Advertisement

Efficient Receipt-Free Voting Based on Homomorphic Encryption

  • Martin Hirt
  • Kazue Sako
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1807)

Abstract

Voting schemes that provide receipt-freeness prevent voters from proving their cast vote, and hence thwart vote-buying and coercion. We analyze the security of the multi-authority voting protocol of Benaloh and Tuinstra and demonstrate that this protocol is not receipt-free, opposed to what was claimed in the paper and was believed before. Furthermore, we propose the first practicable receipt-free voting scheme. Its only physical assumption is the existence of secret one-way communication channels from the authorities to the voters, and due to the public verifiability of the tally, voters only join a single stage of the protocol, realizing the “vote-and-go” concept. The protocol combines the advantages of the receipt-free protocol of Sako and Kilian and of the very efficient protocol of Cramer, Gennaro, and Schoenmakers, with help of designated-verifier proofs of Jakobsson, Sako, and Impagliazzo. Compared to the receipt-free protocol of Sako and Kilian for security parameter ℓ (the number of repetitions in the non-interactive cut-and-choose proofs), the protocol described in this paper realizes an improvement of the total bit complexity by a factor ℓ.

Keywords

Vote Scheme Bulletin Board Security Parameter Homomorphic Encryption Public Channel 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Abe99.
    Masayuki Abe. Mix-networks on permutation networks In Advances in Cryptology — ASIACRYPT’ 99, vol. 1716 of LNCS, pp. 258–273. Springer-Verlag, 1999.Google Scholar
  2. Ben87.
    Josh Cohen Benaloh: Verifiable Secret-Ballot Elections. Yale University PhD thesis, YALEU/DCS/TR-561, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. BT94.
    Josh Cohen Benaloh and Dwight Tuinstra. Receipt-free secret-ballot elections (extended abstract). In Proc. 26th ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 544–553. ACM, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. CDNO97.
    Ran Canetti, Cynthia Dwork, Moni Naor, and Rafail Ostrovsky. Deniable encryption. In Advances in Cryptology — CRYPTO’ 97, vol. 1294 of LNCS, pp. 90–104. Springer-Verlag, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. CG96.
    Ran Canetti and Rosario Gennaro. Incoercible multiparty computation. In Proc. 37th IEEE Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 1996.Google Scholar
  6. Cha81.
    David Chaum. Untraceable electronic mail, return addresses, and digital pseudonyms. Communications of the ACM, 24(2):84–88, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. CDS94.
    Ronald Cramer, Ivan Damgård, and Berry Schoenmakers. Proofs of partial knowledge and simplified design of witness hiding protocols. In Advances in Cryptology — CRYPTO’ 94, vol. 839 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. CF85.
    Josh D. Cohen (Benaloh) and Michael J. Fischer. A robust and verifiable cryptographically secure election scheme. In Proc. 26th IEEE Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 372–382. IEEE, 1985.Google Scholar
  9. CY86.
    Josh Cohen (Benaloh) and Moti Yung: Distributing the Power of a Government to Enhance the Privacy of Voters. In Proc. 5th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 52–62. ACM, 1986.Google Scholar
  10. CFSY96.
    Ronald Cramer, Matthew K. Franklin, Berry Schoenmakers, and Moti Yung. Multi-authority secret-ballot elections with linear work. In Advances in Cryptology — EUROCRYPT’ 96, vol. 1070 of LNCS, pp. 72–83. Springer-Verlag, May 1996.Google Scholar
  11. CGS97.
    Ronald Cramer, Rosario Gennaro, and Berry Schoenmakers. A secure and optimally efficient multi-authority election scheme. European Transactions on Telecommunications, 8:481–489, 1997. Preliminary version in Advances in Cryptology — EUROCRYPT’ 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. E84.
    Taher ElGamal. A public key cryptosystem and a signature scheme based on discrete logarithms. In Advances in Cryptology — CRYPTO’ 84, vol. 196 of LNCS, pp. 10–18. Springer-Verlag, 1984.Google Scholar
  13. Fel87.
    Paul Feldman. A practical scheme for non-interactive verifiable secret sharing. In Proc. 28th IEEE Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 427–437, 1987.Google Scholar
  14. FS86.
    Amos Fiat and Adi Shamir. How to prove yourself: Practical solutions to identification and signature problems. In Advances in Cryptology — CRYPTO’ 86, vol. 263 of LNCS, pp. 186–194. Springer-Verlag, 1986.Google Scholar
  15. FOO92.
    Atsushi Fujioka, Tatsuaki Okamoto, and Kazuo Ohta. A practical secret voting scheme for large scale elections. In Advances in Cryptology — AUSCRYPT’ 92, pp. 244–251, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. JSI96.
    Markus Jakobsson, Kazue Sako, and Russell Impagliazzo. Designated-verifier proofs and their applications. In Advances in Cryptology — EU-ROCRYPT’ 96, vol. 1070 of LNCS, pp. 143–154. Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. Jak98.
    Markus Jakobsson. A Practical Mix. In Advances in Cryptology — EU-ROCRYPT’ 98, vol. 1403 of LNCS, pp. 448–461, Springer-Verlag, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. MH96.
    Markus Michels and Patrick Horster. Some remarks on a receipt-free and universally verifiable mix-type voting scheme. In Advances in Cryptology — ASIACRYPT’ 96, vol. 1163 of LNCS, pp. 125–132. Springer-Verlag, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Oka97.
    Tatsuaki Okamoto. Receipt-free electronic voting schemes for large scale elections. In Proc. of Workshop on Security Protocols’ 97, vol. 1361 of LNCS, pp. 25–35. Springer-Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar
  20. OKST97.
    Wakaha Ogata, Kaoru Kurosawa, Kazue Sako and Kazunori Takatani Fault Tolerant Anonymous Channel In Information and Communications Security ICICS’ 97, vol. 1334 of LNCS, pp. 440–444. Springer-Verlag, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. PIK93.
    Choonsik Park, Kazutomo Itoh, and Kaoru Kurosawa. Efficient anonymous channel and all/nothing election scheme. In Advances in Cryptology — EUROCRYPT’ 93, vol. 765 of LNCS, pp. 248–259. Springer-Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  22. Ped91.
    Torben P. Pedersen. A threshold cryptosystem without a trusted party (extended abstract). In Advances in Cryptology — EUROCRYPT’ 91, vol. 547 of LNCS, pp. 522–526. Springer-Verlag, 1991.Google Scholar
  23. Sak94.
    Kazue Sako. Electronic voting schemes allowing open objection to the tally. In Transactions of IEICE, vol. E77-A No.1, Jan. 1994.Google Scholar
  24. SK94.
    Kazue Sako and Joe Kilian. Secure voting using partially compatible homomorphisms. In Advances in Cryptology — CRYPTO’ 94, vol. 839 of LNCS, pp. 411–424. Springer-Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
  25. SK95.
    Kazue Sako and Joe Kilian. Receipt-free mix-type voting scheme — A practical solution to the implementation of a voting booth. In Advances in Cryptology — EUROCRYPT’ 95, vol. 921 of LNCS, pp. 393–403. Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  26. Sha79.
    Adi Shamir. How to share a secret. Communications of the ACM, 22:612–613, 1979.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Hirt
    • 1
  • Kazue Sako
    • 2
  1. 1.ETH ZürichSwitzerland
  2. 2.NEC CorporationJapan

Personalised recommendations