Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2017)5 and e-Voting Protocol Design

Robert Müller-Török, Domenica Bagnato, Alexander Prosser
{"title":"Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2017)5 and e-Voting Protocol Design","authors":"Robert Müller-Török, Domenica Bagnato, Alexander Prosser","doi":"10.5817/MUJLT2020-2-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Corona pandemic has created a push towards digitization in a number of fields, not least in the public sector including democratic processes. This of course includes an increased interest in e-voting via the Internet. The Council of Europe has a long-standing history of work in the field including two Recommendations – (2004)11 and (2017)5 – which have become the de facto yardstick against which every e-voting system is measured. Rec(2017)5 builds on a decade of experience with e-voting and particularly strengthens two concepts important in any electronic voting system: Voting secrecy and auditability/verifiability. This has distinct implications for the design of e-voting protocols. The aim of this paper is to analyse the impact on what arguably are the most popular voting protocol families, envelope and token protocols. How does the modified Recommendation impact on the viability of protocols and protocol design? The paper first presents the Council of Europe Recommendation and the technical issues it addresses. Then a model is introduced to assess a voting protocol against the Recommendation; a typical envelope and a token protocol are assessed in view of the model and finally the two assessments are compared including policy recommendations for a path to e-voting implementation.","PeriodicalId":38294,"journal":{"name":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","volume":"14 1","pages":"275-302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2020-2-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The Corona pandemic has created a push towards digitization in a number of fields, not least in the public sector including democratic processes. This of course includes an increased interest in e-voting via the Internet. The Council of Europe has a long-standing history of work in the field including two Recommendations – (2004)11 and (2017)5 – which have become the de facto yardstick against which every e-voting system is measured. Rec(2017)5 builds on a decade of experience with e-voting and particularly strengthens two concepts important in any electronic voting system: Voting secrecy and auditability/verifiability. This has distinct implications for the design of e-voting protocols. The aim of this paper is to analyse the impact on what arguably are the most popular voting protocol families, envelope and token protocols. How does the modified Recommendation impact on the viability of protocols and protocol design? The paper first presents the Council of Europe Recommendation and the technical issues it addresses. Then a model is introduced to assess a voting protocol against the Recommendation; a typical envelope and a token protocol are assessed in view of the model and finally the two assessments are compared including policy recommendations for a path to e-voting implementation.
欧洲委员会建议CM/Rec(2017)5和电子投票协议设计
科罗纳疫情推动了许多领域的数字化,尤其是在包括民主进程在内的公共部门。这当然包括人们对通过互联网进行电子投票的兴趣增加。欧洲委员会在这一领域有着悠久的工作历史,包括两项建议——(2004)11和(2017)5——这两项建议已成为衡量每个电子投票系统的事实标准。Rec(2017)5建立在十年电子投票经验的基础上,特别强化了任何电子投票系统中的两个重要概念:投票保密性和可审计性/可验证性。这对电子投票协议的设计有着明显的影响。本文的目的是分析对可以说是最流行的投票协议家族、信封和令牌协议的影响。修改后的建议如何影响协议和协议设计的可行性?本文首先介绍了欧洲委员会的建议及其所涉及的技术问题。然后引入了一个模型来评估针对该建议的投票协议;根据该模型对典型的信封和令牌协议进行了评估,最后对这两种评估进行了比较,包括电子投票实施路径的政策建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信