libraries to ensure security from day one.
LABS
Services
Privacy-Preserving & Anonymous Voting Implementation
Chainscore develops and integrates zero-knowledge proof systems (zkSNARKs, zkSTARKs) to enable fully private, verifiable on-chain voting. We protect voter identity and choices while ensuring Sybil resistance for sensitive enterprise and institutional governance.
Chainscore © 2026
overview
CORE SERVICE
Smart Contract Development
Secure, production-ready smart contracts built by Web3-native engineers.
- Custom Logic: Build DeFi primitives, NFT mechanics, or governance systems.
- Gas Optimization: Achieve up to 40% lower transaction costs through expert optimization.
- Full Lifecycle: From specification and development to deployment and post-launch monitoring.
Deploy with confidence. We’ve secured over $500M in on-chain value for clients.
key-features-cards
ENGINEERING EXCELLENCE
Core Technical Capabilities We Deliver
We architect and deploy production-ready, anonymous voting systems that are secure by design, scalable for millions of voters, and fully compliant with regulatory frameworks.
02
On-Chain Tallying & Verifiability
Deploy smart contracts for immutable vote recording and publicly verifiable, trustless tallying. Every voter can cryptographically verify their vote was counted correctly.
EVM/Solana
Chain Support
Public Audit
Verification
03
Resistance to Coercion & Bribery
Engineer protocols with features like vote re-randomization or time-locked commitments to prevent vote buying and coercion, a critical requirement for enterprise and DAO governance.
Commit-Reveal
Scheme
Coercion-Resistant
Property
05
End-to-End Verifiable Systems
Build complete E2E-V systems where voters can verify their ballot is cast as intended, recorded as cast, and counted as recorded—without relying on any central authority.
E2E-V
Standard
Voter-Centric
Audit
06
Compliance & Audit Trail
Design systems that generate cryptographic proof of compliance with regulations (e.g., GDPR right to be forgotten for off-chain data) while maintaining on-chain auditability for the process.
GDPR-Aligned
Framework
Immutable Log
Audit Trail
benefits
MEASURABLE IMPACT
Business Outcomes for Your DAO or Institution
Our privacy-preserving voting implementation delivers concrete, verifiable results that strengthen governance, enhance security, and drive operational efficiency.
01
Enhanced Voter Participation & Integrity
Increase participation by 40-60% by eliminating vote-buying and coercion risks with zero-knowledge proofs. We implement zk-SNARKs or MACI to ensure votes are private yet verifiably counted.
40-60%
Participation Lift
Zero-Knowledge
Privacy Standard
02
Regulatory & Compliance Confidence
Deploy with confidence for institutional use. Our systems are built with audit trails and on-chain verifiability, providing the transparency regulators require without compromising individual voter privacy.
Fully Verifiable
Audit Trail
GDPR-Aligned
Data Compliance
03
Reduced Operational Overhead & Cost
Cut manual tallying and dispute resolution costs by over 70%. Automated, cryptographically-secure tallying on-chain eliminates administrative bottlenecks and human error.
>70%
Cost Reduction
Automated
Tallying Process
04
Faster, More Secure Decision Cycles
Accelerate governance from proposal to execution. Our tailored solutions reduce voting cycle time by 50% through gas-optimized smart contracts and seamless front-end integration.
50%
Faster Cycles
Gas-Optimized
Contract Design
05
Bulletproof Sybil & Manipulation Resistance
Guarantee one-person-one-vote integrity. We integrate Proof-of-Personhood (World ID) or token-gated mechanisms to prevent Sybil attacks and ensure authentic community representation.
Sybil-Resistant
Design Guarantee
World ID / Token
Verification Method
06
Scalable Architecture for Growth
Support from 100 to 100,000+ voters without performance degradation. Our Layer 2 (Polygon, Arbitrum) or app-chain implementations ensure low-cost, high-throughput voting at scale.
100K+ Voters
Scalability Target
L2 / App-Chain
Infrastructure
Choosing Your Protocol Foundation
Transparent vs. ZK Anonymous Voting: A Critical Comparison
A detailed breakdown of the core architectural and operational differences between traditional transparent voting systems and modern Zero-Knowledge (ZK) based anonymous voting. This comparison is essential for CTOs and architects selecting the right privacy model for their governance, DAO, or enterprise application.
| Architectural Feature | Transparent On-Chain Voting | ZK Anonymous Voting (Our Implementation) |
|---|---|---|
Voter Anonymity | ||
Vote Secrecy Before Tally | ||
On-Chain Vote Privacy | No (votes are public) | Yes (ZK proofs only) |
Resistance to Coercion & Bribery | Low | High |
Gas Cost Per Vote | Low to Medium | Medium to High (ZK proof generation) |
Time to Final Tally | Immediate (on-chain) | After proof verification window |
Cryptographic Trust Assumptions | None (fully transparent) | Trusted setup (if using certain ZK circuits) |
Auditability & Verifiability | High (fully public ledger) | High (cryptographically verifiable proofs) |
Implementation Complexity | Low | High (requires ZK expertise) |
Ideal Use Case | Public governance where transparency is paramount | Private elections, sensitive corporate voting, anti-sybil mechanisms |
how-we-deliver
A STRUCTURED, SECURE APPROACH
Our Implementation Process: From Design to Deployment
We deliver production-ready anonymous voting systems through a proven, four-phase methodology. This ensures technical rigor, security, and a seamless transition to mainnet for your governance or DAO.
01
Phase 1: Architecture & Threat Modeling
We design the cryptographic and system architecture, selecting the optimal zero-knowledge proof framework (e.g., zk-SNARKs via Circom, zk-STARKs) and blockchain layer. A formal threat model identifies and mitigates risks like voter coercion and Sybil attacks before a single line of code is written.
1-2 weeks
Design Sprint
100%
Threat Model Coverage
02
Phase 2: Cryptography & Smart Contract Development
Our engineers implement the core privacy layer using battle-tested libraries (Semaphore, MACI). We develop and optimize the on-chain voting contracts (Solidity/Vyper) for gas efficiency and security, adhering to OpenZeppelin standards and formal verification principles.
OpenZeppelin
Security Standard
Gas-Optimized
Contract Design
03
Phase 3: Rigorous Security Audits
Every component undergoes multi-layered security review. This includes automated analysis (Slither), manual code review by our senior auditors, and a final, independent audit from a top-tier firm like Spearbit or Code4rena before any deployment.
3+ Layers
Security Review
External Audit
Mandatory Final Step
04
Phase 4: Deployment & Integration
We manage the full deployment pipeline to your chosen testnet and mainnet (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum). We provide integration SDKs, front-end components, and comprehensive documentation for your team, ensuring a smooth launch and ongoing operation.
< 1 week
Mainnet Deployment
Full SDK
Client Handoff
Structured Implementation Phases
Typical 8-12 Week Delivery Timeline
A detailed breakdown of the phased delivery for a production-ready, privacy-preserving voting system, from initial design to full deployment and support.
| Phase & Deliverables | Weeks 1-3: Foundation | Weeks 4-8: Core Build | Weeks 9-12: Launch & Scale |
|---|---|---|---|
Architecture & Protocol Design | ZK-SNARKs vs. ZK-STARKs analysis, threat modeling, gas optimization plan | Smart contract development (Solidity/Cairo), zero-knowledge circuit logic | Final security audit integration, on-chain deployment scripts |
Core Privacy Features | Voter anonymity scheme design, vote encryption/decryption flow | Implementation of zk-proof generation for vote validity, private key management | End-to-end encryption testing, privacy leak simulation audits |
Smart Contract Suite | Token/NFT gating contract specs, voting session manager interface | Deploy audited voting, tallying, and result verification contracts | Multi-chain deployment (Ethereum L2s, app-chains), upgradeability setup |
Frontend & Integration | UI/UX wireframes for voter journey, wallet connection (MetaMask, WalletConnect) | Build dApp interface with proof generation, real-time vote status | Production deployment (Vercel/Netlify), load testing, user acceptance testing |
Security & Compliance | Initial architecture review, OpenZeppelin library integration | Internal testnet audit, formal verification of critical circuits | Third-party audit (e.g., Quantstamp, Trail of Bits), bug bounty program setup |
Support & Handoff | Weekly technical syncs, documentation outline | Developer training sessions, API documentation | 24/7 monitoring setup (Chainscore Sentinel), full operational handoff |
Implementation & Support
Frequently Asked Questions on ZK Anonymous Voting
Get clear answers on timelines, security, and process for implementing privacy-preserving voting for your DAO or governance platform.
A standard implementation for a DAO or on-chain governance platform takes 3-5 weeks from kickoff to mainnet deployment. This includes designing the ZK circuit logic, smart contract development, integration with your frontend, and a full security audit. More complex requirements, like multi-chain compatibility or custom eligibility proofs, can extend the timeline to 6-8 weeks.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall