Masked Ballot Voting for Receipt-Free Online Elections

  • Roland Wen
  • Richard Buckland
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5767)

Abstract

To prevent bribery and coercion attacks on voters, current online election schemes rely on strong physical assumptions during the election. We introduce Masked Ballot, an online voting scheme that mitigates these attacks while using a more practical assumption: untappable channels are available but only before the election. During the election voters cast ballots over completely public channels without relying on untappable channels, anonymous channels or trusted devices. Masked Ballot performs only the voting part of an election and is designed to integrate with counting schemes that compute the final election result.

Keywords

Receipt-freeness online elections voting schemes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baudron, O., Fouque, P.A., Pointcheval, D., Stern, J., Poupard, G.: Practical multi-candidate election system. In: PODC, pp. 274–283 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benaloh, J.C., Tuinstra, D.: Receipt-free secret-ballot elections (extended abstract). In: STOC, pp. 544–553 (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cramer, R., Damgård, I., Nielsen, J.B.: Multiparty Computation from Threshold Homomorphic Encryption. In: Pfitzmann, B. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2001. LNCS, vol. 2045, pp. 280–299. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cramer, R., Gennaro, R., Schoenmakers, B.: A Secure and Optimally Efficient Multi-Authority Election Scheme. In: Fumy, W. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1997. LNCS, vol. 1233, pp. 103–118. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Damgård, I., Jurik, M.: A Generalisation, a Simplification and Some Applications of Paillier’s Probabilistic Public-Key System. In: Kim, K. (ed.) PKC 2001. LNCS, vol. 1992, pp. 119–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Di Cosmo, R.: On Privacy and Anonymity in Electronic and Non Electronic Voting: the Ballot-As-Signature Attack (2007), http://www.pps.jussieu.fr/~dicosmo/E-Vote/
  7. 7.
    ElGamal, T.: A public key cryptosystem and a signature scheme based on discrete logarithms. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 31, 469–472 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fouque, P.A., Poupard, G., Stern, J.: Sharing Decryption in the Context of Voting or Lotteries. In: Frankel, Y. (ed.) FC 2000. LNCS, vol. 1962, pp. 90–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hirt, M., Sako, K.: Efficient Receipt-Free Voting Based on Homomorphic Encryption. In: Preneel, B. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2000. LNCS, vol. 1807, pp. 539–556. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jakobsson, M., Sako, K., Impagliazzo, R.: Designated Verifier Proofs and Their Applications. In: Maurer, U.M. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1996. LNCS, vol. 1070, pp. 143–154. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Juels, A., Catalano, D., Jakobsson, M.: Coercion-resistant electronic elections. In: Atluri, V., di Vimercati, S.D.C., Dingledine, R. (eds.) WPES, pp. 61–70. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee, B., Boyd, C., Dawson, E., Kim, K., Yang, J., Yoo, S.: Providing Receipt-Freeness in Mixnet-Based Voting Protocols. In: Lim, J.-I., Lee, D.-H. (eds.) ICISC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2971, pp. 245–258. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee, B., Kim, K.: Receipt-Free Electronic Voting Scheme with a Tamper-Resistant Randomizer. In: Lee, P.J., Lim, C.H. (eds.) ICISC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2587, pp. 389–406. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moran, T.: Cryptography by the People, for the People. PhD thesis, The Weizmann Institute of Science (2008), http://people.seas.harvard.edu/~talm/papers/thesis.pdf
  15. 15.
    Moran, T., Naor, M.: Receipt-Free Universally-Verifiable Voting with Everlasting Privacy. In: Dwork, C. (ed.) CRYPTO 2006. LNCS, vol. 4117, pp. 373–392. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moran, T., Naor, M.: Split-ballot voting: everlasting privacy with distributed trust. In: Ning, P., di Vimercati, S.D.C., Syverson, P.F. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 246–255. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Niemi, V., Renvall, A.: How to Prevent Buying of Votes in Computer Elections. In: Safavi-Naini, R., Pieprzyk, J.P. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 1994. LNCS, vol. 917, pp. 164–170. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Okamoto, T.: Receipt-Free Electronic Voting Schemes for Large Scale Elections. In: Christianson, B., Crispo, B., Lomas, T.M.A., Roe, M. (eds.) Security Protocols 1997. LNCS, vol. 1361, pp. 25–35. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Paillier, P.: Public-Key Cryptosystems Based on Composite Degree Residuosity Classes. In: Stern, J. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1999. LNCS, vol. 1592, pp. 223–238. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sako, K., Kilian, J.: Receipt-Free Mix-Type Voting Scheme - A Practical Solution to the Implementation of a Voting Booth. In: Guillou, L.C., Quisquater, J.-J. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 1995. LNCS, vol. 921, pp. 393–403. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wen, R., Buckland, R.: Minimum Disclosure Counting for the Alternative Vote. In: Ryan, P.Y.A., Schoenmakers, B. (eds.) VOTE-ID 2009. LNCS, vol. 5767. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roland Wen
    • 1
  • Richard Buckland
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and EngineeringThe University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations