Analyzing The Trade-Off between Anonymity and Verifiability in Electronic ‎Voting Protocols

  • Authors

    • Teguh Nurhadi Suharsono Faculty od Engineering, Universitas Sangga Buana, Bandung, Indonesia
    • Deshinta Arrova Dewi Faculty of Data Science and Information Technology, INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia and Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Shinawatra University, Thailand
    • Heri Purwanto Faculty od Engineering, Universitas Sangga Buana, Bandung, Indonesia
    • Tri Basuki Kurniawan Magister Program, Universitas Bina Darma, Palembang, Indonesia
    • Azizul Azhar Ramli Fakulti Sains Komputer Dan Teknologi Maklumat, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Parit Raja, Batu ‎Pahat 86400, Malaysia
    • Lee Pak Ting Harvey Faculty of Business and Communication, INTI International University, Malaysia
    https://doi.org/10.14419/v717s146

    Received date: July 4, 2025

    Accepted date: August 5, 2025

    Published date: October 25, 2025

  • Anonymity; E-Voting Protocol; Process Innovation; Transparent Governance; Verifiability

  • Abstract

    E-voting, also known as electronic voting, is the practice of casting a ballot or voting using digital technology. ‎Verifiability and anonymity are two important considerations in this situation. The study aims to find the optimal balance between these two crucial concepts, specifically the method of value range area (trade-off) between anonymity and verifiability in e-voting protocols. High levels of e-voting verifiability and anonymity are combined in this value range. ‎The result should be an electronic voting system that protects voters' rights to privacy while promoting confidence in ‎and transparency surrounding election outcomes. This study evaluated several current e-voting protocols to see which ‎ones came closest to the ideal harmony between anonymity and verifiability, utilizing verifiability calculation metrics ‎and anonymity calculation metrics. The balancing area was divided into 4 areas in this investigation. The study's area ‎of balance between verifiability and anonymity can demonstrate that the e-voting protocol is in the ideal category ‎region for such a protocol. After examining numerous e-voting procedures, some issues have finally been identified. ‎The e-voting protocol is ideal because Area 2 is the area where anonymity and verifiability have ideal degree values. ‎E-voting enhancement verifiability protocols are examples of protocols that achieve the perfect balance between ‎anonymity and verifiability‎.

  • References

    1. T. N. Suharsono, D. Anggraini, Kuspriyanto, B. Rahardjo, and Gunawan, “Implementation of Simple Verifiability Metric to Measure the Degree of Verifiability of E-Voting Protocol,” 2020 14th International Conference on Telecommunication Systems, Services, and Applications (TSSA, pp. 1–3, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1109/TSSA51342.2020.9310915.
    2. M. K. Reiter and A. D. Rubin, “Crowds,” ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 66–92, 1998, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/290163.290168.
    3. M. Chaieb, S. Yousfi, P. Lafourcade, and R. Robbana, “Verify-Your-Vote: A Verifiable Blockchain-Based Online Voting Protocol,” Information Systems, pp. 16–30, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11395-7_2.
    4. M. Li, X. Luo, W. Sun, J. Li, and K. Xue, “AvecVoting: Anonymous and Verifiable E-voting with Untrustworthy Counters on Blockchain,” ICC 2022 - IEEE International Conference on Communications, May 2022, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICC45855.2022.9838840.
    5. M. B. Verwer, I. Dionysiou, and H. Gjermundrød, “TrustedEVoting (TeV) a Secure, Anonymous and Verifiable Blockchain-Based e-Voting Framework,” Communications in Computer and Information Science, pp. 129–143, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37545-4_9.
    6. M. N. Saqib et al., “Anonymous and formally verified dual signature based online e-voting protocol,” Cluster Computing, vol. 22, no. S1, pp. 1703–1716, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-018-2162-7.
    7. M. Sallal, Ruairi de Frein, and A. Malik, “PVPBC: Privacy- and Verifiability-Preserving E-Voting Based on Permissioned Blockchain,” vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 121–121, Mar. 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15040121.
    8. Y. Liu and Q. Zhao, “E-voting scheme using secret sharing and K-anonymity,” World Wide Web, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1657–1667, Apr. 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11280-018-0575-0.
    9. M. Kumar, S. Chand, and C. P. Katti, “A Secure End-to-End Verifiable Internet-Voting System Using Identity-Based Blind Signature,” IEEE Sys-tems Journal, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 2032–2041, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2019.2940474.
    10. H. Ge et al., “Koinonia,” Proceedings of the 35th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, pp. 270–285, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1145/3359789.3359804.
    11. R. Küsters, J. Liedtke, J. Müller, D. Rausch, and A. Vogt, “Ordinos: A Verifiable Tally-Hiding E-Voting System,” IEEE Xplore, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSP48549.2020.00022.
    12. T. N. Suharsono, N. Gunawan, and Rini Nuraini Sukmana, “e-Voting Protocol Modelling To Improve Verifiability Requirements,” pp. 1–8, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1109/TSSA52866.2021.9768253.
    13. H. Almutairi, A. Alqahtani, Z. S. Jabbar, J. F. Tawfeq, A. D. Radhi, and Poh Soon JosephNg, “Design of an optimized energy-efficient routing pro-tocol for reliable wireless body area networks,” International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems/International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 4386–4386, 2024, https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v14i4.pp4386-4393.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Suharsono, T. N. ., Dewi , D. A. ., Purwanto , H. ., Kurniawan , T. B. ., Ramli , A. A. ., & Harvey, L. P. T. . (2025). Analyzing The Trade-Off between Anonymity and Verifiability in Electronic ‎Voting Protocols. International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 14(6), 525-531. https://doi.org/10.14419/v717s146