cryptographic voting protocols a systems perspective.pptVIP

Cryptographic Voting Protocols: A Systems Perspective By Chris Karlof, Naveen Sastry, and David Wagner University of California, Berkely Proceedings of the 14th Usenix Security Symposium held in Baltimore on July 31st-August 5th, 2005 Presenter: Rick Carback 11-16-05 Overview Selection Criteria Motivation Results New and Significant Goals of Secure Voting Systems Neff’s Protocol Attacks and Mitigations Subliminal Channels Human Unreliability Denial of Service Secure Voting Protocol Implementation Future Work Conclusions Paper Selection Criteria Chris Karloff and Naveen Sastry are both 5th year graduate students. David Wagner DIMACS Special Focus on Security Organizing committee member ACM CCS 2004 Program committee member USENIX Security 2006 Program committee member IEEE Security Privacy 2006 Program committee member Motivation Chose protocols by Neff and Chaum because they are revolutionary Viewed Neff and Chaum protocols as part of a complete voting system What are the weaknesses of these schemes in complete systems if implemented? Can these ideas work in the real world? Results New and Significant Enumerates E-Voting goals Analysis of Cryptographic Protocols in the larger systems context Exposes weaknesses in implementation of cryptographic protocols Provides countermeasures for these weaknesses Identified new challenges and open problems in electronic voting systems. Goals of Secure Voting Systems Cast-as-Intended Counted-as-Cast Verifiability One voter, One vote Coercion Resistance Privacy Neff’s Scheme Distributed Key Generation Protocol (Similar to Chaums Scheme) DRE constructs a VC, a matrix of BMPs. Each row represents one candidate. BMPs are all (0, 0) or (1, 1) for the chosen candidate and (0, 1) or (1, 0) for the others. Neff’s Scheme (cont.) DRE picks a pledge bit for each BMP for the chosen candidate, voter can verify by picking a side for each one. OVC is created with this information. Voter checks that challenge is correct on bulletin board. Vot