A New Approach towards Coercion-Resistant Remote E-Voting in Linear Time

  • Oliver Spycher
  • Reto Koenig
  • Rolf Haenni
  • Michael Schläpfer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7035)


Remote electronic voting has attracted increasing attention in cryptographic research. A promising protocol presented by Juels et al. is currently widely discussed. Although it offers a remarkably high degree of coercion-resistance under reasonable assumptions, it can not be employed in practice due to its poor efficiency. The improvements that have been proposed either require stronger trust assumptions or turned out to be insecure. In this paper, we present an enhancement of the protocol, which runs in linear time without changing the underlying trust assumptions.


Security Property Homomorphic Encryption Scheme Secure Function Evaluation Trust Assumption ElGamal Encryption 
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.
    Araújo, R.: On Remote and Voter-Verifiable Voting. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, Darmstadt University of Technology, Darmstadt, Germany (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Araújo, R., Foulle, S., Traoré, J.: A practical and secure coercion-resistant scheme for remote elections. In: Chaum, D., Kutylowski, M., Rivest, R., Ryan, P. (eds.) FEE 2007, Frontiers of Electronic Voting, Dagstuhl, Germany, pp. 330–342 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Araújo, R., Ben Rajeb, N., Robbana, R., Traoré, J., Youssfi, S.: Towards Practical and Secure Coercion-Resistant Electronic Elections. In: Heng, S.-H., Wright, R.N., Goi, B.-M. (eds.) CANS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6467, pp. 278–297. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clark, J., Hengartner, U.: Selections: Internet voting with over-the-shoulder coercion-resistance. In: Danezis, G. (ed.) FC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7035, pp. 47–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clarkson, M.R., Chong, S., Myers, A.C.: Civitas: Toward a secure voting system. In: 29th IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, SP 2008, pp. 354–368 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Di Cosmo, R.: On privacy and anonymity in electronic and non electronic voting: the ballot-as-signature attack. Hyper Articles en Ligne hal-00142440(2) (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jakobsson, M., Juels, A.: Mix and Match: Secure Function Evaluation Via Ciphertexts. In: Okamoto, T. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2000. LNCS, vol. 1976, pp. 162–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Juels, A., Catalano, D., Jakobsson, M.: Coercion-resistant electronic elections. In: Atluri, V., De Capitani di Vimercati, S., Dingledine, R. (eds.) 4th ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, WPES 2005, Alexandria, USA, pp. 61–70 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pfitzmann, B.: Breaking an Efficient Anonymous Channel. In: De Santis, A. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1994. LNCS, vol. 950, pp. 332–340. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    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
  11. 11.
    Smith, W.D.: New cryptographic voting scheme with best-known theoretical properties. In: FEE 2005, Workshop on Frontiers in Electronic Elections, Milan (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weber, G., Araujo, R., Buchmann, J.: On coercion-resistant electronic elections with linear work. In: ARES 2007, 2nd International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security, Vienna, Austria, pp. 908–916 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weber, S.: Coercion-Resistant Cryptographic Voting: Implementing Free and Secret Electronic Elections. VDM Verlag, Saarbrücken (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oliver Spycher
    • 1
    • 2
  • Reto Koenig
    • 1
    • 2
  • Rolf Haenni
    • 2
  • Michael Schläpfer
    • 3
  1. 1.University of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland
  2. 2.Bern University of Applied SciencesBielSwitzerland
  3. 3.ETH ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations