Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Facial Recognition for Remote Electronic Voting – Missing Piece of the Puzzle or Yet Another Liability?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Emerging Technologies for Authorization and Authentication (ETAA 2021)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNSC,volume 13136))

Abstract

Reliable voter identification is one of the key requirements to guarantee eligibility and uniformity of elections. In a remote setting, this task becomes more complicated compared to voter identification at a physical polling station. In case strong cryptographic mechanisms are not available, biometrics is one of the available alternatives to consider. In this paper, we take a closer look at facial recognition as a possible remote voter identification measure. We cover technical aspects of facial recognition relevant to voting, discuss the main architectural decisions, and analyse some of the remaining open problems, including dispute resolution and privacy issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ceo-tim-cook-on-voting-technology-iphones-smartphones-2021-4.

  2. 2.

    https://pages.nist.gov/frvt/html/frvt11.html.

  3. 3.

    https://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/en/reports/political-landscape/afghanistans-2019-election-23-disputed-biometric-votes-endanger-election-results/.

  4. 4.

    https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/telangana/telangana-state-election-commission-successfully-tests-facial-recognition-technique/article30627812.ece.

  5. 5.

    https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/managing-elections-under-covid-19-pandemic-conditions-the-case-of-ghana.pdf.

  6. 6.

    The Estonian i-voting system also requires voters to explicitly authenticate themselves before they are allowed to sign their ballots.

  7. 7.

    https://www.vice.com/en/article/dyzykz/detroit-police-chief-facial-recognition-software-misidentifies-96-of-the-time.

  8. 8.

    https://www.rferl.org/a/biometrics-to-end-fraud-in-afghan-election-may-discourage-some-women-from-voting/30131049.html.

  9. 9.

    https://www.logitech.com/assets/41349/logitech--why-a-better-webcam-matters.ENG.pdf.

References

  1. Adida, B.: Helios: web-based open-audit voting. In: van Oorschot, P.C. (ed.) Proceedings of the 17th USENIX Security Symposium, pp. 335–348. USENIX Association (2008). http://www.usenix.org/events/sec08/tech/full_papers/adida/adida.pdf

  2. Arnò, S., Galassi, A., Tommasi, M., Saggino, A., Vittorini, P.: State-of-the-art of commercial proctoring systems and their use in academic online exams. Int. J. Distance Educ. Technol. (IJDET) 19(2), 55–76 (2021). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDET.20210401.oa3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Asgari, S., Trajkovic, J., Rahmani, M., Zhang, W., Lo, R.C., Sciortino, A.: An observational study of engineering online education during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE 16(4), 1–17 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Backes, M., Chen, T., Dürmuth, M., Lensch, H.P.A., Welk, M.: Tempest in a teapot: compromising reflections revisited. In: 30th IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P 2009), Oakland, California, USA, 17–20 May 2009, pp. 315–327. IEEE Computer Society (2009). https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2009.20

  5. Balfanz, D., et al.: Web authentication: an API for accessing public key credentials level 1. W3C recommendation, W3C, March 2019. https://www.w3.org/TR/2019/REC-webauthn-1-20190304/

  6. Brand, C., et al.: Client to authenticator protocol (CTAP). Proposed standard, FIDO Alliance, January 2019. https://fidoalliance.org/specs/fido-v2.0-ps-20190130/fido-client-to-authenticator-protocol-v2.0-ps-20190130.html

  7. Buolamwini, J., Gebru, T.: Gender shades: intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In: Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, FAT 2018. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, vol. 81, pp. 77–91. PMLR (2018). http://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a.html

  8. Cardillo, A., Akinyokun, N., Essex, A.: Online voting in Ontario municipal elections: a conflict of legal principles and technology? In: Krimmer, R., et al. (eds.) E-Vote-ID 2019. LNCS, vol. 11759, pp. 67–82. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30625-0_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Chaidos, P., Cortier, V., Fuchsbauer, G., Galindo, D.: BeleniosRF: a non-interactive receipt-free electronic voting scheme. In: Proceedings of ACM CCS 2016, pp. 1614–1625. ACM (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2976749.2978337

