handouts/ho02.tex
changeset 190 4ee6812ab436
parent 188 2555552d2c05
child 191 f675aa15b6d0
equal deleted inserted replaced
189:9961bbb8c8af 190:4ee6812ab436
     4 
     4 
     5 \begin{document}
     5 \begin{document}
     6 
     6 
     7 \section*{Handout 2 (E-Voting)}
     7 \section*{Handout 2 (E-Voting)}
     8 
     8 
     9 In security engineering, there are many counter-intuitive phenomena:
     9 In security engineering, there are many counter-intuitive
    10 for example I am happy (more or less) to use online banking every day,
    10 phenomena: for example I am happy (more or less) to use online
    11 where if something goes wrong, I can potentially lose a lot of money,
    11 banking every day, where if something goes wrong, I can
    12 but I am staunchly against using electronic voting (lets call it
    12 potentially lose a lot of money, but I am staunchly against
    13 e-voting for short). E-voting is an idea that is nowadays often
    13 using electronic voting (lets call it e-voting for short).
    14 promoted in order to counter low turnouts in elections\footnote{In my
    14 E-voting is an idea that is nowadays often promoted in order
    15   last local election where I was eligible to vote only 48\% of the
    15 to counter low turnouts in elections\footnote{In my last local
    16   population have cast their ballot. I was, I shamefully admit, one of
    16 election where I was eligible to vote only 48\% of the
    17   the non-voters.} and generally sounds like a good idea. Right?
    17 population have cast their ballot. I was, I shamefully admit,
    18 Voting from the comfort of your own home, or on your mobile on the go,
    18 one of the non-voters.} and generally sounds like a good idea.
    19 what could possibly go wrong? Even the UK's head of the Electoral
    19 Right? Voting from the comfort of your own home, or on your
    20 Commission, Jenny Watson, argued in 2014 in a Guardian article that
    20 mobile on the go, what could possibly go wrong? Even the UK's
    21 the UK should have e-voting. Her plausible argument is that 76\% of
    21 head of the Electoral Commission, Jenny Watson, argued in 2014
    22 pensioners in the UK vote (in a general election?), but only 44\% of
    22 in a Guardian article that the UK should have e-voting. Her
    23 the under-25s. For which constituency politicians might therefore make
    23 plausible argument is that 76\% of pensioners in the UK vote
    24 more favourable (short-term) decisions is clear. So being not yet
    24 (in a general election?), but only 44\% of the under-25s. For
       
    25 which constituency politicians might therefore make more
       
    26 favourable (short-term) decisions is clear. So being not yet
    25 pensioner, I should be in favour of e-voting, no?
    27 pensioner, I should be in favour of e-voting, no?
    26 
    28 
    27 Well, it turns out there are many things that can go wrong with
    29 Well, it turns out there are many things that can go wrong
    28 e-voting, as I like to argue in this handout. E-voting in a ``secure
    30 with e-voting, as I like to argue in this handout. E-voting in
    29 way'' seems to be one of the things in computer science that are still
    31 a ``secure way'' seems to be one of the things in computer
    30 very much unsolved. It is not on the scale of Turing's halting
    32 science that are still very much unsolved. It is not on the
    31 problem, which is proved that it can never be solved in general, but
    33 scale of Turing's halting problem, which is proved that it can
    32 more in the category of being unsolvable with current technology. This
    34 never be solved in general, but more in the category of being
    33 is not just my opinion, but also shared by many security researchers
    35 unsolvable with current technology. This is not just my
    34 amogst them Alex Halderman, who is the world-expert on this subject
    36 opinion, but also shared by many security researchers amogst
    35 and from whose course on Securing Digital Democracy I have most of my
    37 them Alex Halderman, who is the world-expert on this subject
    36 information and inspiration. It is also a controversial topic in many
    38 and from whose course on Securing Digital Democracy I have
    37 countries:
    39 most of my information and inspiration. It is also a
       
