Linear Logical Voting Protocols

  • Henry DeYoung
  • Carsten Schürmann
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7187)


Current approaches to electronic implementations of voting protocols involve translating legal text to source code of an imperative programming language. Because the gap between legal text and source code is very large, it is difficult to trust that the program meets its legal specification. In response, we promote linear logic as a high-level language for both specifying and implementing voting protocols. Our linear logical specifications of the single-winner first-past-the-post (SW-FPTP) and single transferable vote (STV) protocols demonstrate that this approach leads to concise implementations that closely correspond to their legal specification, thereby increasing trust.


Logic Programming Linear Logic Legal Text Vote Total Vote Count 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Andreoli, J.M.: Logic programming with focusing proofs in linear logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 2(3), 297–347 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benaloh, J., Moran, T., Naish, L., Ramchen, K., Teague, V.: Shuffle-sum: Coercion-resistant verifiable tallying for STV voting. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 4(4), 685–698 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cervesato, I., Scedrov, A.: Relating state-based and process-based concurrency through linear logic. Information & Computation 207(10), 1044–1077 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chang, B.Y.E., Chaudhuri, K., Pfenning, F.: A judgmental analysis of linear logic. Tech. Rep. CMU-CS-03-131R, Carnegie Mellon University (December 2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chaum, D., Ryan, P.Y.A., Schneider, S.: A Practical Voter-Verifiable Election Scheme. In: De Capitani di Vimercati, S., Syverson, P.F., Gollmann, D. (eds.) ESORICS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3679, pp. 118–139. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clocksin, W.F., Mellish, C.S.: Programming in Prolog, 5th edn. Springer (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cochran, D., Kiniry, J.: Vótáil: A formally specified and verified ballot counting system for Irish PR-STV elections. In: Beckert, B., Marché, C. (eds.) Pre-proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Verification of Object-Oriented Software, Paris, France (June 2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Delaune, S., Kremer, S., Ryan, M.: Verifying privacy-type properties of electronic voting protocols. Journal of Computer Security 17(4), 435–487 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    DeYoung, H., Pfenning, F.: Reasoning about the consequences of authorization policies in a linear epistemic logic. In: Cortier, V., Shmatikov, V. (eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Foundations of Computer Security, Los Angeles, California (August 2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garg, D., Bauer, L., Bowers, K.D., Pfenning, F., Reiter, M.K.: A Linear Logic of Authorization and Knowledge. In: Gollmann, D., Meier, J., Sabelfeld, A. (eds.) ESORICS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4189, pp. 297–312. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garg, D., Pfenning, F.: A proof-carrying file system. In: 31st IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 349–364. IEEE Computer Society Press, Oakland (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Girard, J.Y.: Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science 50(1), 1–102 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    López, P., Pfenning, F., Polakow, J., Watkins, K.: Monadic concurrent linear logic programming. In: Barahona, P., Felty, A.P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th International ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming, pp. 35–46. ACM Press, Lisbon (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schack-Nielsen, A., Schürmann, C.: Celf – A Logical Framework for Deductive and Concurrent Systems (System Description). In: Armando, A., Baumgartner, P., Dowek, G. (eds.) IJCAR 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5195, pp. 320–326. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wadler, P.: A Taste of Linear Logic. In: Borzyszkowski, A.M., Sokolowski, S. (eds.) MFCS 1993. LNCS, vol. 711, pp. 185–210. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Watkins, K., Cervesato, I., Pfenning, F., Walker, D.: A concurrent logical framework I: Judgments and properties. Tech. Rep. CMU-CS-02-101, Carnegie Mellon University (2002) (revised May 2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henry DeYoung
    • 1
  • Carsten Schürmann
    • 2
  1. 1.Carnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.IT University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations