Vulnerability analysis of three remote voting methods

TL;DR

This paper compares vulnerabilities of postal, internet, and hybrid remote voting methods, highlighting how automation and digitalization shift from visible to more widespread but less apparent security risks.

Contribution

It provides a systematic vulnerability analysis of three remote voting methods, considering multiple security criteria and quantifying vulnerabilities by size, visibility, and difficulty.

Findings

Automation increases invisible vulnerabilities

Digitalization shifts vulnerabilities from visible to widespread

Hybrid voting has unique security trade-offs

Abstract

This article analyses three methods of remote voting in an uncontrolled environment: postal voting, internet voting and hybrid voting. It breaks down the voting process into different stages and compares their vulnerabilities considering criteria that must be respected in any democratic vote: confidentiality, anonymity, transparency, vote unicity and authenticity. Whether for safety or reliability, each vulnerability is quantified by three parameters: size, visibility and difficulty to achieve. The study concludes that the automatisation of treatments combined with the dematerialisation of the objects used during an election tends to substitute visible vulnerabilities of a lesser magnitude by invisible and widespread vulnerabilities.