  10. Chamikara, M.A.P., Bertók, P., Khalil, I., Liu, D., Camtepe, S.: Privacy preserving face recognition utilizing differential privacy. Comput. Secur. 97, 101951 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2020.101951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chaum, D.: Security without identification: transaction systems to make big brother obsolete. Commun. ACM 28(10), 1030–1044 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1145/4372.4373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chaum, D.: Elections with unconditionally-secret ballots and disruption equivalent to breaking RSA. In: Barstow, D., et al. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 1988. LNCS, vol. 330, pp. 177–182. Springer, Heidelberg (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45961-8_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheeseman, N., Lynch, G., Willis, J.: Digital dilemmas: the unintended consequences of election technology. Democratization 25(8), 1397–1418 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 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 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27576-0_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters: Guidelines and Explanatory Report (2002). European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission). https://rm.coe.int/090000168092af01

  16. Cortier, V., Galindo, D., Glondu, S., Izabachène, M.: Election verifiability for Helios under weaker trust assumptions. In: Kutyłowski, M., Vaidya, J. (eds.) ESORICS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8713, pp. 327–344. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11212-1_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Das, A., Galdi, C., Han, H., Ramachandra, R., Dugelay, J., Dantcheva, A.: Recent advances in biometric technology for mobile devices. In: 9th IEEE International Conference on Biometrics Theory, Applications and Systems, pp. 1–11. IEEE (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/BTAS.2018.8698587

  18. Dziva, C., Musara, E., Chigora, P.: Democratisation and securitisation of Zimbabwe’s national elections: opportunities and challenges of biometric voter registration. J. Public Adm. Dev. Altern. (JPADA) 5(1), 48–62 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  19. E-valimiste turvalisuse töörühma koondaruanne. Estonian Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications (2019). https://www.mkm.ee/sites/default/files/content-editors/e-valimiste_tooruhma_koondaruanne_12.12.2019_0.pdf. in Estonian

  20. European Parliament, Council of the European Union: Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2016:119:FULL&from=EN

  21. Fowler, A.: Promises and perils of mobile voting. Election Law J. Rules Polit. Policy 19(3), 418–431 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Grassi, P., et al.: Digital identity guidelines: authentication and lifecycle management [includes updates as of 03–02–2020] (2020). https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-63b

  23. Grother, P., Ngan, M., Hanaoka, K.: Face Recognition Vendor Test (FRVT) Part 3: Demographic Effects (2019). https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2019/NIST.IR.8280.pdf

  24. Heiberg, S., Martens, T., Vinkel, P., Willemson, J.: Improving the verifiability of the Estonian internet voting scheme. In: Krimmer, R., et al. (eds.) E-Vote-ID 2016. LNCS, vol. 10141, pp. 92–107. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52240-1_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. House of Commons, Canada: Fact Sheet of Hybrid Voting Process in the House of Commons (2021). https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Newsroom/Articles/Factsheet-ElectronicVotingSystem-e-Final-02-25.pdf

  26. Jacobsen, K.L.: Biometric voter registration: a new modality of democracy assistance? Coop. Confl. 55(1), 127–148 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Juels, A., Catalano, D., Jakobsson, M.: Coercion-resistant electronic elections. In: Proceedings of WPES 2005, pp. 61–70. ACM (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kim, G., Eum, S., Suhr, J.K., Kim, I., Park, K.R., Kim, J.: Face liveness detection based on texture and frequency analyses. In: 5th IAPR International Conference on Biometrics, ICB 2012, New Delhi, India, 29 March–1 April 2012, pp. 67–72. IEEE (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICB.2012.6199760

  29. Krips, K., Kubjas, I., Willemson, J.: An internet voting protocol with distributed verification receipt generation. In: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Electronic Voting E-Vote-ID 2018, Bregenz, Austria, 2–5 October 2018, pp. 128–146. TalTech Press (2018). https://digikogu.taltech.ee/en/item/0050d4bb-192b-4531-8e23-ccf8b565222e

