Blockchain technologies power cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. They are a decentralized, transparent technology that has the potential to transform many industries, a significant one being democratic elections. Over the last few years, there have been many accusations from politicians about election Interference, and recently, Romania annulled a vote due to suspected interference in the first round of voting for their elections. (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4x2epppego)
Unfortunately, blockchain technologies have become somewhat of a gimmick with people trying to make quick and easy money due to highly volatile markets. This often makes people overlook blockchain and associate it with meme coins and other somewhat useless implementations of blockchain.
Elections are not transparent processes; these typically work by collecting votes on a ballot, counting them, and then publishing the results. However, it is not possible to see what is happening behind the scenes. This is where blockchain technologies could be used to ensure that the entire process is transparent and that every vote can be anonymously tracked.
What is Blockchain Technology?
Blockchain is a decentralized technology that provides accountability and transparency over each record that is published. There is no single computer or system that controls a blockchain; instead, it operates over a network of computers (known as nodes), and each of these has an entire copy of the blockchain and its transactions. This means it is not possible to “hack” into the main computer and change records, making it highly resistant to tampering. Traditional systems generally rely on a centralized, transactional database, which not only permits anyone with access to modify records but also creates a somewhat “single point of failure”. Blockchains, with their distributed node systems, eliminate this issue, as every node in the network independently verifies and stores the data, ensuring that tampering with one copy does not alter the overall ledger.
Transactions, or records, on the blockchain are grouped into blocks. Each of these blocks contains a unique identifier known as a hash. A hash is a cryptographic representation of data that cannot be reversed without knowing the original value. These are used for securely storing passwords and ensuring file integrity, among other things. For example, the following data is a SHA256 (Secure Hashing Algorithm) hash of the word ‘password’. This cannot be reversed; the only way to produce this hash is to know the exact value and run it through the same hashing algorithm:
5e884898da28047151d0e56f8dc6292773603d0d6aabbdd62a11ef721d1542d8
As well as having its own unique hash, the block also contains the hash of the previous block, or transaction, forming a chain. This means that altering one block would require changing all of the previous blocks as well, which is seemingly impossible.
As stated above, multiple participants maintain copies of the blockchain. A consensus mechanism is a protocol that helps the network achieve agreement on a single version of the truth (i.e., which transactions are valid and should be added to the blockchain). This process prevents conflicts and ensures the integrity and security of the blockchain.
This means that once a transaction is recorded on the blockchain, it is likely not possible to change it. Modifying an existing transaction would require an attacker to control the majority of nodes for that specific blockchain, which could potentially be overcome by creating a custom network that was controlled by a variety of trusted parties.
A blockchain is transparent, meaning that every single transaction or record can be viewed by anyone; however, it is encrypted to protect sensitive data so a transaction does not give away personal data about the person who made it. For example, the following link can be used to view Bitcoin transactions:
Blockchain and Voting: A Match Made for Democracy
Imagine an electoral system where every registered voter receives a single, unique token upon registration. This token serves as their virtual ballot, ensuring that each individual can vote only once. When the token is used to cast a vote, it is recorded on a blockchain—a public ledger that maintains an immutable record of all transactions. Here’s how such a system could address existing vulnerabilities:
Transparency
Blockchain ensures that every vote is publicly recorded and verifiable. While the voter’s identity remains confidential, the act of voting is visible to all, eliminating concerns about vote tampering or double voting.
Immutability
Once a vote is cast and recorded on the blockchain, it cannot be altered or deleted. This feature makes it impossible for malicious actors to manipulate results post-election.
Decentralization
Unlike traditional voting systems that rely on centralized databases susceptible to hacking, a blockchain-based system distributes data across a network of nodes. This decentralization makes unauthorized access and manipulation far more challenging.
Auditability
Blockchain provides a permanent and accessible record of votes, enabling third parties to audit results independently without compromising voter anonymity.
Challenges to Implementation
While the potential benefits are compelling, implementing blockchain-based voting systems isn’t without challenges.
It is difficult to ensure accessibility for all voters, especially those without reliable internet access or technical literacy. Robust systems would need to be created to verify voter identities securely while protecting their privacy. Current blockchain networks may struggle to handle the volume of transactions required for large-scale elections so it would likely need a custom blockchain. Although blockchain is secure by design, vulnerabilities could arise if the supporting infrastructure (e.g., voter registration systems) is compromised.
What do the critics say?
The idea of using blockchain technologies for voting is not a new one; there are many critics of the technology being used this way – these are often government entities. For example, the following article was created by the US Vote Foundation in an effort to show why blockchain technology cannot be used for voting.
The following whitepaper was created by MIT to describe why they do not believe that blockchain-based voting should be implemented.
https://dci.mit.edu/voting-on-the-blockchain
Park, S., Specter, M., Narula, N., & Rivest, R. L. (2021). Going from bad to worse: From internet voting to blockchain voting. Journal of
A much shorter read that states a lot of the arguments can be found here:
https://www.usvotefoundation.org/blockchain-voting-is-not-a-security-strategy
The arguments can be summarized as follows:
Transparency: There are arguments surrounding blockchain’s transparency risks due to the exposure of people’s votes. This concern is unfounded as it is possible to use the blockchain to implement zero-knowledge proofs or use cryptographic techniques that ensure votes are anonymous. At the same time, it would be possible to issue receipts or hashes to the voter that can be used to verify their ballot. This would not necessarily be an easy challenge but it could be overcome. These solutions would be highly complex and are not yet widely implemented in large-scale systems.
Additionally, modern blockchain systems can anonymize voter data effectively without compromising transparency. Furthermore, the anonymized traceability of using the blockchain for voting is exactly why it can prevent election interference. Each vote can be traced by anyone. Therefore, a ballot counter is not able to purposefully or accidentally count votes incorrectly.
Immutability: There is a claim that blockchain does not address vulnerabilities on personal devices, known as upstream vulnerabilities. This relates to malware being installed on devices. This overlooks potential solutions. Perhaps we could go into a booth, scan a QR code, and cast our vote to the blockchain, or use a government-provided device.
Furthermore, by the design of blockchain, once a vote is recorded, it cannot be altered which is a significant improvement over our current systems. This is because traditional systems rely on humans counting the votes; these humans can be bribed, blackmailed, or may even manipulate votes for their political views. This, again, would come with its own complications but it would be possible to implement. For example, “51% Attacks” are where one entity or group of entities controls over 51% of the blockchain network; if this were to occur, it would be possible to rewrite the blockchain. There would need to be a custom blockchain and software created to handle voting, which would require significant effort. This can potentially be mitigated by using permissioned blockchains and proof-of-stake techniques.
Decentralization: Concerns about accountability in decentralized systems may overlook the value that it provides. Blockchain networks can include verified, trusted nodes operated by trusted organizations. Decentralization reduces the risks of a single point of failure because there is an entire blockchain. This does come with additional considerations, specifically around the nodes but these should be possible to overcome by ensuring that the nodes are controlled by a variety of trusted sources. Perhaps these nodes could be controlled by multiple different agencies across government and security. It would be important to ensure that a single entity does not control 51% of the nodes, which is why it would need to be implemented across multiple different government departments.
Auditability: Critics claim that blockchain lacks a paper trail for verification. However, voters can be issued digital receipts or codes that allow them to verify their vote on the blockchain. These receipts or codes would be cryptographic hashes to check their vote on the blockchain, which would be unique to each voter. These codes ensure transparency without revealing voter identities, enabling robust auditing processes. Gaining the trust of the public would also be a significant challenge; it often takes a long time for the public to adopt new technologies.
West Virginia Blockchain Voting Trial (2018)
In 2018, West Virginia trialled a blockchain voting system from the company voatz to allow overseas voters and military personnal to cast their votes securely. The trial was a success, with no claims that the technology was tampered with or failed to facilitate a secure vote. Voters downloaded an app and used biometric data to prove their identities and encryption was used to secure voter data. The votes were recorded on a blockchain ledger to ensure transparency and immutability.However, MIT performed analysis of the voatz system and found that weak protocols were beinig used that could potentially leak data during transmission. This sparked critics to scrutinies the blockchain based voting system. The application relied on centralized servers which could also potentially be attacked.
Implementing a new system would require a significant amount of security testing, where weak protocols and server-side attacks could be identified and fixed before launching to the public. The voatz system was also scrutinized for not releasing their source code.
Implementing Blockchain Voting Successfully
There are several ways that blockchain could be successfully implemented, but the primary, high-level steps have been given below:
- Secure Infrastructure: The government can create secure voting devices in the place of ballot voting booths.
- Transparent Verification: Digital receipts or tokens can be issued to voters so they can confirm their vote once it has been cast. These will be unique and only given to the voter.
- Incremental Adoption: Blockchain voting should start in small, local elections before being made countrywide.
- Educating Stakeholders: Ensure that voters, governments, and auditors understand the benefits that blockchain can bring to voting.
Conclusion
Blockchain can potentially be used to improve the voting process by enhancing trust, security, and transparency. This transformation does require overcoming significant challenges; however, through collaboration between technologists, governments, and the public, it may be possible to harness blockchain technologies to make more secure and transparent elections.
