Absolutely.
A voting system has to be not only fair but seen to be fair. And transparent so everyone can understand and see how it works.
As well as being robust.
I'll refer to the British system as that's what I'm most familiar with, but many democracies have similar solutions.
The make-up of the constituencies and size of the constituencies is controlled by an independent electoral commission. And there are consultations when changes are proposed. There are national guidelines for each polling station and uniform opening times.
The vote at every polling station is open to scrutiny from representatives of the candidates and every ballot and every ballot box. They can see people entering the polling station, and the ballot boxes can be watched by anyone in the polling station. The booths are private, so what someone can see, is a person putting a folded ballot paper into the ballot box.
The count is also watched by the candidates or representatives of the candidates. And is counted by hand.
And as you say, there are things that could do to cheat the vote.
One could try to vote multiple times, but even before we required photo ID, it would be risky and only get a handful of votes that almost certainly wouldn't affect an election.
When the casting the of the votes through to the count is based on paper and pencil and no machines, there is a scope for error (which is why recounts are sometimes requested) but any effort sufficient to affect even an election for a single seat would require massive logistics and be likely to be caught.
The same cannot be said for a system relying on electronic voting machines, a global hack might flip say 5% of the votes the other way with no way for normal people to prove it and possibly difficulty even for professionals with the required access.