The Pret a Voter election scheme allows voters to confirm that their vote is accurately counted whilst maintaining ballot secrecy. Initial analysis indicates that the scheme is highly trustworthy, due to the high degree of transparency and auditability. However, the assurance arguments are subtle and involve some understanding of the role of cryptography. As a result, there remain challenges regarding public understanding and trust. It is essential that a voting system be not only trustworthy but also widely trusted. In this note, I propose a simple mechanism to generate a conventional paper audit trail that can be invoked should the outcome of the cryptographic count be called into question. It is hoped that having such a familiar mechanism as a safety net will encourage public confidence. Care has to be taken to ensure that the mechanism does not undermine the carefully crafted integrity and privacy assurances of the original scheme. © 2007 University of Newcastle upon Tyne. Printed and published by the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Computing Science, Claremont Tower, Claremont Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, England. Bibliographical details
[1]
Rebecca T. Mercuri.
A better ballot box
,
2002
.
[2]
C. Andrew Ne,et al.
Practical high certainty intent verification for encrypted votes
,
2004
.
[3]
Dan S. Wallach,et al.
Analysis of an electronic voting system
,
2004,
IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2004. Proceedings. 2004.
[4]
Sharon B. Cohen.
Auditing Technology for Electronic Voting Machines
,
2005
.
[5]
David Chaum,et al.
A Practical Voter-Verifiable Election Scheme
,
2005,
ESORICS.
[6]
Peter Ryan.
Verified Encrypted Paper Audit Trails
,
2006
.
[7]
Peter Y. A. Ryan,et al.
Putting the Human Back in Voting Protocols
,
2009,
Security Protocols Workshop.
[8]
Peter Y. A. Ryan,et al.
Prêt à Voter with Re-encryption Mixes
,
2006,
ESORICS.
[9]
R. Rivest.
The ThreeBallot Voting System
,
2006
.
[10]
Brian Randell,et al.
Voting Technologies and Trust
,
2006,
IEEE Security & Privacy.