    40 controversial topic in many countries:
    38 
    41 
    39 \begin{itemize}
    42 \begin{itemize}
    40 \item The Netherlands between 1997--2006 had electronic voting
    43 \item The Netherlands between 1997--2006 had electronic voting
    41   machines, but ``hacktivists'' had found they can be hacked to change
    44       machines, but ``hacktivists'' had found they can be
    42   votes and also emitted radio signals revealing how you voted.
    45       hacked to change votes and also emitted radio signals
       
    46       revealing how you voted.
    43 
    47 
    44 \item Germany conducted pilot studies with e-voting, but in 2007 a law
    48 \item Germany conducted pilot studies with e-voting, but in
    45   suit has reached the highest court and it rejected e-voting on the
    49       2007 a law suit has reached the highest court and it
    46   grounds of not being understandable by the general public.
    50       rejected e-voting on the grounds of not being
       
    51       understandable by the general public.
    47 
    52 
    48 \item UK used optical scan voting systems in a few trail polls, but to
    53 \item UK used optical scan voting systems in a few trail
    49   my knowledge does not use any e-voting in elections.
    54       polls, but to my knowledge does not use any e-voting in
       
    55       elections.
    50       
    56       
    51 \item The US used mechanical machines since the 1930s, later punch
    57 \item The US used mechanical machines since the 1930s, later
    52   cards, now DREs and optical scan voting machines.
    58       punch cards, now DREs and optical scan voting machines.
    53 
    59 
    54 \item Estonia used since 2007 the Internet for national
    60 \item Estonia used since 2007 the Internet for national
    55   elections. There were earlier pilot studies for voting via Internet
    61       elections. There were earlier pilot studies for voting
    56   in other countries.
    62       via Internet in other countries.
    57 
    63 
    58 \item India uses e-voting devices since at least 2003. They used
    64 \item India uses e-voting devices since at least 2003. They
    59   ``keep-it-simple'' machines produced by a government owned company.
    65       used ``keep-it-simple'' machines produced by a
       
    66       government owned company.
    60 
    67 
    61 \item South Africa used software for its tallying in the 1993
    68 \item South Africa used software for its tallying in the 1993
    62   elections (when Nelson Mandela was elected) and found that the
    69       elections (when Nelson Mandela was elected) and found
    63   tallying software was rigged, but they were able to tally manually.
    70       that the tallying software was rigged, but they were
       
    71       able to tally manually. 
    64 \end{itemize}
    72 \end{itemize}
    65 
    73 
    66 
    74 
    67 The reason that e-voting is such a hard problem is that we have
    75 The reason that e-voting is such a hard problem is that we
    68 requirements about the voting process that conflict with each
    76 have requirements about the voting process that conflict with
    69 other. The five main requirements for voting in general are:
    77 each other. The five main requirements for voting in general
       
    78 are:
    70 
    79 
    71 \begin{itemize}
    80 \begin{itemize}
    72 \item {\bf Integrity} 
    81 \item {\bf Integrity} 
    73   \begin{itemize}
    82   \begin{itemize}
    74   \item The outcome of the vote matches with the voters'
    83   \item By this we mean that the outcome of the vote matches
    75         intend.
    84         with the voters' intend. Note that it does not say
    76   \item There might be gigantic sums at stake and need to be defended against.
    85         that every vote should be counted as cast. This might
       
    86         be surprising, but even counting paper ballots will
       
    87         always have an error rate: people after several hours
       
    88         looking at ballots will inevitably miscount votes. But
       
    89         what should be ensured is that the error rate does not
       
    90         change the outcome of the election. Of course if
       
    91         elections continue to be on knives edges we need to
       
    92         ensure that we have a rather small error rate. 
       
    93           
       
    94   \item There might be gigantic sums at stake and need to be
       
    95         defended against. The problem with this is that if
       
    96         the incentives are great and enough resources are
       
    97         available, then maybe it is feasible to mount a DoS
       
    98         attack agains voting server and by bringing the
       
    99         system to its knees, change the outcome of an
       
   100         election.                
    77   \end{itemize}
   101   \end{itemize}
       
   102 
    78 \item {\bf Ballot Secrecy}
   103 \item {\bf Ballot Secrecy}
    79   \begin{itemize}
   104   \begin{itemize}
    80   \item Nobody can find out how you voted.
   105   \item Nobody can find out how you voted. This is to avoid
       
   106         that voters can be coerced to vote in a certain way
       
   107         (for example by relatives, employers etc).
       
   108          
    81   \item (Stronger) Even if you try, you cannot prove how you
   109   \item (Stronger) Even if you try, you cannot prove how you
    82     voted. The reason is that you want to avoid vote selling as has
   110         voted. The reason is that you want to avoid vote
    83     been tried, for example, by a few jokers in the recent 
   111         coercion but also vote selling. That this is a problem
    84     Scottish referendum.    
   112         is proved by the fact that some jokers in the recent
       
   113         Scottish referendum tried to make money out of their
       
   114         vote. 
    85   \end{itemize}
   115   \end{itemize}
       
   116 
    86 \item {\bf Voter Authentication}
   117 \item {\bf Voter Authentication}
    87   \begin{itemize}
   118   \begin{itemize}
    88   \item Only authorised voters can vote up to the permitted number of votes
   119   \item Only authorised voters can vote up to the permitted
    89     (in order to avoid the ``vote early, vote often'').
   120         number of votes (in order to avoid the ``vote early,
       
   121         vote often'').
    90   \end{itemize}
   122   \end{itemize}
       
   123   
    91 \item {\bf Enfranchisement}
   124 \item {\bf Enfranchisement}
    92   \begin{itemize}
   125   \begin{itemize}
    93   \item Authorised voters should have the opportunity to vote.
   126   \item Authorised voters should have the opportunity to vote.
       
   127         This can, for example, be a problem if you make the
       
   128         authorisation dependent on an ID card, say a
       
   129         driving license: then everybody who does not have a
       
   130         license cannot vote. While this sounds an innocent
       
   131         requirement, in fact some parts of the population 
       
   132         for one reason or the other just do not have 
       
   133         driving licenses. They are now excluded. Also if
       
   134         you insist on paper ballots you have to have special
       
   135         provisions for them.  
    94   \end{itemize}
   136   \end{itemize}
       
   137   
    95 \item {\bf Availability}
   138 \item {\bf Availability}
    96   \begin{itemize}
   139   \begin{itemize}
    97   \item The voting system should accept all authorised votes and produce results in a timely manner.
   140   \item The voting system should accept all authorised votes
    98   \end{itemize}
   141         and produce results in a timely manner. If you move
       
   142         an election online, you have to guard agains DoS 
       
   143         attacks.
       
   144    \end{itemize}
    99 \end{itemize}
   145 \end{itemize}
       
   146 
       
   147 \noindent While these requirements seem natural, the problem 
       
   148 is that they often clash with each other. For example
       
   149 
       
   150 \begin{center}
       
   151 integrity vs.~ballot secrecy\\
       
   152 authentication vs.~enfranchisement
       
   153 \end{center}
       
   154 
       
   155 \noindent If we had ballots with complete voter
       
   156 identification, then we can improve integrity because we can
       
   157 trace back the votes to the voters. This would be good when
       
   158 verifying the results. But such an identification would
       
   159 violate ballot secrecy (you can prove to somebody else how you
       
   160 voted). In contrast if we remove all identification for
       
   161 ensuring ballot secrecy, then we have to ensure that no
       
   162 ``vote-stuffing'' occurs.
       
   163 
       
   164 Similarly, if we improve authentication, \ldots
   100 
   165 
   101 To tackle the problem of e-voting, we must first have a look
   166 To tackle the problem of e-voting, we must first have a look
   102 into the history of voting and how paper-based ballots 
   167 into the history of voting and how paper-based ballots 
   103 evolved. We know for sure that elections were held in Athens
   168 evolved. We know for sure that elections were held in Athens
   104 as early as 600 BC, but might even date to the time of
   169 as early as 600 BC, but might even date to the time of