Electronic voting in all its different variations receives substantial criticism on the level of security it presently provides. Given the established limitations of technical means to provide security this paper discusses the procedural security aspect of the e-electoral process. Two main areas of potential benefits from procedural security measures derive from this discussion. The first is the expansion of the existing level of e-voting security. The second is the impact of procedural safeguards in the voters' perception of security and the use of such safeguards to support the social acceptance of the eelectoral process. This paper explores the concept of procedural security, presents some of the measures adopted in the 2003 UK e-voting pilots, relates procedural security to the issue of social acceptance for the new e-electoral practices and indicates some areas of future work.
In this paper we explore the security related procedures that are required for the successful development and deployment of electronic voting in legally-binding government elections. Initiating our research on the theoretical basis, which justifies the necessity for security in deploying electronic elections, we further explore the question of who and what should be safeguarded in the course of the e-electoral process. Based on our research study, we suggest that security in e-voting has two aspects, the technical and the procedural one. It is recognised that from the technical perspective further research is necessary to ensure full and complete voter authentication and voting security to enable an e-election. However, we argue that e-voting security can also be enhanced through providing procedural security measures at specific points in the e-electoral process.Our analysis of the Electoral Commission's evaluation reports on the 2002 UK local government evoting pilots identified past cases of procedural security issues. Interviews and observations conducted during the 2003 UK e-voting pilots further confirmed these issues. We have established the need to further explore the re-design of the electoral process and consider procedural security as primarily applicable to agent-related processes. In view of the increased complexity of the e-voting processes, which can involve multi-channel e-voting options, and the increase in the number of agents involved in the administration of eelections, we relate procedural security to the need for transparent allocation of responsibilities among the different agents. In concluding we argue that existing procedural security should be enhanced, that there is a clear need for better monitoring of compliance to such procedures and that further security procedures need to be put in place at specific points in the e-election process.
Security is among the most important constraints in the implementation of electronic voting because, to date, commercially available technology does not provide a completely secure e-transaction environment. In this paper, we explore the issue of security of e-voting procedures, given the established limitations of technology. We examine security in the context of the increased complexity of multiple-channel voting, provided by a multiplicity of agents involved in the administration of eelections. As previously suggested, security in e-voting has two aspects, the technical and the procedural one. In the course of interviews and observations conducted during the 2003 UK local government legally binding e-voting pilots we have identified several procedural security gaps and related procedural security measures. After defining the norms of procedural security in evoting, we adopt an existing framework of e-voting security objectives and use it as an analytical tool to indicate the importance of the procedural aspect of security. In concluding we extend the use of procedural security measures to the need for transparency in electronic voting and the development of trust and public confidence towards the newly introduced voting practices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.