Skip to main content

How Many Election Officials Does It Take to Change an Election?

  • Conference paper
Foundations and Applications of Security Analysis (ARSPA-WITS 2009)

Abstract

Electronic voting technologies have been quite widely deployed in a number of democracies. In the US for example, approximately 30% of the electorate used Direct Recorded Electronic (DRE) machines in the 2004 and 2008 presidential election. These systems have come in for significant criticism leading many experts to conclude that all digital technology used in voting must be flawed. While these critiques are fully justified and documented, to conclude that all voting technology must be irredeemably flawed is not in our view justified. The purpose of this note is to argue that, while it is undoubtedly true that careless introduction of information technology can undermine democracy, high assurance, verifiable voting schemes do exist and are worthy of serious consideration. Furthermore, such verifiable schemes can provide higher levels of trustworthiness than traditional pencil and paper, hand counting systems. The challenge remains to convince the various stakeholders of the trustworthiness of such schemes.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. http://punchscan.org/index.php

  2. Beneloh, J., Tuinstra, D.: Receipt-free secret-ballot elections. In: Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 544–553. ACM, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Chaum, D.: Untraceable mail, return addresses and digital pseudonyms. Communications of the ACM 24(2), 84–88 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chaum, D.: Secret-ballot receipts: True voter-verifiable elections. IEEE Security and Privacy 2(1), 38–47 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chaum, D., Ryan, P.Y.A., Schneider, S.: A practical, voter-verifiable election scheme. In: di Vimercati, S.d.C., Syverson, P.F., Gollmann, D. (eds.) ESORICS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3679, pp. 118–139. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Chaum, D., et al.: Scantegrity II: End-to-End Verifiability for Optical Scan Election Systems using Invisible Ink Confirmation Codes. Technical report. In: Proceedings of USENIX-ACCURATE EVT (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gumbel, A.: Steal this vote! Nation Books (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Jones, D.W.: A brief illustrated history of voting (2003), http://www.cs.uiowa.edo/~jones/voting/pictures

  9. Jones, D.W.: Threats to voting systems (2005), http://vote.nist.gov/threats/papers/threatstovotingsystems.pdf

  10. Juels, A., Catalano, D., Jakobsson, M.: Coercion-resistant Electronic Elections. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society (November 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kohno, T., Stubblefield, A., Rubin, A.D., Wallach, D.S.: Analysis of an electronic voting system. In: Symposium on Security and Privacy. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mercuri, R.: A better ballot box? IEEE Spectrum Online (October 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Neff, A.: A verifiable secret shuffle and its application to e-voting. In: Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 116–125. ACM, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Rivest, R.L.: The three ballot voting system (2006), http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~rivest/Rivest-TheThreeBallotVotingSystem.pdf

  15. Rivest, R.L., Wack, J.P.: On the notion of “software independence” in voting systems. Transactions of the Royal Society (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ryan, P.Y.A.: Towards a dependability case for the chaum voting scheme. In: DIMACS Workshop on Electronic Voting – Theory and Practice (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ryan, P.Y.A.: A variant of the chaum voting scheme. Technical Report CS-TR-864, University of Newcastle upon Tyne (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ryan, P.Y.A.: A variant of the chaum voting scheme. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Issues in the Theory of Security, pp. 81–88. ACM, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ryan, P.Y.A., Schneider, S.: Prêt à Voter with Re-encryption Mixes. In: Gollmann, D., Meier, J., Sabelfeld, A. (eds.) ESORICS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4189, pp. 313–326. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Schneier, B.: Election fraud in kentucky (2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ryan, P.Y.A. (2009). How Many Election Officials Does It Take to Change an Election?. In: Degano, P., Viganò, L. (eds) Foundations and Applications of Security Analysis. ARSPA-WITS 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5511. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03459-6_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03459-6_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-03458-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-03459-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics