Analysis of Electronic Voting Protocol Using Strand Space Model

  • Venkatasamy Sureshkumar
  • Ramalingam Anitha
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 420)


In this paper, we studied the electronic voting protocol to formalize and verify its fairness, privacy type properties in the strand space model. Also we established a suitable attacker model, the concept of pair bundles and equivalence of pair bundles which are used to frame the formalization and verification of fairness, privacy type properties in detail using the strand space model. For example, FOO protocol is considered to illustrate the model developed using the strand space theory. The result shows that the fairness, vote privacy properties are satisfied and receipt freeness property is failed for FOO protocol. Finally, an improvement of the FOO protocol is proposed so that it achieves receipt freeness property.


Strand space model e-voting protocol pair bundle equivalence of pair bundles 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Backes, M., Hritcu, C., Maffei, M.: Automated verification of remote electronic voting protocols in the applied pi-calculus. In: 21st IEEE Comp. Secur. Foundations Symposium, CSF 2008, pp. 195–209 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baskar, A., Ramanujam, R., Suresh, S.P.: Knowledge-based modelling of voting protocols. In: Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge, pp. 62–71. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chevallier-Mames, B., Fouque, P.-A., Pointcheval, D., Stern, J., Traoré, J.: On some incompatible properties of voting schemes. In: Chaum, D., Jakobsson, M., Rivest, R.L., Ryan, P.Y.A., Benaloh, J., Kutylowski, M., Adida, B. (eds.) Towards Trustworthy Elections. LNCS, vol. 6000, pp. 191–199. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Delaune, S., Kremer, S., Ryan, M.: Verifying privacy-type properties of electronic voting protocols. J. Comp. Secur. 17(4), 435–487 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Delaune, S., Kremer, S., Ryan, M.: Coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness in electronic voting. In: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Comp. Secur. Foundations Workshop, pp. 28–39. IEEE Comp. Soc. Press (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fujioka, A., Okamoto, T., Ohta, K.: A Practical Secret Voting Scheme for Large Scale Elections. In: Zheng, Y., Seberry, J. (eds.) AUSCRYPT 1992. LNCS, vol. 718, pp. 244–251. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fábrega, F.J.T., Herzog, J.C., Guttman, J.D.: Strand spaces: Proving security protocols correct. J. Comp. Secur. 7(2), 191–230 (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jonker, H.L., Pieters, W.: Receipt-freeness as a special case of anonymity in epistemic logic. In: Proceedings of the IAVoSS Workshop on Trustworthy Elections (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu, Y.: Fairness analysis of e-commerce protocols based on strand spaces. International Journal of Grid and Utility Computing 4(2), 128–133 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Petrakos, N., Kotzanikolaou, P., Douligeris, C.: Using Strand Space Model to Verify the Privacy Properties of a Fair Anonymous Authentication Scheme. In: 16th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics, pp. 105–110 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang, L., Luo, J.: Formal analysis of anonymity based on strand space model. In: First IEEE International Conference on Ubi-Media Computing, pp. 75–81 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zuzana, R.: Electronic Voting Schemes. Master’s thesis. Comenius University (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Venkatasamy Sureshkumar
    • 1
  • Ramalingam Anitha
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied Mathematics and Computational SciencesPSG College of TechnologyCoimbatoreIndia

Personalised recommendations