Published: August 9, 2010
Author(s)
Stefan Popoveniuc, John Kelsey, Andrew Regenscheid, Poorvi Vora
Conference
Name: 2010 Electronic Voting Technology Workshop/ Workshop on Trustworthy Elections (EVT/WOTE '10)
Dates: 08/09/2010 - 08/10/2010
Location: Washington, DC, United States
Citation: Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Electronic Voting Technology/Workshop on Trustworthy Elections (EVT/WOTE '10), pp. 1-16
The term "end-to-end verifiability" has been used over the past several years to describe multiple voting system proposals. The term has, however, never been formally defined. As a result, its meaning tends to change from voting system to voting system. We propose a definition for end-to-end verifiability of public elections based on performance requirements, as opposed to design requirements. We suggest a set of properties that collectively define the term. The properties help detect some of the possible problems that may influence the integrity of the election outcome.
The term "end-to-end verifiability" has been used over the past several years to describe multiple voting system proposals. The term has, however, never been formally defined. As a result, its meaning tends to change from voting system to voting system. We propose a definition for end-to-end...
See full abstract
The term "end-to-end verifiability" has been used over the past several years to describe multiple voting system proposals. The term has, however, never been formally defined. As a result, its meaning tends to change from voting system to voting system. We propose a definition for end-to-end verifiability of public elections based on performance requirements, as opposed to design requirements. We suggest a set of properties that collectively define the term. The properties help detect some of the possible problems that may influence the integrity of the election outcome.
Hide full abstract
Keywords
cryptography; end-to-end voting system; voting; voting system
Control Families
None selected
