CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

In contemporary society, electronic voting (e-voting) is prevalent, especially in

decisions of financial or political significance where ensuring the integrity of the
verdict becomes challenging. The fundamental requisites for such processes are
accuracy, security, and privacy. Secure e-voting, a form of multi-party
computation, necessitates a secure environment for individuals to make decisions,
whether publicly disclosed or kept private. Traditional e-voting methods often rely
on a trustworthy public bulletin board to provide a consistent view to all voters, yet
the election administrator must demonstrate the complete trustworthiness of this
board.

Considering the need for trust, some propose leveraging blockchain technology as
a decentralized and transparent bulletin board. Blockchain, functioning as a
decentralized database, introduces innovative tools for developing trustless and
decentralized systems. Unlike traditional systems, blockchain lacks a centralized
coordinator, with each node storing data blocks locally. Originally designed for
secure financial transactions, blockchain's applications have expanded to diverse
fields like the Internet of Things, carbon dating, and healthcare.

The advent of Ethereum marked a pivotal moment in blockchain technology,

introducing a Turing complete programming language and enabling the use of
smart contracts on its network. This versatility has led researchers to explore the
integration of blockchain into various domains, including the field of voting
systems.
In this context, we propose a blockchain-based decentralized trustless e-voting
system. Unlike merely substituting blockchain for a bulletin board, our approach
involves a decentralized blockchain within a decentralized system. The trustless
nature of our system means that voters do not rely on a single election
administrator; instead, all voters share an equal level of trust. The correctness of
the system is guaranteed by the entire protocol, and voters receive cryptographic
assurance that their privacy is preserved.

Our technique employs threshold encryption, eliminating the need for a trusted
third party to ensure that election results cannot be tallied before the end of the
election. The public and secret key pair setup is part of the encryption process,
with the public key shared among all parties, while the secret key remains separate
and inaccessible until key reconstruction, requiring the contribution of at least n
individuals (Pathak et al., 2021).

Blockchain, defined as a growing collection of blocks with cryptographic

connections, provides a secure foundation for data. In the realm of voting, scholars
are exploring its transitional era, aiming to capitalize on characteristics like
transparency, secrecy, and non-repudiation. The use of blockchain technology for
electronic voting applications has gained significant attention in recent efforts to
enhance the security and integrity of elections (Jafar et al., 2021).

1.1 Background of Study

The prominence of blockchain technology is often associated with the

groundbreaking initiatives of Bitcoin and Ethereum. When contemplating
blockchain, one's thoughts typically gravitate towards cryptocurrency and smart
contracts. Bitcoin pioneered the integration of the blockchain data structure, while
Ethereum furthered the concept with the introduction of smart contracts. Coined by
Nick Szabo in the 1990s, smart contracts are defined as "a set of digital promises,
complete with protocols for parties to fulfill these commitments" (Szabo, 1997).
These contracts, deployed on the Ethereum network, are accessible to all
participants, with their outcomes validated through both consensus mechanisms
and individual network members (Wood, 2014).

The blockchain has evolved into a suite of technologies encompassing the

blockchain data format, distributed consensus mechanisms, public key
cryptography, and smart contracts. Each of these components is explored in detail
below. The blockchain operates as a peer-to-peer network, constructing a chain of
blocks. In Figure 1, each block in the blockchain is characterized by a
cryptographic hash and a timestamp, sequentially linked to the preceding block.

Within a block, the Merkle tree block header encompasses multiple transactions.
Cryptography, a secure networking technique combining computer science and
mathematics, ensures the confidentiality of data. It facilitates the secure
transmission of encrypted and decrypted data across an unsecured network.
 Fig 1: Blockchain Structure (Jafar..,Aziz., & Shukur., 2021)

The primary objective of adopting such a data structure is to establish

immutability. Any alteration to a piece of data necessitates the computation of the
hash of the block containing that data, along with the hashes of all subsequent
blocks (Lejun et al., 2021). To maintain the integrity of all data, only the hash of
the latest block needs to be recalculated. Data within blocks in blockchain systems
is generated during their creation from all validated transactions, ensuring that no
one can surreptitiously insert, delete, or modify transactions in a previously
validated block without detection. The "genesis block," or the inaugural zero-
block, typically includes crucial network parameters, such as the original set of
validators responsible for block issuance.

1.1.1 Public Key Cryptography

Public key cryptography finds significant applications in blockchain, serving two

primary purposes:
 1. Identification of Requester: In the blockchain ecosystem, validators must
possess their keypairs, utilized for signing consensus messages. Moreover,
all incoming transactions, signifying requests to modify blockchain data,
must be signed. This ensures a transparent and secure verification process,
enhancing the integrity of the blockchain.

2. Transaction Anonymity: Anonymity in the context of blockchain implies

that individuals interested in using cryptocurrencies can generate a random
keypair, subsequently controlling a wallet associated with a public key
(Froomkin, 2016). The blockchain framework guarantees that only the
owner of the keypair possesses access to the funds within the wallet—a
verifiable and secure property.

However, it's important to note that while blockchain technology can uphold the
anonymity of cryptocurrency transactions, challenges arise in scenarios such as
online voting. While ballots must be accepted anonymously, ensuring that they
originate only from eligible voters, the blockchain alone may not fully address the
issue of voter confidentiality. Additional measures may be necessary to ensure a
comprehensive solution in the context of online voting systems.

1.1.2 Smart Contracts

Smart contracts have injected vitality into blockchain technologies, ushering in

advancements across various domains. Essentially, a smart contract is a piece of
code that encapsulates logic. However, when coupled with the immutability
inherent in a blockchain data structure and the consensus among network
participants, it transforms into an unconditionally trusted third party (Mohanta,
Jena, Panda, & Sobhanayak, 2019). Once written, a smart contract remains
unalterable, and every stage must undergo scrutiny by all network members. The
compelling aspect of smart contracts lies in their transparency—anyone capable of
setting up a blockchain node can independently verify their outcomes.

1.2 Problem Statement

The existing voting system employed in the Nigerian electoral process faces
notable inefficiencies. These inefficiencies are evident in several aspects:

1. Sluggish Voter Registration: The current system experiences delays in the

voter registration process, contributing to inefficiencies in the overall
electoral setup.

2. Time-Consuming Results Compilation: The traditional method of result

gathering is time-intensive and susceptible to manipulation, compromising
the accuracy and integrity of election outcomes.

3. Inaccessible Election Venues: The difficulty in accessing election venues,

exacerbated by considerable distances voters must traverse to reach their
registered locations, has led to increased voter apathy and disengagement
from the electoral process.

1.3 Aim and Objectives

In the pursuit of creating an effective system to address the identified challenges in

the problem statement, the project outlines the following aim and objectives:

1.3.1 Aim
The primary aim of this project is to develop a user-friendly and efficient prototype
of an E-voting system. This system will be based on a digital application that
ensures enhanced security and protection through the implementation of
blockchain technology.

1.3.2 Objectives

The specific objectives of the project include:

1. Conduct a Comprehensive Study: Undertake an in-depth examination of

election processes, specifically focusing on the intricacies of the voting
system.

2. Design and Develop Software Platform: Create a software platform that

encompasses functionalities for voter registration, election voting, real-time
collation of election results, monitoring, and provides remote access for
voters.

3. Implement Custom Blockchain Algorithm: Incorporate a custom

blockchain algorithm into the software platform, leveraging SHA-256
encryption to ensure a robust and secure voting environment.

4. Create Administration Dashboard: Design and develop an administration

dashboard tailored for election administrators, facilitating effective
management and oversight of the electoral process.

5. Conduct Simulations and Comparative Analysis: Execute simulations to

evaluate and compare the results of the designed E-voting system with other
existing voting systems. This comparative analysis aims to assess the
efficacy and efficiency of the proposed solution.
1.4 Significance of the Project

Amid the swift evolution of computer technology across various operational

domains and its integration with information management, the e-voting system
proposed in this project holds considerable significance. The significance can be
delineated as follows:

1. University Benefits: The implementation of an e-voting system within the

university context offers a streamlined and equitable approach to conducting
elections across various levels, including faculties, departments, and
university-wide elections. The system aims to alleviate the stress associated
with traditional voting methods, fostering a more efficient and fair electoral
process.

2. Societal Impact, Particularly in Nigeria: At a broader societal level,

particularly in the context of Nigeria, the project's significance is
underscored by its potential to offer the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC) a cost-effective means to conduct elections. By
leveraging an e-voting system, the electoral process can be rendered more
efficient and fair, contributing to the democratic ideals of the nation.

1.5 Scope of the Study

The scope of this study encompasses the development and implementation of an E-

voting system based on a digital application with blockchain integration. The focus
will be on creating a prototype that addresses the inefficiencies in the current
voting system within the Nigerian electoral context.

1.6 Limitations of the Study

While the study aims to contribute valuable insights and solutions, certain
limitations are acknowledged:

1. Resource Constraints: The availability of resources, including time and

budget, may impose constraints on the depth and breadth of the study.

2. Technical Challenges: Unforeseen technical challenges during the

development and implementation phases may arise, potentially impacting
the project timeline.

3. Generalizability: The findings and recommendations of the study may have

limitations regarding generalizability to different contexts beyond the
university and Nigerian electoral system.

4. Legislative and Regulatory Considerations: The study may be subject to

legislative and regulatory frameworks that could influence the full-scale
implementation of the proposed e-voting system.

5. Security Concerns: Despite efforts to enhance security through blockchain

technology, the study acknowledges that no system is entirely immune to
cybersecurity threats.

1.7 Definition of Terms

 Blockchain: A distributed and immutable ledger technology, characterized

by its capacity to record transactions in a secure and transparent manner.

 Voting System: A contrivance or platform instituted to collate and tabulate

votes within the precincts of an election.

 Security: The shield against unauthorized access and tampering of data,

engendering an impervious bulwark.
  Transparency: The unobstructed visibility of the voting process, crucial for
the vouchsafing of its integrity.

 Trustworthiness: The underpinning of reliability and credibility that

defines the voting system.

 Prototype: A functional model of the blockchain voting system, engineered

for the purpose of rigorous testing and evaluation.

1.8 Chapter Layout

This research work is organized into five chapters, each chapter gives the
exposition of the fundamental concepts, procedures, ad implementation of the
project.

Chapter one introduces the background of the study with the statement of the
problem, objectives of the project, its significance, scope and constraints while
previous literature in the understudied topic were reviewed in chapter two. Chapter
three focuses on system investigation, system analysis and design. It details with
detailed investigation and analysis of the existing system and problem
identification. It also proposes the new system. Chapter four covers the system
implementation, results and system integration test. Finally the chapter five discuss
the summary, recommendation and the conclusion of the project.

Chapter Two

Literature Review
This chapter presents a review of the literature on the voting system, types of
voting, security using cryptography and other techniques, countries with electronic
voting systems, places where blockchain-based electronic voting systems have
been used, and related works on electronic voting systems.

2.1 Voting System

Voting is a fundamental aspect of any democratic society or environment,

providing a means for the people in that society to choose their leaders and hold
them accountable. The accuracy and integrity of the electoral process are essential
to the legitimacy of the government and the trust of the public. In many countries,
it is established by law for citizens to elect their governing bodies. However, in
many of these countries, the laws governing the electoral process have been
breached numerous times, providing an illegal opportunity for crooked contestants,
with the assistance of corrupt election officers and voters, to win an election.

2.1.1 Types of Voting Systems

Over the years, various types of voting systems have been used in different
countries and regions. Many innovative changes have also been made to strengthen
election systems with the core purpose of reducing various types of election fraud.
Mohammad et al. (2010) and Olowookere and Awode (2014) highlighted various
types of voting systems.

a. Mechanical Lever Voting System

The mechanical voting system is a traditional paper-based voting system
that was widely used in the United States in the 20th century. It is one of the
outdated voting systems and is no longer in use. This system used paper
ballots inserted into a voting machine. The voter would then walk up to the
machine, a curtain would close behind them, and the voter would pull a
 lever to cast their vote. The machine would then record and count the votes.
This system did not rely on electricity and could be manually recounted if
needed.
Additionally, this system had its challenges. It was prone to errors, as votes
could be recorded incorrectly, or paper ballots could get stuck in the
machine. It was expensive to maintain and required a large amount of space
for storage.

b. Paper-Based Voting System (PVS)

The paper-based voting system is a traditional voting system that involves
the use of paper ballots manually counted by election officials. This system
is the most common voting system and has been used for centuries, still
widely used in many countries around the world. All voting documents are
paper-based and generally designed to be read by humans, not machines
(Mohammad et al., 2010). In this system, the list of candidates along with
their respective parties is placed on a ballot paper. Each eligible voter
receives one ballot paper to elect a particular candidate, using a pen or an
inked finger to mark choices on the ballot paper, and then placing the ballot
paper in a box.
This system also has its challenges. It can be time-consuming and prone to
errors, such as mistakes in the counting of the ballots or ballots being lost or
damaged. It also requires a large number of election officials to count the
ballots, which can be very costly.

c. Punch-Card Voting System

The punch-card voting system is a type of paper-based voting system that
involves the use of paper ballots with perforated holes. The voter votes or
 selects their preferred candidates by punching out the corresponding holes
on the ballot. The ballots are then counted by election officials using a
machine that reads the punched-out holes.
This system was widely used in the United States in the 20th century and
was considered relatively efficient and cost-effective (Gelman, 1997).
However, it was prone to errors, such as ballots being punched incorrectly
(Gelman, 1997; U.S Election Assistance Commission, 2018). These errors
led to controversy in the 2000 presidential election, where the outcome was
disputed due to problems with punch-card voting systems in Florida
(Gelman 1997; U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2018). After the year
2000, the popularity of punch-card voting systems in the US decreased
significantly (Lori, 2016).
d. Short Message Service (SMS) Voting System
The short message service (SMS) voting system is an electronic voting
system that has been used in some countries, allowing voters to cast their
votes using their mobile phones via text messages. This system reaches
more voters because many people have mobile phones, and not all have
access to the internet, helping bridge the "digital divide."
This system has been used in various countries worldwide, including
Finland and the United Kingdom (Doleac & Stein, 2015). Although it
increases accessibility and convenience for voters, it has faced criticism for
its lack of security and transparency, as it is vulnerable to hacking and other
forms of tampering (Doleac & Stein, 2015).

e. Direct-Recording Electronic (DRE) Voting System

The direct-recording electronic (DRE) voting system is an electronic voting
system that allows voters to cast their votes electronically using a computer
 or electronic voting machine. In a DRE voting system, voters are presented
with the candidates' list, and they vote for their candidate by pressing a
button or touching the screen. The votes are then recorded and counted
electronically by the voting system.
The direct-recording electronic voting system has been used in several
countries such as Brazil, India, and the United States (Sneath, 2018;
National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2018; Zetter, 2005).
Although the DRE voting system has been viewed as a means of
convenience and accessibility for voters, it is vulnerable to hacking and
other forms of tampering.

f. Internet Voting System

The internet voting system is a type of voting system that allows voters to
cast votes practically anywhere over the internet using a computer or mobile
device. In this voting system, voters have a lot to gain, but they also have
concerns about security since the internet serves as a medium of
transmission and could be attacked by hackers. The internet voting system
has been used in several countries, such as Canada, Switzerland, and
Estonia.

S/ Types Benefits Drawbacks

n
1 Mechanical lever i. Accessibility. i. Expensive to maintain
voting system ii. Security. and requires a large
iii. Simplicity Space.
iv. Speed ii. Insecurity of votes
 2 paper-based voting i. Cost. i. Since the votes are
system ii. Transparency. counted by humans, the
iii. Sustainability system is susceptible to
Human errors.
ii. Attacks on voters and
Theft of ballot papers.
3 Punch-card voting . Efficiency i. Attacks on voters and
system ii. Accuracy. Theft of ballot papers.
iii. Reliability ii. Since the votes are
counted by humans, the
system is susceptible to
Human errors.
4 Short message i. Security i. SMS can be interrupted
service (SMS) voting ii. Transparency ii. Easy to gather people
system iii. Real-Time and bribe them to vote
Results. for a particular
candidate
5 Internet voting i. Reduced error i. Possibility of under-age
system ii. Increased voting
Transparency ii. Susceptible to hackers
iii. Increased Attacks.
Voters Turnout.
Table 1:Types of voting system

2.1.2 Concept of Electronic Voting System

An electronic voting system is a system that enables voters to cast their votes
electronically. Electronic voting, also known as the e-voting system, integrates
electronic devices such as mobile phones, computers, and smart devices. Electronic
voting systems can be utilized in various settings, including elections for political
office, corporate meetings, and other voting contexts. Electronic elections can be
conducted in controlled or uncontrolled environments.

Elections conducted in a controlled environment refer to the use of electronic

voting systems in a supervised and secured setting, such as a polling station. The
systems used in this controlled environment are often audited and secured by
vetted government officials to ensure the integrity of the election. Electronic voting
systems used in a controlled environment include punch-card voting systems and
DRE.

Elections conducted in an uncontrolled environment refer to the use of electronic

voting systems in an unsecured setting, such as internet voting or voting by mail.
The vote is often transmitted over the internet or mobile phone network.

2.1.3 Advantages and Disadvantages of Electronic Voting

a. Advantages of Electronic Voting

Electronic voting offers several advantages over traditional voting methods. Some
of these include:

i. Increased speed and accuracy of vote counting: Electronic voting

systems can tally votes quickly and accurately, reducing the potential for
errors and speeding up the vote counting process.
 ii. Increased integrity: Security features, such as encryption, verification of
votes, and voter-verified paper audit trails, can be integrated into electronic
voting systems to prevent fraud and errors, thereby increasing the integrity
of the election.

iii. Increased accessibility for disabled voters: Electronic voting systems

can be designed to be accessible to citizens with disabilities, making it easier
for them to vote.

b. Disadvantages of Electronic Voting

Despite its advantages, electronic voting has several disadvantages compared to

traditional voting methods:

i. Security concerns: Electronic voting systems are susceptible to online hacking

and other forms of cyber attacks that could compromise the integrity of the voting
process.

ii. Lack of transparency: Many electronic voting systems lack transparency,

making it difficult to verify the integrity of the vote count. This is one of the issues
that electronic voting with blockchain aims to address.

iii. Cost: The implementation and maintenance of electronic voting systems can be
expensive compared to the cost of conducting elections in the traditional way.

iv. Reliability: Electronic voting systems rely on technologies that can fail, leading
to potential inaccuracies in the vote count or preventing voters from casting their
votes in case of a failure.
2.1.4 Electronic Voting System Phases

The electronic voting system is a comprehensive system comprised of various

components or units. This type of voting system typically undergoes several phases
during the voting process, as identified by Abdalla and Samani (2013) and Sayali
et al. (2018). The e-voting process can be broadly divided into three phases:

i. Pre-Voting Phase

a. Candidate Nomination Process

The candidate nomination process is the procedure by which individuals or

political parties submit their candidacies for the election. Depending on the
national legislature, there might be various ways to become nominated as a
candidate. A candidate must meet eligibility criteria, such as being a legal member
of a political party and possessing minimum academic qualifications.

b. Voter Registration Process

In most elections, voters are required to register explicitly, depending on local

laws. In some elections, citizens are automatically registered for voting.

ii. Voting Phase

This phase of electronic voting is the actual voting process. Depending on the
results of the pre-voting phase, this stage enables all eligible voters to make
decisions and cast their votes.

iii. Post-Voting Phase

a. Transmission of Vote
After the voting, the electronic voting system conveys the votes via the internet or
a network to a central counting remote location. This often involves the use of
secure communication protocols to guarantee the integrity of the vote.

b. Vote Counting

This phase is one of the most critical steps in elections and is typically done by
software programmed to count the votes.

c. Results and Reporting

After vote counting, the results are sent to authorized election officers. Based on
specified rules, the total votes polled by each candidate are displayed and signed
by the authorized election officers.

d. Result Announcement

An authorized election officer, usually the chairman of the electoral office,

announces the final result and declares the winner of the election based on the
votes won by each candidate.

e. Audit

This phase is used to verify the accuracy of the vote count and ensure the integrity
of the voting process.
Fig 2: E-voting System Phases.

2.1.5 Review of Related Works

A comprehensive review of related literature was conducted on blockchain-based

electronic voting systems. The researchers' motivations, methodologies,
contributions to knowledge, and limitations were examined to discover and expand
more on the gaps in existing systems/research.

Lai et al. (2018) proposed a decentralized, anonymous, and transparent e-voting

system (DATE) to reduce voters' reliance on the authority or government. The
research aimed to provide a system for large-scale electronic voting. The
objectives were to design and implement an efficient and effective decentralized,
anonymous, and transparent e-voting system, ensuring the transparency of voting
by recording all messages on the Ethereum blockchain and safeguarding the
privacy of each voter through an efficient ring signature mechanism.
The research utilized an Ethereum smart contract to implement the proposed
system, storing all necessary information on it. Given the Ethereum blockchain's
gas limit constraints, complex operations were avoided in the smart contract.
Instead, only pointers on a ballot were stored, as the complete calculation of
blockchain history information was unnecessary.

The proposed system (DATE) consists of three phases:

A. Setup Phase: During this phase, election-related information, including the

voter list, candidate list, key management scheme, setup time, voting time,
and tally time, is publicly announced on an Ethereum smart contract.

B. Voting Phase: Each valid voter automatically possesses one of the private
keys associated with the public keys stored on the voter list and is familiar
with the public information.

C. Tally Phase: Using the key management scheme established in the setup
phase, key managers disclose their individual secrets to retrieve their
deposits. The smart contract ceases to accept any ballots after the voting
phase.

However, the proposed system has limitations, including its vulnerability to denial-
of-service (DOS) attacks. This vulnerability arises from the absence of a third-
party authority within the scheme responsible for auditing votes after the election
process.

Z. Guo, Xiang He, and Peiyan Zou (2021) proposed a Blockchain-based

Voting System as an innovative approach to address critical weaknesses identified
in traditional voting systems. The shortcomings of these traditional systems, such
as susceptibility to inaccurate vote counts, voter mimicry, and electronic voting
machine hacking, prompted the need for a more secure alternative. This research
project aims to develop a new electronic voting system that eliminates the
possibility of manipulation, allowing voters to verify and track their votes through
the utilization of Blockchain technology.

The primary objective of the research is to design a fair, impartial, and transparent
voting system that leverages Blockchain to ensure the security, traceability, and
anonymity of voting data. This approach is intended to prevent data usurpation,
enable verifiability, and protect voter privacy. The exploration of using blockchain
as the underlying technology led to the identification of two key mechanisms: the
Consensus mechanism and the Data verification mechanism.

The Consensus mechanism determines how blockchain is integrated into the

system and controls the addition of new blocks to the existing chain. On the other
hand, the Data verification mechanism focuses on ensuring data integrity by
having each network node verify the validity of received data, including digital
signatures and data structure. Data is only accepted if it meets all specified
conditions. Cryptographic hash functions were employed to compress input data
into a short and fixed output, preserving data integrity.

To enhance security, the research utilized asymmetric encryption, timestamps, and

Merkle trees. Asymmetric encryption ensures secure communication, timestamps
provide temporal context, and Merkle trees secure database data without
compromising integrity.

Despite the proposed system's reliance on electronic devices, the researchers

acknowledge the skepticism that voters may have toward such devices. This
concern underscores the importance of addressing and mitigating distrust in
electronic devices to build confidence in the proposed Blockchain-based Voting
System.

Patrick McCorry, Siamak F. Shahandashti, and Feng Hao (2017) conducted

a study on a decentralized, self-tallying e-voting protocol designed to ensure
maximum voter privacy. The study, titled "A Smart Contract for Boardroom
Voting with Maximum Voter Privacy," aimed to assess the viability of employing
blockchain technology for small-scale elections. Unlike traditional e-voting
methods that rely on a central bulletin board for verifiability, the authors explored
the potential of blockchain as a decentralized and trustless alternative.

The authors proposed a smart contract implementation of a voting protocol known

as the Open Vote Network, developed in Ethereum's Solidity language. The
implementation comprised two smart contracts: the voting contract and the
cryptography contract. The voting contract managed the election process,
implemented the voting protocol, and verified the zero-knowledge proofs utilized
in the Open Vote Network. Meanwhile, the cryptography contract distributed the
code for generating zero-knowledge proofs, allowing all voters to use the same
cryptography code locally without interacting with the Ethereum network.

The implementation underwent testing on the official Ethereum test network with
forty simulated voters, revealing that the voting protocol could be employed for
small-scale elections at a cost of $0.73 per voter. The authors considered this cost
reasonable, given that the voting protocol provided maximum voter privacy and
was publicly verifiable.
This study marked the first implementation of a decentralized internet voting
protocol running on a blockchain, utilizing Ethereum not only as a public bulletin
board but also as a platform for consensus computing, ensuring the correct
execution of the voting protocol. In summary, the authors presented a
groundbreaking study on a smart contract for boardroom voting with maximum
voter privacy using blockchain technology. The research offers a new perspective
on decentralized, trustless, and secure internet voting. The proposed smart contract
implementation of the Open Vote Network introduces a novel approach to
conducting small-scale elections, and the authors express their intent to explore the
possibility of using blockchain for national-scale elections in the future.

Mohammad et al. (2021) proposed an e-voting system based on blockchain

technology, aiming to harness the advantages of blockchain, including
cryptographic foundations and transparency, to establish an effective scheme for
electronic voting. The research was driven by the understanding that democracy in
any country necessitates a transparent voting system that aligns with the people's
requirements, ensuring the empowerment of the right individuals.

The research objectives were centered on designing and implementing a voting

system adhering to specific benchmark parameters such as voter anonymity, vote
integrity, and non-repudiation, among others. The proposed e-voting system
employed a modular design, dividing the system into the following layers:

a. User Interaction and Front-end Security layer: This critical layer ensures
that only legitimate users gain access to the system through authentication
and authorization processes. Authentication and authorization methods
could vary, encompassing simple username/password to advanced
 biometric methods (fingerprint, iris) recognition. This layer serves as the
initial point of contact with users, validating their credentials based on the
system's access control policies.
b. Access Control Management layer: Acting as an intermediary between
layers a and c, this layer provides services such as roles definition to
facilitate the expected functions of these layers.
c. E-Voting Transaction Management layer: At the core of the system, this
layer maps transactions (containing the credentials provided by each voter
at layer a) onto the blockchain for mining.
d. The Ledger Synchronization layer: This layer establishes a connection
between the Multichain ledger and the local database for vote tracking and
secure storage. Votes are recorded, tracked using unique IDs, and secured
through cryptographic hashes. Results are stored in the database for auditing
and future operations.

Bhabendu KM, Debasish J, Soumyashree S.P, and Srichandan S (2019)

conducted a study that delved into the challenges related to privacy and security
arising in the implementation of blockchain technology. The study
comprehensively examined the architecture of blockchain and its diverse
applications, aiming to map research areas and identify potential research gaps.

The decentralized design of blockchain ensures the system's security, transparency,

and tamper-proof nature. Transactions on the blockchain are recorded in blocks,
linked chronologically to form a chain, hence the name "blockchain."
Cryptography plays a crucial role in securing transactions, allowing only
authorized users access to information. Each block in the chain contains a set of
transactions and a unique code, known as a "hash," linking it to the previous block.
This feature makes it challenging to alter or tamper with the information stored on
the blockchain, contributing to the technology's security and tamper-proof nature.

Moreover, the distributed nature of blockchain eliminates any single point of

failure, enhancing system resilience and reducing susceptibility to attacks. The
blockchain system's architecture comprises multiple decentralized nodes, with each
node maintaining a regularly updated copy of the blockchain list. Various
activities, such as initiating transactions, validating transactions, or performing
mining, can be executed by these nodes.

Research findings suggest that blockchain can serve as a solution for current legal
frameworks regulating contracts across jurisdictions, offering the ability to
maintain a digital ledger without the need for a third party. Additionally,
implementing blockchain architecture in digital rights management systems has the
potential to provide transparency among stakeholders while safeguarding the
security and privacy of individuals.

Miranda Imperial's research, titled "The Democracy to Come? An Enquiry into

the Vision of Blockchain-Powered E-Voting Start-Ups" (2021), aimed to
investigate the messages propagated by start-up companies utilizing blockchain
technology for electronic voting (BPE) and their potential impact on democratic
outcomes. Employing Norman Fairclough's critical discourse analysis, the
researcher scrutinized the written content of seven BPE start-ups as presented on
their websites.

The research findings indicated that the perspectives of BPE start-ups regarding
blockchain-powered democracy diverge from conventional understandings of
democracy. These start-ups envision a democracy shaped by powerful institutions,
individuals possessing advanced technical skills, and economic interests. This
interpretation of democracy restricts the role of voters in decision-making
processes beyond casting their votes, leaving the ultimate decisions in the hands of
these established powers. The emphasis on appealing to existing elites for BPE
implementation, coupled with a lack of attention to community, collective rights,
and the non-technologically literate population, suggests that BPE developers
prioritize a specific understanding of democracy while overlooking privacy,
security, and accountability concerns related to implementing blockchain
technology for e-voting.

The research holds significance in the context of the increasing intersections

between technology and democracy and the rapid technological innovations taking
place. It draws on the theory of technological determinism, which posits that
technology shapes society and its institutions. Earlier studies linked internet
development to increased citizen participation and empowerment in democratic
processes. Similarly, blockchain technology is touted as a solution for e-voting
with the potential to enhance privacy, anonymity, and efficiency. However, the
research argues that these claims may be influenced by a deterministic view of
technology, and whether blockchain technology brings about meaningful changes
in democratic processes remains to be seen.

The research underscores the importance of considering the potential consequences

and limitations of new technologies, along with the assumptions and power
dynamics behind their promotion. Critics of the optimism surrounding
technological advancements argue that they often serve corporate interests rather
than benefiting society as a whole. Alternative social theories, such as the social
construction of technology and the prosumer perspective, become relevant when
analyzing BPE, allowing for the examination of technology developers' decisions
and their impact on the technology's options and limitations.

CHAPTER THREE

SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND METHODOLOGY

3.0 INTRODUCTION

In the pursuit of revolutionizing the traditional voting experience and ensuring the
integrity of electoral processes in today's digital age, the "Design and
Implementation of a Blockchain-Based E-Voting System" project embarks on a
crucial phase of its journey. Chapter Three delves into the intricacies of blockchain
analysis, design, and methodology, offering a comprehensive view of how this E-
Voting system is meticulously crafted to enhance the security and transparency of
the electoral process.

3.1 Analysis of Existing System

Nigeria currently uses The Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), it is an

electronic device used for voter accreditation and authentication during elections. It
was introduced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in 2021
to improve the transparency and credibility of elections in the country.

The voting process begins with voter registration using the BVAS kit, followed by
voter verification during the voting phase. Votes are cast manually into a ballot
box, and seals are recorded before counting for each elective position. The process
involves breaking seals (in the presence of party agents and observers at the polling
station), emptying contents into a counting container, unfolding ballots to
determine validity, and sorting them by candidate. The counting process includes
filing Forms, bundling counted ballot papers in groups, and filling out Forms along
with a statement of rejected ballots where applicable

3.1.2 Limitations of the Existing System

The current voting system in Nigeria, relying on the Biometric Verification and
Authentication System (BVAS), exhibits several limitations that warrant careful
consideration. These limitations are crucial to understanding the challenges
associated with the present electoral process.

1. Lack of Real-time Integrity and Transparency:

The existing system faces challenges in maintaining real-time integrity and
transparency. The combination of digital and manual processes may lead to
delays in result submission, hindering the immediacy and accuracy of
electoral outcomes.

2. Reliability Concerns:

There is a lack of absolute reliability in the results submitted. Instances of

post-election disputes and violence suggest a lack of confidence in the
accuracy of the electoral process and outcomes.

3. Potential for Human Error:

The manual aspects of the voting process, such as the counting of ballots and
the filling out of various forms, introduce a risk of human error. This
 includes errors during tallying and incorrect data entry, which can
compromise the accuracy of the final results.

4. Limited Accessibility to Remote Areas:

The current system may face challenges in ensuring accessibility to remote

or rural areas, potentially disenfranchising voters in these regions due to
technological or logistical limitations.

5. Security Concerns:

The reliance on a combination of digital and manual processes raises

concerns about the overall security of the electoral system. Ensuring the
integrity of the process and guarding against potential manipulations
becomes paramount.

6. Time-Consuming Manual Processes:

The manual steps involved in the voting process, from breaking seals to
filling out forms and bundling ballot papers, contribute to a time-consuming
procedure. This may result in delayed announcements and the prolonged
delivery of results to higher-level tallying centers.

3.2 System Design

In the development of the blockchain voting system designed to facilitate secure

and transparent voting processes, the selected methodology is the Agile Software
Development Model. This choice is motivated by Agile's effectiveness in
overcoming the constraints associated with traditional waterfall methodologies.
Unlike the rigid sequential design of the Waterfall model, Agile adopts an
incremental approach, providing flexibility and adaptability throughout the
development lifecycle.

Diverging from the structured nature of the Waterfall model, where revisiting prior
stages is challenging, Agile allows for changes even post-initial planning. The
methodology entails breaking down the project into manageable components,
including design, coding, and testing, and assembling them as required. Agile
practices prioritize incremental development with frequent releases, typically every
two or three weeks, facilitating rapid user feedback and the accommodation of
evolving requirements.

By actively engaging end-users in the development process, Agile reduces the

reliance on extensive documentation, favoring informal communication. This
aligns with the dynamic nature of software development, enabling swift responses
to changing needs.

The strategic selection of the Agile methodology for this research focuses on its
capacity to release small modules of the blockchain voting system for user
evaluation and feedback. These assessments play a pivotal role in guiding
developers on feature additions, modifications, or removals. The iterative nature of
Agile supports changes even after the completion of a development stage, fostering
continuous improvement based on user input.

Moreover, Agile's emphasis on early and frequent testing ensures the prompt
identification and resolution of any bugs or errors within the development cycle.
This methodology not only accommodates ongoing adjustments but also promotes
a streamlined and efficient design and implementation process for the blockchain
voting system.
3.2.1 USE CASE DIAGRAM

A use case diagram serves as a visual representation of a user's engagement with

the system. It illustrates the diverse interactions that users have with the system
and offers a higher-level perspective, presenting a simplified and graphical
overview of the system's essential functionalities.

In this diagram, actors are symbolized as stick figures, and use cases are
represented as ovals. Actors embody entities, such as individuals, who will utilize
the application, while use cases signify the distinct activities associated with the
system. This portrayal provides a clear and concise depiction of the essential
functionalities that the system is designed to perform. below is the use case
diagram for the system
Fig 3: Use Case Diagram

3.2.2 System Architecture

The system architecture is depicted comprehensively in Figure 3.1, illustrating the

key building blocks that constitute the design. Each component is examined in
detail below.
Fig 4: Proposed System Architecture

The registration process serves as the foundational element of our design,

underscoring the importance of confirming a voter's identity to uphold the integrity
of the electoral process. Preventing identity theft is pivotal in ensuring the accuracy
of every vote count. Our proposed service utilizes a user's valid identity card
number for cross-referencing against the database, determining the eligibility of the
user to register for voting. Subsequently, each voter is assigned a unique hash
address, which becomes their identifier for casting a ballot. To facilitate the voting
process, each hash address is endowed with a sufficient amount of Ethers, ensuring
the secure and authentic participation of each voter.

3.3 Requirement Analysis

In this section, we'll delve into the specifics of how this will be implemented.
There are two main components: the registration system and the voting system.

a. Registration System
Users' already-collected personal information, such as their name, address,
and date of birth, is stored in a SQL database behind an HTML/CSS-based
front end for the voting registration system. Users are authenticated and
given a hash code/address to use as a voting credential if they are deemed
legitimate users.
b. Voting System
The voting system is a decentralized app that uses Bootstrap or HTML for
the frontend and a Blockchain for the backend. The smart contract is written
in a language called "Solidity." In the smart contract, the name of the
candidate and their symbol are written. A smart contract is the part of the
voting system that is the actual logic. A transaction is a change made to a
blockchain.

The way the outside world communicates with the Ethereum network is through
transactions. When we want to change or update the state stored in the Ethereum
network, we use a "transaction." A transaction fee or service charge must be paid
for each transaction. Within an Ethereum network, a currency called ether moves
around. Ether is mostly used as a service charge or transaction fee, also called a
"gas fee." For this prototype, we are using the IOTA testnet on EVM, so there is no
need for a gas fee since it is free. Ganache-CLI is being used for this project. This
makes setting up a private network faster, and transactions are mined almost as
soon as they happen. MetaMask is a bridge that lets you visit the decentralized web
of the future in your browser right now. It lets you run Ethereum decentralized
applications (dApps) right in your browser without having to run a full Ethereum
node.

3.3.1 Voting with Smart Contracts

The voting procedure in question is conducted on the IOTA Testnet because it is

expensive to deploy smart contracts on the official blockchain. Figure 7 presents
the general procedure. The following is a description of the remaining steps:

a. First, a smart contract is deployed on the blockchain, with the contract's

owner saved as the "chairman," and configurations for voters and
candidates, as well as functions for voting, granting the ability to vote, and
counting votes, are defined.
b. To vote, an individual must have a code for their Ethereum wallet, which the
Chairman will distribute to them after the voting process has been initiated.
c. To cast their ballots, voters interact with the smart contract by making a
transaction in their Ether wallet. If the user hasn't previously cast a vote, the
smart contract will do so and give it to the candidate they choose. Every vote
resets to the current victor. After the election is over, you can also call the
function associated with the victorious candidate.
 Fig 5: Smart contract

3.3.2 The Smart Contract Structure

The smart contract for this architecture is also split into two parts: the factory
contract, which makes multiple copies of the election contract, and the election
contract itself. The way the factory contract works with the election contract model
is set by the variables and functions it has. An array of type Ethereum address
stores the addresses of all the contracts deployed by the factory contract, as well as
the addresses of two special functions: the create election function, which creates a
new election instance, and the getDeployedElections function, which returns the
deployedElections variable.

Once the produced bytecode has been uploaded to the Ethereum network, the
contract's ABI creates several election instances.

3.4 Flow Chart Diagram

The flowchart illustrates the sequential process of the system, utilizing the two
actors involved. Both voters and administrators play crucial roles in the system,
with their contributions representing both possible next steps and the completion of
the process.

Fig 6: system flow chart

SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
A system architecture diagram would be used to show the relationship between
different components. Usually they are created for systems which include hardware
and software and these are represented in the diagram to show the interaction
between them.

Fig 7: system architecture

CHAPTER FOUR
 SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION

4.1 Chapter overview

This chapter provides an extensive exploration of the intricate details involved in

the implementation of the Blockchain Voting System. It goes beyond the surface,
delving into the complexities of both the software and blockchain components. By
examining critical considerations, memory requirements, and the logic behind the
selection of programming languages, this chapter aims to offer a comprehensive
understanding of the system's implementation.

4.2 Features and Choice of Implementation

In the construction of the Blockchain-based Voting System, meticulous attention

was devoted to the selection of technologies and languages, with the objective of
forging a resilient and user-friendly democratic solution. This section
comprehensively outlines the features and elucidates the reasoning behind the
selection of implementation technologies.

Ganache

Ganache serves as the local blockchain for development purposes. It allows

developers to simulate a blockchain environment on their local machines,
facilitating testing and development without interacting with the main Ethereum
network. In the context of the E-Voting System, Ganache becomes the playground
where smart contracts are deployed, tested, and refined.

Truffle
Truffle complements Ganache by providing a development framework for
Ethereum. It simplifies the process of writing, compiling, and deploying smart
contracts. With Truffle, the development workflow becomes more structured.
Smart contracts can be tested in a sandbox environment (like Ganache) before
being

deployed to the mainnet. This ensures that the logic governing the voting process is
robust and error-free.

MetaMask

MetaMask acts as the bridge between the user's browser and the Ethereum
blockchain. It enables users to interact with decentralized applications (DApps)
seamlessly. In the E-Voting System, MetaMask becomes the interface through
which voters connect their browsers to the blockchain. It handles the cryptographic
keys, allowing users to securely cast their votes without compromising their
private information

HTML, CSS, and JavaScript: These front-end virtuosos compose the visual and
interactive symphony of the E-Voting System. HTML lays the structural
foundation, CSS adorns it with visual aesthetics, and JavaScript breathes life into
the interface, orchestrating real-time updates and user interactions. Together, they
create an immersive and intuitive voting platform, a masterpiece in user
experience.

Solidity: As the backbone of the smart contracts, Solidity interacts with the
Ethereum blockchain. Truffle simplifies the development and deployment of these
smart contracts, ensuring a smooth integration between the front-end and the
blockchain. Ganache provides a local testing ground, allowing developers to iterate
quickly and test the functionality of smart contracts in a controlled environment.

Advantages of Chosen Technologies

1. Localized Development Environment: Ganache and Truffle provide a

localized environment for development, allowing developers to test and
refine smart contracts without incurring transaction costs on the Ethereum
mainnet.

2. Smart Contract Deployment: Truffle streamlines the deployment of smart

contracts to the Ethereum blockchain. This ensures that the logic governing
the voting process is securely deployed and accessible on the decentralized
network.

3. User Interaction: MetaMask facilitates secure and seamless user interaction

with the E-Voting System. It handles key management, allowing users to
cast votes without exposing their private keys, enhancing the overall security
of the system.

4. Rapid Iteration: The combination of Ganache, Truffle, and MetaMask

enables developers to rapidly iterate through the development cycle.
Changes can be tested locally before being deployed to the Ethereum
blockchain, reducing the risk of errors and vulnerabilities.

Use Cases
 1. Local Testing with Ganache: Developers use Ganache to test smart
contracts locally before deploying them to the mainnet. This ensures that the
smart contracts function as intended and are free from errors.

2. Truffle Deployment: Smart contracts developed in Solidity are deployed

using Truffle, streamlining the process of making them accessible on the
Ethereum blockchain. Truffle provides a systematic approach to managing
the development lifecycle.

3. User Authentication with MetaMask: MetaMask acts as the secure

gateway for users to authenticate and interact with the E-Voting System. It
handles cryptographic key management, ensuring the integrity and security
of the voting process.

4. Real-Time Updates with JavaScript: JavaScript, in conjunction with

MetaMask, enables real-time updates and interactions. Users receive instant
feedback on their voting actions, enhancing the transparency and
engagement of the voting process.

4.3 System Testing

During the development of the system, the system required some setup to run some
basic tests. The system environment was set up to suit and mimick an ethereum
network as well as connecting metamask to the localhost server. The Ganache
application was used to serve the local accounts and account balance used in the
transactions, the ganache local sever served as the ethereum local net
Fig 8: system testing using Ganache

4.3.1 Unit Test

In this phase examination of individual components or modules of the system in

isolation to verify that each unit performs as designed was done. unit testing was
applied to scrutinize the functionality of discrete elements, including smart
contracts, user interface components, and backend services. By addressing each
component independently, it provides a granular understanding of how each part
contributes to the overall functionality of the Blockchain-based Voting System.

4.3.2 Integration Test

The examination of interactions between different components or modules of the

system to ensure that they function cohesively when integrated, integration testing
is essential to verify the seamless interaction between the user interface, smart
contracts, and backend services within the decentralized environment.
4.4 Target Computer System Requirements
In order to run this application, computer systems must have the following
applications and software installed. The required specifications include:

HARDWARE DETAILS

For the development and implementation of the Blockchain-based Voting System,

the following hardware components are required:

1. System Running: Pentium or Intel.

2. Random Access Memory (RAM): A minimum of 512MB RAM and

above.

3. Hard Disk: 1.0GB and above.

4. Internet Connectivity: Access to 3G/EDGE/Wi-Fi internet connectivity is

necessary.

5. Compatible Devices: The software should run on personal computers

(PCs), smartphones, and other web-compatible devices.

SOFTWARE DETAILS

To enable the development and implementation of the Blockchain-based Voting

System, the following software components are necessary:

1. Operating System: Windows XP, Windows 7, and above.

2. Web Browsers: Google Chrome or updated Mozilla Firefox web browser.

3. Blockchain Development Framework: Truffle Framework.

4. Browser Extension (WEB): Metamask.

 5. ETHEREUM BLOCKCHAIN SIMULATOR: Ganache

4.5 RESULTS

The development and implementation of the Blockchain-based Voting System

have yielded substantial results and outputs, promising a paradigm shift in the
realm of democratic processes. Below is a summary of the significant outcomes
that are set to positively impact the voting system and the democratic experience:

Login Page

The login page functions as the entry point for authorized users to interact with the
blockchain-based voting system, emphasizing simplicity and security.

The user is required to input a valid Email and a secure password is mandatory for
access, utilizing industry-standard encryption techniques.

Once the user submits the login form, the system verifies the authenticity of the
entered email and password against the stored data on the blockchain.
Fig 9: Login page

Registration Page

The registration page facilitates the onboarding of new users into the blockchain-
based voting system. It is designed to capture essential user details, ensuring a
seamless and secure registration process.

Once the user submits the login form, the system verifies the authenticity of the
entered email and password against the stored data on the blockchain.

Fig 10: Registration Page

Vote Section

The vote section provides users with a straightforward and intuitive interface to
cast their votes for their chosen candidates. The design aims to ensure ease of use
and a seamless voting experience. To cast a vote, Users navigate through the list of
candidates by scrolling through the list of candidates and simply click on their
chosen candidate. This action is logged securely on the blockchain, ensuring the
transparency and immutability of the voting process.

