2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2022.101718
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Internet voting in Estonia 2005–2019: Evidence from eleven elections

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
41
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
2
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Parliamentary elections, and four nationwide local elections between 2005 and 2019 (Ehin et al 2022). Also, the country's voting system has been robustly studied and analysed, examining themes such as efficiency, transparency, security, and auditability (Nurse et al 2017;Heiberg et al 2011, September).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parliamentary elections, and four nationwide local elections between 2005 and 2019 (Ehin et al 2022). Also, the country's voting system has been robustly studied and analysed, examining themes such as efficiency, transparency, security, and auditability (Nurse et al 2017;Heiberg et al 2011, September).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…i-voting: Estonia is the first country to introduce online voting in national elections since 2005 [4], using an electronic ID chip [5].This identity generated SHA1/SHA2 signatures and was used to identify citizens. The voter would have to download the app, authenticate, and then the voting process would follow.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In turn, voters can verify the inclusion of their votes in the final tally, and the entire voting process becomes subject to audit, as illustrated in Figure 3. Nevertheless, this voting system has been hard to use in some countries because the infrastructure needed to be better, and the electoral staff required more skilled professionals to use these systems effectively [52][53][54]. In turn, there were challenges in its utilization in terms of a lack of legal base, low ICTs skills, a lack of talented blockchain staff, and intentional challenges like booth capturing and rigging, ballot stuffing, and other purposely performed frauds by the election commission [37].…”
Section: Blockchain-based E-votingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All e-voting systems endeavor to strengthen integrity, transparency, privacy, accuracy, and fairness in society. Most of these blockchain e-voting systems are established by private or government organizations, and most of them have brought excellent outcomes, provided fair election results, and decreased election expenditures.Nevertheless, this voting system has been hard to use in some countries because the infrastructure needed to be better, and the electoral staff required more skilled professionals to use these systems effectively[52][53][54]. In turn, there were challenges in its utilization in terms of a lack of legal base, low ICTs skills, a lack of talented blockchain staff, and intentional challenges like booth capturing and rigging, ballot stuffing, and other purposely…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%