Elections are an important corner stone of democratic processes. In addition to publishing the final result (e.g., the overall winner), elections typically publish the full tally consisting of all (aggregated) individual votes. This causes several issues, including loss of privacy for both voters and election candidates as well as so-called Italian attacks that allow for easily coercing voters.

Modern electronic voting systems (e-voting systems) are designed to provide not only vote privacy but also (end-to-end) verifiability. Several verifiable e-voting systems have been proposed in the literature, with Helios being one of the most prominent ones. Almost all such systems, however, reveal not just the voting result but also the full tally, consisting of the exact number of votes per candidate or even all single votes. There are several situations where this is undesirable. For example, in elections with only a few voters (e.g., boardroom or jury votings), revealing the complete tally leads to a low privacy level, possibly deterring voters from voting for their actual preference. In other cases, revealing the complete tally might unnecessarily embarrass some candidates. Often, the voting result merely consists of a single winner or a ranking of candidates, so revealing only this information but not the complete tally is sufficient. This property is called tally-hiding and it offers completely new options for e-voting. In this paper, we propose the first provably secure end-to-end verifiable tally-hiding e-voting system, called Ordinos. We instantiated our system with suitable cryptographic primitives, including an MPC protocol for greater-than tests, implemented the system, and evaluated its performance, demonstrating its practicality. Moreover, our work provides a deeper understanding of tally-hiding in general, in particular in how far tally-hiding affects the levels of privacy and verifiability of e-voting systems.

Mix nets with randomized partial checking (RPC mix nets) have been introduced by Jakobsson, Juels, and Rivest as particularly simple and efficient verifiable mix nets. These mix nets have been used in several implementations of prominent e-voting systems to provide vote privacy and verifiability. In RPC mix nets, higher efficiency is traded for a lower level of privacy and verifiability. However, these mix nets have never undergone a rigorous formal analysis. Recently, Kahazei and Wikstroem even pointed out several severe problems in the original proposal and in implementations of RPC mix nets in e-voting systems, both for so-called re-encryption and Chaumian RPC mix nets. While Kahazei and Wikstroem proposed several fixes, the security status of Chaumian RPC mix nets (with the fixes applied) has been left open, re-encryption RPC mix nets, as they suggest, should not be used at all. In this paper, we provide the first formal security analysis of Chaumian RPC mix nets. We propose security definitions that allow one to measure the level of privacy and verifiability RPC mix nets offer, and then based on these definitions, carry out a rigorous analysis. Altogether, our results show that these mix nets provide a reasonable level of privacy and verifiability, and that they are still an interesting option for the use in e-voting systems.

Verifiability is a central property of modern e-voting systems. Intuitively, verifiability means that voters can check that their votes were actually counted and that the published result of the election is correct, even if the voting machines/authorities are (partially) untrusted. In this paper, we raise awareness of a simple attack, which we call a clash attack, on the verifiability of e-voting systems. The main idea behind this attack is that voting machines manage to provide different voters with the same receipt. As a result, the voting authorities can safely replace ballots by new ballots, and by this, manipulate the election without being detected. This attack does not seem to have attracted much attention in the literature. Even though the attack is quite simple, we show that, under reasonable trust assumptions, it applies to several e-voting systems that have been designed to provide verifiability. In particular, we show that it applies to the prominent Three Ballot and VAV voting systems as well as to two e-voting systems that have been deployed in real elections: the Wombat Voting system and a variant of the Helios voting system. We discuss countermeasures for each of these systems and for (various variants of) Helios provide a formal analysis based on a rigorous definition of verifiability. More precisely, our analysis of Helios is with respect to the more general and in the area of e-voting often overlooked notion of accountability.

Coercion resistance is one of the most important and intricate security requirements for voting protocols. Several definitions of coercion resistance have been proposed in the literature, both in cryptographic settings and more abstract, symbolic models. However, unlike symbolic approaches, only ve ry few voting protocols have been rigorously analyzed within the cryptographic setting. A major obstacle is that existing cryptographic definitions of coercion resistance tend to be complex and limited in scope: they are often tailored to specific classes of protocols or are too demanding. In this paper, we therefore present a simple and intuitive cryptographic definition of coercion resistance, in the style of game-based definitions. This definition allows us to precisely measure the level of coercion resistance a protocol provides. As the main technical contribution of this paper, we apply our definition to two voting systems, namely, the Bingo voting system and ThreeBallot. The results we obtain are out of the scope of existing approaches. We show that the Bingo voting system provides the same level of coercion resistance as an ideal voting system. We also precisely measure the degradation of the level of coercion resistance of the ThreeBallot voting system when the so-called short ballot assumption is not met and show that the level of coercion resistance this system provides is significantly lower than that of an ideal system even in the case of short ballots.

In this paper, we present new insights into central properties of voting systems, namely verifiability, privacy, and coercion-resistance. We demonstrate that the combination of the two forms of verifiability considered in the literature -- individual and universal verifiability -- are, unlike commonly believed, insufficient to guarantee overall verifiability. We also demonstrate that the relationship between coercion-resistance and privacy is more subtle than suggested in the literature. Our findings are partly based on a case study of prominent voting systems, Three Ballot and VAV, for which, among others, we show that, unlike commonly believed, they do not provide any reasonable level of verifiability, even though they satisfy individual and universal verifiability. Also, we show that the original variants of Three Ballot and VAV provide a better level of coercion-resistance than of privacy.

Many cryptographic tasks and protocols, such as non-repudiation, contract-signing, voting, auction, identity-based encryption, and certain forms of secure multi-party computation, involve the use of (semi-)trusted parties, such as notaries and authorities. It is crucial that such parties can be held accountable in case they misbehave as this is a strong incentive for such parties to follow the protocol. Unfortunately, there does not exist a general and convincing definition of accountability that would allow to assess the level of accountability a protocol provides.

Coercion-resistance is one of the most important and intricate security requirements for voting protocols. Several definitions of coercion-resistance have been proposed in the literature, both in cryptographic settings and more abstract, symbolic models. However, unlike symbolic approaches, only very few voting protocols have been rigorously analyzed within the cryptographic setting. A major obstacle is that existing cryptographic definitions of coercion-resistance tend to be complex and limited in scope: They are often tailored to specific classes of protocols or are too demanding. In this paper, we therefore present a simple and intuitive, yet widely applicable cryptographic definition of coercionresistance, in the style of game-based definitions. This definition allows to precisely measure the level of coercion-resistance a protocol provides. As a proof of concept, we apply our definition to two voting systems, namely, the Bingo voting system and ThreeBallot. The results we obtain are out of the scope of existing approaches. We show that the Bingo voting system provides the same level of coercion-resistance as an ideal voting system. We also precisely measure the degradation of coercion-resistance of ThreeBallot in case the so-called short ballot assumption does not hold and show that the level of coercion-resistance ThreeBallot provides is significantly lower than that of an ideal system, even in case of short ballots.