Fig 11: Vote section

Admin Page

The admin page is a centralized interface designed for administrators to efficiently

manage the blockchain-based voting system. Here is list of activities that can be
carried out by the admin:

i. Candidate Management: Input fields allow administrators to add new

candidates. Essential details such as the candidate's name and affiliated party
can be captured.
 ii. Election Control: Exclusive authority is given to the admin to start or stop
the election. Clearly labeled buttons facilitate easy control over the voting
process.
iii. Centralized Oversight: This functionality ensures centralized control over
the entire voting process.
iv. Voter List Viewing: Admins have the ability to view the list of voters.

Fig 12: Admin page

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Summary

This system was developed to improve the state of electronic voting. The primary
aim of adding blockchain to the existing electronic voting systems is to increase
trust in the system and aid the security process of the application.

5.2 Conclusion

In conclusion, the system highlights the faults in the paper-based method of voting
as well as the limitations of a centralized voting system. This system also
illustrates the use of blockchain in other aspects of everyday livelihood and how it
can be applied to the voting domain. The system itself has some limitations in its
implementation. It uses a manual method for registering voters for particular
electoral instances. If the population of users in the system increases, it would be a
challenging task for administrators of the system to register voters for
authenticated voting instances.

5.3 Recommendation for Further Study

The system's identification mechanism can be enhanced. Currently, the system

uses a system-generated end user to register into the system, which might be
invalid if anything happens to the users. In the event that a user passes away and
someone else registers using the user's identification number, face recognition may
be incorporated into the implementation. This way, each user who registers not
only has their address connected to the account but also their biometric properties.

REFERNCES
Agbu, O. (2016). Election Rigging and the Use of Technology: The Smart Card
Reader as the Joker in Nigeria’s 2015 Presidential Election. Journal of African
Elections, 15(2), 90–111. https://doi.org/10.20940/jae/2016/v15i2a5

Ahlkvist, J., Gustafsson, A., Lundborg, C., Mattsson, J. T., Sandstedt, A., &
Slavnic, S. (2019). A Decentralized Voting System. Gothenburg, Sweden:
Chalmers University of Technology.

Aluaigba, M. T. (2016). Democracy Deferred: The Effects of Electoral Malpractice

on Nigeria’s Path to Democratic Consolidation. Journal of African Elections,
15(2), 136–158. https://doi.org/10.20940/jae/2016/v15i2a7

Ayed, A. (2017). A Conceptual Secure Blockchain Based Electronic Voting

System. International Journal of Network Security & Its Applications, 9(3), 01–09.
https://doi.org/10.5121/ijnsa.2017.9301

Challenge of E-Voting. (2016, October 31). Retrieved June 29, 2021, from
https://www.fortinet.com/blog/industry-trends/the-challenge-of-e-voting

Chandler, S. (2021, June 3). Here Are The 5 Biggest Bitcoin Transactions In
History. Retrieved July 1, 2021, from https://www.cryptovantage.com/news/here-
are-the-5-biggest-bitcoin-transactions-in-history/

Grigoryan, A. (2018, June 20). The Benefits of Server Side Rendering Over Client
Side Rendering. Retrieved August 2, 2021, from
https://medium.com/walmartglobaltech/the-benefits-of-server-side-rendering-over-
client-side-rendering-5d07ff2cefe8

Hjalmarsson, F. P., Hreioarsson, G. K., Hamdaqa, M., & Hjalmtysson, G. (2018).

Blockchain-Based E-Voting System. 2018 IEEE 11th International Conference on
Cloud Computing (CLOUD). Published. https://doi.org/10.1109/cloud.2018.00151
Khan, K. M., Arshad, J., & Khan, M. M. (2018). Secure Digital Voting System
Based on Blockchain Technology. International Journal of Electronic Government
Research, 14(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijegr.2018010103

Koksal, I. (2019, October 23). The Benefits Of Applying Blockchain Technology In

Any Industry. Retrieved August 2, 2021, from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ilkerkoksal/2019/10/23/the-benefits-of-applying-
blockchain-technology-in-any-industry/?sh=1ff6bb7d49a5

Kumar, A. (2018, July 3). Bitcoin Blockchain - What is Proof of Work? Retrieved
August 2, 2021, from https://vitalflux.com/bitcoin-blockchain-proof-work/

Loukil, F., Abed, M., & Boukadi, K. (2021). Blockchain adoption in education: a
systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies. Published.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10481-8

Ma, X., Zhou, J., Yang, X., & Liu, G. (2020). A Blockchain Voting System Based
on the Feedback Mechanism and Wilson Score. Information, 11(12), 552.
https://doi.org/10.3390/info11120552

Madise, U., & Martens, T. (2005). E-voting in Estonia 2005. The first practice of
country-wide binding Internet voting in the world. Electronic voting, Bregenz,
Austria.

Marella, P. B., Milojkovic, M., Mohler, J., & Dagher, G. G. (2019). GenVote:
Blockchain-Based Customizable and Secure Voting Platform. Communications in
Computer and Information Science, 152–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-
25109-3_8
McCorry, P., Shahandashti, S. F., & Hao, F. (2017). A Smart Contract for
Boardroom Voting with Maximum Voter Privacy. Financial Cryptography and
Data Security, 357–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70972-7_20

Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System[White

paper]. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Rura, L., Issac, B., & Haldar, M. K. (2011). Secure electronic voting system based
on image steganography. 2011 IEEE Conference on Open Systems. Published.
https://doi.org/10.1109/icos.2011.6079268

Ryan, P. (2008). Prêt à Voter with Paillier encryption. Mathematical and

Computer Modelling, 48(9–10), 1646–1662.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2008.05.015

Shift4Shop. (2020, March 5). Understanding Bitcoins and How They’re Used.
Retrieved June 29, 2021, from https://blog.shift4shop.com/accept-bitcoins-with-
bitpay

Suryavanshi, A. (2020). Online Voting system. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Published. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3589075

Taş, R., & Tanrıöver, M. Z. (2020). A Systematic Review of Challenges and

Opportunities of Blockchain for E-Voting. Symmetry, 12(8), 1328.
https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12081328

The Carter Center & National Democratic Institute for International Affair. (1999,
June). OBSERVING THE 1998–99 NIGERIA ELECTIONS.

Tso, R., Liu, Z. Y., & Hsiao, J. H. (2019). Distributed E-Voting and E-Bidding
Systems Based on Smart Contract. Electronics, 8(4), 422.
https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8040422
Tykn. (2021, May 24). Blockchain Identity Management: The Definitive Guide
(2021 Update). Retrieved August 2, 2021, from https://tykn.tech/identity-
management-blockchain