Is your vote truly secret? Ballot Secrecy iff Ballot Independence: Proving necessary conditions and analysing case studies

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2311.12977v1
• Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 20:25:32 GMT
• Title: Is your vote truly secret? Ballot Secrecy iff Ballot Independence: Proving necessary conditions and analysing case studies
• Authors: Aida Manzano Kharman, Ben Smyth, Freddie Page,
• Abstract summary: We formalise definitions of ballot secrecy and ballot independence by Smyth, JCS'21 as indistinguishability games in the computational model of security. Both Smyth, JCS'21 and Smyth, draft '21 improve on earlier works by considering a more realistic adversary model wherein they have access to the ballot collection.
• Score: 0.19116784879310028
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: We formalise definitions of ballot secrecy and ballot independence by Smyth, JCS'21 as indistinguishability games in the computational model of security. These definitions improve upon Smyth, draft '21 to consider a wider class of voting systems. Both Smyth, JCS'21 and Smyth, draft '21 improve on earlier works by considering a more realistic adversary model wherein they have access to the ballot collection. We prove that ballot secrecy implies ballot independence. We say ballot independence holds if a system has non-malleable ballots. We construct games for ballot secrecy and non-malleability and show that voting schemes with malleable ballots do not preserve ballot secrecy. We demonstrate that Helios does not satisfy our definition of ballot secrecy. Furthermore, the Python framework we constructed for our case study shows that if an attack exists against non-malleability, this attack can be used to break ballot secrecy.

Related papers

• Efficient Lower Bounding of Single Transferable Vote Election Margins [56.12949230611067]
  Single transferable vote (STV) is a system of preferential proportional voting employed in multi-seat elections. The margin of victory, or simply margin, is the smallest number of ballots that, if manipulated, can alter the set of winners. Lower bounds on the margin can also be used for this purpose, in cases where exact margins are difficult to compute.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-24T13:39:23Z)
• Optimal bounds for dissatisfaction in perpetual voting [84.02572742131521]
  We consider a perpetual approval voting method that guarantees that no voter is dissatisfied too many times. We identify a sufficient condition on voter behavior under which a sublinear growth of dissatisfaction is possible. We present a voting method with sublinear guarantees on dissatisfaction under bounded conflicts, based on the standard techniques from prediction with expert advice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T19:58:55Z)
• MERGE: Matching Electronic Results with Genuine Evidence for verifiable voting in person at remote locations [2.206168301581203]
  We introduce the MERGE protocol to combine the speed of electronic ballot delivery with the reliability of paper returns. This protocol allows voters to submit an electronic record of their vote quickly while simultaneously mailing a paper ballot for verification. The electronic record can be used for preliminary results, but the paper ballot is used in a Risk Limiting Audit (RLA) if received in time, ensuring the integrity of the election.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T09:19:01Z)
• Idiosyncratic properties of Australian STV election counting [52.669205232251585]
  Single Transferable Vote (STV) counting is used in several jurisdictions in Australia. This paper shows some of the unintuitive properties of some of these systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-18T01:19:27Z)
• Publicly auditable privacy-preserving electoral rolls [0.32498796510544625]
  We study the problem of designing publicly auditable yet privacy-preserving electoral rolls. The audit can detect polling-day ballot stuffing and denials to eligible voters by malicious polling officers. The entire electoral roll is never revealed, which prevents any large-scale systematic voter targeting and manipulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T13:11:48Z)
• Learning to Manipulate under Limited Information [44.99833362998488]
  We trained over 100,000 neural networks of 26 sizes to manipulate against 8 different voting methods. We find that some voting methods, such as Borda, are highly manipulable by networks with limited information, while others, such as Instant Runoff, are not.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T18:49:50Z)
• Privacy Violations in Election Results [0.0]
  We show that the release of individual ballot records would lead to no revelation of any vote choice for 99.83% of voters. We discuss the potential benefits of transparency, compare remedies to reduce privacy violations, and highlight the privacy-transparency tradeoff inherent in all election reporting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-08T07:27:41Z)
• Adaptively Weighted Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections: AWAIRE [61.872917066847855]
  Methods for auditing instant-runoff voting (IRV) elections are either not risk-limiting or require cast vote records (CVRs), the voting system's electronic record of the votes on each ballot. We develop an RLA method that uses adaptively weighted averages of test supermartingales to efficiently audit IRV elections when CVRs are not available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T15:55:34Z)
• Towards Secure Virtual Elections: Multiparty Computation of Order Based Voting Rules [5.156484100374059]
  One of the main challenges in e-voting systems is to certify that the computed results are consistent with the cast ballots. We propose a secure voting protocol for elections governed by order-based voting rules. Our protocol offers perfect ballot secrecy, in the sense that it issues only the required output, while no other information on the cast ballots is revealed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-21T12:17:21Z)
• Obvious Manipulability of Voting Rules [105.35249497503527]
  The Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem states that no unanimous and non-dictatorial voting rule is strategyproof. We revisit voting rules and consider a weaker notion of strategyproofness called not obvious manipulability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-03T02:41:48Z)
• Security Survey and Analysis of Vote-by-Mail Systems [0.0]
  We examine the security of electronic systems used in the process of voting by mail, including online voter registration and online ballot tracking systems. We find that online voter registration systems in some states have vulnerabilities that allow adversaries to alter or effectively prevent a voter's registration. We additionally find that ballot tracking systems raise serious privacy questions surrounding ease of access to voter data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-18T02:18:15Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.