电子投票中的抗胁迫性和无收据性

S. Delaune, S. Kremer, M. Ryan
{"title":"电子投票中的抗胁迫性和无收据性","authors":"S. Delaune, S. Kremer, M. Ryan","doi":"10.1109/CSFW.2006.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we formally study important properties of electronic voting protocols. In particular we are interested in coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness. Intuitively, an election protocol is coercion-resistant if a voter A cannot prove to a potential coercer C that she voted in a particular way. We assume that A cooperates with C in an interactive fashion. Receipt-freeness is a weaker property, for which we assume that A and C cannot interact during the protocol: to break receipt-freeness, A later provides evidence (the receipt) of how she voted. While receipt-freeness can be expressed using observational equivalence from the applied pi calculus, we need to introduce a new relation to capture coercion-resistance. Our formalization of coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness are quite different. Nevertheless, we show in accordance with intuition that coercion-resistance implies receipt-freeness, which implies privacy, the basic anonymity property of voting protocols, as defined in previous work. Finally we illustrate the definitions on a simplified version of the Lee et al. voting protocol","PeriodicalId":131951,"journal":{"name":"19th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop (CSFW'06)","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"170","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness in electronic voting\",\"authors\":\"S. Delaune, S. Kremer, M. Ryan\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/CSFW.2006.8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper we formally study important properties of electronic voting protocols. In particular we are interested in coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness. Intuitively, an election protocol is coercion-resistant if a voter A cannot prove to a potential coercer C that she voted in a particular way. We assume that A cooperates with C in an interactive fashion. Receipt-freeness is a weaker property, for which we assume that A and C cannot interact during the protocol: to break receipt-freeness, A later provides evidence (the receipt) of how she voted. While receipt-freeness can be expressed using observational equivalence from the applied pi calculus, we need to introduce a new relation to capture coercion-resistance. Our formalization of coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness are quite different. Nevertheless, we show in accordance with intuition that coercion-resistance implies receipt-freeness, which implies privacy, the basic anonymity property of voting protocols, as defined in previous work. Finally we illustrate the definitions on a simplified version of the Lee et al. voting protocol\",\"PeriodicalId\":131951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"19th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop (CSFW'06)\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"170\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"19th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop (CSFW'06)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/CSFW.2006.8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"19th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop (CSFW'06)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CSFW.2006.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 170

摘要

本文正式研究了电子投票协议的重要性质。我们特别感兴趣的是抗矫顽性和无接收性。直观地说,如果选民a不能向潜在的胁迫者C证明她以特定的方式投票,那么选举协议是抗胁迫的。我们假设A以交互方式与C合作。收据自由是一个较弱的属性,因此我们假设a和C在协议期间不能交互:为了打破收据自由,a稍后提供她如何投票的证据(收据)。虽然接收自由度可以用应用π微积分的观测等价来表示,但我们需要引入一种新的关系来捕获矫顽力阻力。我们对矫顽性和无接受性的形式化是完全不同的。然而,我们根据直觉表明,抗强制意味着无收据,这意味着隐私,即投票协议的基本匿名属性,如先前工作中定义的那样。最后,我们说明了Lee等人投票协议的简化版本的定义
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness in electronic voting
In this paper we formally study important properties of electronic voting protocols. In particular we are interested in coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness. Intuitively, an election protocol is coercion-resistant if a voter A cannot prove to a potential coercer C that she voted in a particular way. We assume that A cooperates with C in an interactive fashion. Receipt-freeness is a weaker property, for which we assume that A and C cannot interact during the protocol: to break receipt-freeness, A later provides evidence (the receipt) of how she voted. While receipt-freeness can be expressed using observational equivalence from the applied pi calculus, we need to introduce a new relation to capture coercion-resistance. Our formalization of coercion-resistance and receipt-freeness are quite different. Nevertheless, we show in accordance with intuition that coercion-resistance implies receipt-freeness, which implies privacy, the basic anonymity property of voting protocols, as defined in previous work. Finally we illustrate the definitions on a simplified version of the Lee et al. voting protocol
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信