  30. Krips, K., Willemson, J.: On practical aspects of coercion-resistant remote voting systems. In: Krimmer, R., et al. (eds.) E-Vote-ID 2019. LNCS, vol. 11759, pp. 216–232. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30625-0_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Kulyk, O., Teague, V., Volkamer, M.: Extending Helios towards private eligibility verifiability. In: Haenni, R., Koenig, R.E., Wikström, D. (eds.) VOTELID 2015. LNCS, vol. 9269, pp. 57–73. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22270-7_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Li, Y., Li, Y., Yan, Q., Kong, H., Deng, R.H.: Seeing your face is not enough: an inertial sensor-based liveness detection for face authentication. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 1558–1569. ACM (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2810103.2813612

  33. Lyastani, S.G., Schilling, M., Neumayr, M., Backes, M., Bugiel, S.: Is FIDO2 the kingslayer of user authentication? A comparative usability study of FIDO2 passwordless authentication. In: 2020 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, SP 2020, pp. 268–285. IEEE (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/SP40000.2020.00047

  34. Madise, Ü., Martens, T.: E-voting in Estonia 2005. The first practice of country-wide binding internet voting in the world. In: Electronic Voting 2006: 2nd International Workshop, Co-Organized by Council of Europe, ESF TED, IFIP WG 8.6 and E-Voting.CC. LNI, vol. P-86, pp. 15–26. GI (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Marasco, E., Ross, A.: A survey on antispoofing schemes for fingerprint recognition systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 47(2), 28:1–28:36 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2617756

  36. Moore, L., Sawhney, N.: Under the Hood: The West Virginia Mobile Voting Pilot (2019). https://sos.wv.gov/FormSearch/Elections/Informational/West-Virginia-Mobile-Voting-White-Paper-NASS-Submission.pdf

  37. Neumann, S., Volkamer, M.: Civitas and the real world: problems and solutions from a practical point of view. In: Seventh International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security, ARES 2012, Prague, pp. 180–185. IEEE Computer Society (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/ARES.2012.75

  38. Okamoto, T.: Receipt-free electronic voting schemes for large scale elections. In: Christianson, B., Crispo, B., Lomas, M., Roe, M. (eds.) Security Protocols 1997. LNCS, vol. 1361, pp. 25–35. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0028157

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  39. Patachi, Ş, Schürmann, C.: Eos a universal verifiable and coercion resistant voting protocol. In: Krimmer, R., Volkamer, M., Braun Binder, N., Kersting, N., Pereira, O., Schürmann, C. (eds.) E-Vote-ID 2017. LNCS, vol. 10615, pp. 210–227. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68687-5_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Peixoto, B., Michelassi, C., Rocha, A.: Face liveness detection under bad illumination conditions. In: Macq, B., Schelkens, P. (eds.) 18th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, ICIP 2011, pp. 3557–3560. IEEE (2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIP.2011.6116484

  41. Prabhakar, S., Pankanti, S., Jain, A.K.: Biometric recognition: security and privacy concerns. IEEE Secur. Priv. 1(2), 33–42 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1109/MSECP.2003.1193209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Aiello, R.: A historic first: MPs hold House of Commons votes by app (2021). https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/a-historic-first-mps-hold-house-of-commons-votes-by-app-1.5338151

  43. Rivest, R.L., Shamir, A., Tauman, Y.: How to leak a secret. In: Boyd, C. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2001. LNCS, vol. 2248, pp. 552–565. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45682-1_32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Rosacker, K.M., Rosacker, R.E.: Voting is a right: a decade of societal, technological and experiential progress towards the goal of remote-access voting. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Roy, A., Memon, N.D., Ross, A.: MasterPrint: exploring the vulnerability of partial fingerprint-based authentication systems. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 12(9), 2013–2025 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIFS.2017.2691658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Ryan, P.Y.A., Rønne, P.B., Iovino, V.: Selene: voting with transparent verifiability and coercion-mitigation. In: Clark, J., Meiklejohn, S., Ryan, P.Y.A., Wallach, D., Brenner, M., Rohloff, K. (eds.) FC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9604, pp. 176–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53357-4_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Sabra, M., Maiti, A., Jadliwala, M.: Zoom on the keystrokes: exploiting video calls for keystroke inference attacks. In: 28th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, NDSS 2021, Virtually, 21–25 February 2021. The Internet Society (2021). https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss-paper/zoom-on-the-keystrokes-exploiting-video-calls-for-keystroke-inference-attacks/

  48. Scytl: individual verifiability, Swiss Post E-voting protocol explained. Technical report, Swiss Post, November 2017. https://www.post.ch/-/media/post/evoting/dokumente/swiss-post-online-voting-protocol-explained.pdf?la=de

  49. Shukla, D., Kumar, R., Serwadda, A., Phoha, V.V.: Beware, your hands reveal your secrets! In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Scottsdale, AZ, USA, 3–7 November 2014, pp. 904–917. ACM (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2660267.2660360

  50. Shweiki, O., Lee, Y.: Compelled use of biometric keys to unlock a digital device: deciphering recent legal developments. United States Attorneys’ Bull. 67(1), 23–42 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Stenerud, I.S.G., Bull, C.: When reality comes knocking Norwegian experiences with verifiable electronic voting. In: Proceedings of EVOTE 2012. LNI, vol. P-205, pp. 21–33. GI (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Wolf, P., Alim, A., Kasaro, B., Namugera, P., Saneem, M., Zorigt, T.: Introducing biometric technology in elections. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (2017). https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/introducing-biometric-technology-in-elections-reissue.pdf

  53. Xu, Y., Heinly, J., White, A.M., Monrose, F., Frahm, J.: Seeing double: reconstructing obscured typed input from repeated compromising reflections. In: Sadeghi, A., Gligor, V.D., Yung, M. (eds.) 2013 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS 2013, Berlin, Germany, 4–8 November 2013, pp. 1063–1074. ACM (2013). https://doi.org/10.1145/2508859.2516709

  54. Xu, Y., Price, T., Frahm, J., Monrose, F.: Virtual U: defeating face liveness detection by building virtual models from your public photos. In: 25th USENIX Security Symposium, pp. 497–512. USENIX Association (2016). https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity16/technical-sessions/presentation/xu

  55. Zhao, W., Chellappa, R., Phillips, P.J., Rosenfeld, A.: Face recognition: a literature survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 35(4), 399–458 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1145/954339.954342

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper has been supported by the Estonian Research Council under grant number PRG920. The authors are grateful to the Estonian Information System Authority and State Electoral Office for their support of the research process.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Smartmatic-Cybernetica Centre of Excellence for Internet Voting, Soola 3, Tartu, Estonia

    Sven Heiberg

  2. Cybernetica, Narva mnt 20, Tartu, Estonia

    Kristjan Krips, Jan Willemson & Priit Vinkel

  3. Institute of Computer Science, University of Tartu, Narva mnt 18, Tartu, Estonia

    Kristjan Krips

  4. State Electoral Office, Lossi plats 1a, Tallinn, Estonia

    Priit Vinkel

Authors
  1. Sven Heiberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristjan Krips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Willemson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Priit Vinkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Pisa, Italy

    Andrea Saracino

  2. Institute of Informatics and Telematics, Pisa, Italy

    Paolo Mori

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Heiberg, S., Krips, K., Willemson, J., Vinkel, P. (2021). Facial Recognition for Remote Electronic Voting – Missing Piece of the Puzzle or Yet Another Liability?. In: Saracino, A., Mori, P. (eds) Emerging Technologies for Authorization and Authentication. ETAA 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13136. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93747-8_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93747-8_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-93746-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-93747-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation