Article

Secure Voting Website Using Ethereum and Smart

Contracts
1 1 2 1,
Abhay Singh , Ankush Ganesh , Rutuja Rajendra Patil , Sumit Kumar * , Ruchi Rani
3,4
5
and Sanjeev Kumar Pippal

1
Symbiosis Institute of Technology, Pune, Symbiosis International (Deemed University),
Pune 412115, Maharashtra, India; abhaysengar3250@[Link] (A.S.); masterankush0115@[Link] (A.G.)
2
Computer Science and Engineering-Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Department,
Vishwakarma Institute of Information Technology, Pune 411037, Maharashtra, India; rutujapat@[Link]
3
Department of Computer Science Engineering and Technology, School of Computer Science and Engineering,
Dr. Vishwanath Karad MIT World Peace University (MIT-WPU), Pune 411038, Maharashtra, India;
ruchiasija20@[Link]
4
Department of Computer Science, Indian Institute of Information Technology, Kottayam 686635, Kerala, India
5
Department of Technology, NSBT, MGM University, Aurangabad 431005, Maharashtra,
India; sanpippalin@[Link]
* Correspondence: er.sumitkumar21@[Link]

Abstract: Voting is a democratic process that allows individuals to choose their leaders and voice
their opinions. However, the current situation with physical voting involves long queues, paper-
based ballots, and security challenges. Blockchain-based voting models have appeared as a
method to address the limitations of traditional voting methods. As blockchain is distributed and
decentralized, which uses hash functions for securing transactions, it dramatically improves the
existing voting system. These digital platforms eliminate the need for physical presence, reduce
paperwork, and ensure the integrity of votes through transparent and tamper-proof blockchain
technology. This paper introduces a blockchain-based voting model to enhance accessibility,
security, and efficiency in the voting process. The research focuses on developing a robust and
user-friendly voting system by leveraging the advantages of decentralized technology. The
proposed model employs Ethereum as the underlying blockchain platform through an innovative
and iterative approach. The model uses Smart contracts to record and validate votes, while AI-
based facial recognition technology is integrated to verify the identity of voters. Rigorous testing and
analysis are conducted to validate the effectiveness and reliability of the proposed blockchain-based
Citation: Singh, A.; Ganesh, A.;
voting model. The system underwent extensive simulation scenarios and stress tests to evaluate
Patil, R.R.; Kumar, S.; Rani, R.;
Pippal, S.K. Secure Voting
its performance, security, and usability.
Website
Using Ethereum and Smart Contracts. Keywords: e-voting; blockchain; EVM; digital platform; decentralized
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 6, 70.
[Link]

Academic Editor: Christos Douligeris

[Link]
Received: 14 April 2023 Elections are crucial, but a sizable portion of the population has little faith in the
Revised: 4 July 2023 system, a grave issue for a nation. Even the most significant countries, such as India,
Accepted: 7 July 2023 are affected by a flawed electoral system. The fundamental problems with the current
Published: 10 August 2023 vote-casting device are vote falsification, election control, and poll space shooting. In
the modern era, blockchain technology has been a revolutionary force dramatically im-
pacting numerous industries, from banking to healthcare [1]. One of the most intriguing
applications of blockchain technology has been its use in the voting system, allowing for
Copyright: © 2023 by the voter authentication, improved security, and increased transparency [2,3]. Blockchain is
authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, a distributed ledger system that records and stores data securely and reliably. It is a decen-
Switzerland. This article is an open tralized system, meaning the data is stored on many computers rather than a single, central
access article distributed under
computer, making it virtually impossible to tamper with or manipulate. A blockchain
the terms and conditions of the
voting system relies on this technology to provide secure, reliable voting [4]. Blockchain
Creative Commons Attribution (CC
technology in the poll has been gaining attraction due to its promise of improved
BY) license (https://
security, greater transparency, and more efficient management. Blockchain voting systems
[Link]/licenses/by/
4.0/).
are more
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 6, 70. [Link] [Link]
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 2 of 24
6, 70

secure than traditional voting systems because they provide a tamper-proof record of each
vote stored securely on the blockchain and can be verified by anyone. This eliminates the
possibility of faked or manipulated votes, as each ballot is transparently recorded on the
blockchain for anyone to view.
Another advantage of blockchain voting systems is that they are much more efficient
than traditional ones. They are faster, as votes can be recorded and stored securely on
the blockchain in minutes or seconds, compared to conventional voting systems, which
sometimes take days or weeks to be tallied. This makes it easier for officials to manage and
monitor elections, as the votes are tabulated in real-time. In addition, blockchain voting
systems can also be used to provide voter authentication. This ensures that only authorized
voters can vote and are securely stored and validated. This eliminates the possibility of
voter fraud, as votes can be tracked and verified to ensure that they are authentic [5–11].
Finally, blockchain voting systems provide greater transparency than traditional voting
systems due to the distributed nature of the blockchain. All votes are securely stored on
the blockchain, allowing anyone to view and verify them. This eliminates the possibility of
rigged or manipulated polls, as anyone can view them and verify that they are accurate
and authentic. In conclusion, blockchain voting systems offer numerous advantages
over traditional voting systems, such as improved security, transparency, and
efficiency. As technology evolves and improves, blockchain voting systems become
increasingly popular and could soon become the norm in elections worldwide [12–14].
Section 1 represents a brief introduction, and Section 2 describes Blockchain in detail
and its subsequent necessity. Section 3 iterates through the short report of the
literature review. Section 4 outlines the proposed methodology and design. It also gives
details of multiple phases and the level of work done in the technical aspect of the
proposed system. Section 5 is an analysis and discussion of the theoretical and practical
implementation of the proposed method; It also has a validation subsection. Finally, Section
6 is the conclusion, briefly summarizing the proposed model.

[Link]
Blockchain can assist in implementing an immutable, transparent, and efficient system
that cannot be hacked. Because blocks cannot be changed or deleted, blockchain can
solve the problems in the traditional voting system. Blockchain is a distributed network
composed of many interconnected nodes. A centralized approach does not control the
network. If most nodes agree, the transaction allows users to be anonymous. Whenever
there is a need for transparency and decentralized authentication and identification of users,
we use blockchain. The transactions in a blockchain network are encrypted. In simpler
words, blockchain is a shared database [15,16].
Core components of Blockchain Architecture:
• Node: Each user in a blockchain network is a node. A copy of the distributed ledger is
shared with all the blockchain network nodes.
• Transaction: is the foundation of blockchain. In a blockchain, transaction details (asset,
price, and ownership) are recorded and verified across all nodes.
• Block: numerous blocks in the blockchain network store information such as the hash
of that block. Figure 1 represents blocks committed in a ledger with their hash Id.
• Chain: blocks in a specific order. Blockchain ensures these blocks’ order by storing the
previous node’s hash in the current node.
• Miners: nodes that perform complex blockchain operations are responsible for verify-
ing whether a transaction is valid.
• Consensus: Blockchain follows some algorithms to reach an agreement among nodes
participating in a transaction. It’s proof of work.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 3 of 24
6, 70

Figure 1. Blocks committed in a ledger.

Some common terminologies in a blockchain are:

1. Smart Contract: Smart contracts are a simple logical bit of programs stored on each
block of blockchain that run when some conditions are proper. They follow “if/when
. . . then . . . ” statements written on the blockchain and help automate the verification of
parties’ agreement. Automated execution of an agreement is done with the help of
smart contracts; it ensures that each participant can be sure of the transaction’s
outcome. The irreversibility and traceability of these transactions increase the trust of
the nodes in the network. Some advantages of smart contracts are making faster
and better decisions, saving time, and lowering cost and risk.
2. Wallet: Wallet is a collection of user identities. It allows users to store and manage
their Bitcoin, Ether, and other cryptocurrencies.
3. Truffle: It’s a blockchain development environment. It also provides a testing
frame- work and asset pipeline for Ethereum. We have used Ganache, which
provides 10 Ethereum test accounts with 100 ETH.

Blockchain in Voting System

Blockchain technology makes implementing e-voting more affordable, simple, and
secure. This system ensures data integrity, availability, and fault tolerance by having
a decentralized system. Computers(nodes) connected in a decentralized network are
blockchain systems. Each node has a complete record of all the transactions on the network
and validates all the transactions. They form blockchains, which are ledgers in which
digital data is linked. Blockchain records are essentially unchangeable [17] . Benefits of the
E-voting system over the current system:
• User Participation: In blockchain-based voting systems, voting can be done anywhere
and on any internet device to increase user participation. It is beneficial for disabled
users.
• User Motivation: By having a fair election, user motivation and trust in the voting
system increase.
• Security: It is decentralized and uses hashing functions to secure transactions. We
need more than 50 affected nodes for a blockchain to be insecure.
 Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 4 of 24
6, 70

• Efficiency: In traditional e-voting systems, there is still some paperwork involved,

so by using a blockchain-based e-voting system, the cost is significantly reduced,
increasing the efficiency of election management.
• Precision: There are no errors (or) miscalculations of votes in blockchain-based voting
systems. So the results are accurate and timely. It also provides proof of vote to
every voter.

[Link] Review
Several papers have been published presenting the functions and issues with
blockchain- based Voting protocols. In this section, we have given some relevant blockchain
voting protocols. The Open vote network proposed by Uzma Jafar [1] was the first
release of a self-counting internet protocol that granted security and privacy through
Ethereum. Open Vote Network supported a small voting size of 50–60, a choice by
design but still failed to stop miners from illegal activities on the system. Voters could also
break the Voting system by sending an invalid vote. This system did not guarantee
resistance to violence and corruption, and since solidity did not support ‘elliptic curve
cryptography,’ the additional library developed into a better blockchain voting protocol.
After the library was added, the contracts and transaction data became too big to be stored
on the blockchain. The cost to maintain transaction data on Ethereum was astronomically
high; storing all voters’ data on it wasn’t feasible. Table 1 illustrates the comparison of
several blockchain voting platforms, frameworks they used, their security protocols, and
limitations.

Table 1. Comparison of Literature.

[Link] Security Protocol Limitations

[7] Ethereum, Geth ECC Audit, Accuracy, Integrity Scalability
[8] Bitcoin, Multichain SHA-256 Security
[9] ABVS, Ethereum N.A Transaction Privacy
[1] Ethereum, Hyperledger Fabric Double SHA-256 Scalability and Processing
[10] Smart Contracts zk-SNARK User Identity
[5] Blockchain ECC and SHA-256 Integrity and Scalability

Smart Contracts, Hyperledger Fabric, Membership Ser vice Provider (MSP),

Security
NFT[11] HSM
[12] Ethereum, Open Vote Network Merkle tree Transaction Privacy
[9] IOT based system SHA-256 Voting must be done via EVM
Zcash tokens, Authentication with
Challenge-Handshake Authentication Performance and security
[18] Protocol (CHAP) Protocol Handshake Authentication
Challenge-

[19] Ethereum Handling of incorrect data, some

Homomorphic encryption amount of ether is needed.

Limited applicability, Lack of empirical

[20] PyCharm’s Community software ECDSA, SHA-256, PKI evidence,
Security and
Privacy
[21] N.A SHA-256 N.G
[3] POW, Bitcoin SHA-256 Scalability, Accuracy
[2] POW, Ethereum SHA-3 Audit, Accuracy and Integrity
[4] PBFT, bitcoin Double SHA-256 Verifiability and scalability

Hsueh C.W [2] presented a decentralized and ingenuous electronic voting protocol.
The voting system (Date) required a minimum degree of confidence between
candidates. The date provided the ability to do large-scale electronic elections, which
OVN lacked. Regrettably, this proposed system was also functional enough to provide
security from
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 5 of 24
6, 70

DoS attacks because the authority needed for auditing the vote after the election wasn’t
available. While using Ring Signature, which keeps users’ privacy, it was hard to coordinate
several signers. This protocol could only be used for small-scale voting despite
providing the ability to do large scales. Shahzad et al. [3] presented a reliable blockchain-
based voting protocol. On a minor scale, it promised to solve anonymity, security, and
privacy problems in blockchain systems. However, this protocol wasn’t problem-
free; this paper used a mathematically complex and resource-demanding algorithm. It
needs a vast supply of energy to process. Another issue arises from the involvement of
third parties because there is a risk of fraudulent activity and data leaks.
Shiyao Gao [4] proposed an auditable blockchain-based voting technology. They
also modified the algorithm method to make it resistant to DoS attacks. It not only
accepts the anonymity of the voter, but it also helps the audit process. However, the
proposition analysis demonstrates that if voting is small scaled, privacy and efficiency gains
for election are considerable. Depending on the size, some efficiency is sacrificed to give
higher privacy. Haibo Yi [5] proposed a Blockchain-based Voting Scheme that employed
blockchain tech- nology to increase voting security in a peer network. A technology
placed on distributed ledger technology can be used to prevent vote manipulation.
Protocol was developed and tested on a peer network using Linux computers. This
technology makes the involvement of external parties necessary and is unsuitable for
centralized use in a system with various agents. With this system using a distributed
technology, securing multi-functional com- puters can prevent the issue. If the
calculation is complex and there are too many voters, compute expenses become
significant, if not prohibitive.
Khan, K.M. [6] proposed a blockchain-based electronic voting protocol. Their
experi- ments also provide fascinating insights into how specific characteristics, such as
interactions between various parameters and security and performance indicators
within an organi- zation, affect the system’s overall scale value and reliability. It became
clear. According to the author’s proposal, the election operation needs the
implementation of unique and hash-able addresses for voters and candidates. Voters
use these addresses to vote for candidates. However, severe drawbacks of this model
were revealed. This paper was open to bilateral investment because no regulators
prevent unauthorized voters from voting. Their methodology needed to be revised and
indifferent to the integrity of the voting process. This attack could be more targeted
because it needs to address the main problems of blockchain voting systems, especially
the scalability and latency of electronic voting. They used a multi-chain architecture, a
private blockchain based on Bitcoin unsuitable for a referendum. According to the
authors, this method is only suitable for small and medium voting contexts.
The main areas for improvement of past proposed blockchain-based voting
systems are primarily related to security and scalability issues. Many previous models
have used public blockchains, which are vulnerable to attacks from malicious actors.
Moreover, the transparency of public blockchains can compromise voter anonymity,
which is essential to ensuring free and fair elections. Scalability is another significant
issue in previous blockchain-based voting models. Public blockchains, which are
commonly used in many of these models, have limited transaction processing
capabilities, which can result in long voting times and increased costs. Additionally, the
high cost of transactions on public blockchains may make it difficult to implement
blockchain-based voting systems on a large scale. Another challenge previous models faced
was a standardized consensus mechanism for blockchain-based voting. Different models
have used various consensus mechanisms, including proof of work, proof of stake, and
delegated proof of stake. However, these mechanisms may not be suitable for large-
scale voting systems due to their high resource requirements. The drawback of an
online voting system where anyone can cast a vote instead of the intended user is the
issue of voter authentication and identification. In a traditional paper-based voting
system, voters must physically present themselves at the polling station and verify their
identity through government-issued identification, such as a passport or driver’s
license. However, in an online voting system, demonstrating the
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 6 of 24
6, 70

voter’s identity is challenging, and there is a higher risk of fraud or impersonation. Another
problem with online voting is that an attacker could gain unauthorized access to the voting
system and cast votes on behalf of other users.
Recent work in blockchain voting takes advantage of Zero Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs)
to determine the rightful owner of the vote. ZKPs allow for verifying a statement without
revealing information beyond what is necessary to prove the statement’s truth. This means
it is possible to establish a valid vote without revealing the voter’s identity or any informa-
tion about their voting preferences. One example of using ZKPs in blockchain voting is
the implementation of a ZKP-based authentication mechanism, where voters provide their
identity information to a trusted third party, which then generates cryptographic proof
that the voter is eligible to cast a vote. The evidence is then submitted to the blockchain
and verified using ZKPs, allowing the voter to cast a ballot without revealing their identity.
Another example is using ZKP-based anonymous voting schemes, where voters can cast
their votes without revealing their preferences or identity. This is achieved using ZKPs
to prove a valid vote without revealing any information. The use of ZKPs in blockchain
voting provides a promising avenue for addressing the challenge of verifying the rightful
owner’s identity while preserving the voter’s privacy and anonymity.
To address the shortcomings of previous blockchain voting systems, our proposed
blockchain voting system offers three key contributions:
1. A novel blockchain architecture with a hybrid consensus mechanism and a
modular design was proposed, effectively improving the system’s security,
scalability, and transparency capabilities for conducting secure and efficient
voting.
2. The proposed blockchain voting system integrates face recognition to deal with
the issue of unauthorized access and impersonation. AIML-based face recognition
can significantly enhance the security of online voting systems by reducing the risk
of unauthorized voting.
3. The proposed blockchain voting system has better performance and security capabili-
ties than other classical models and can ensure the voting results’ anonymity, integrity,
and accuracy while maintaining the voters’ privacy.

[Link] System
4.1. Methodology
The proposed work plan considers two main modules to be completed in three phases.
The two modules are the front end for the application and the back end using Solidity to
implement Blockchain. Each of these modules will be considered as one phase, and the
remaining phase will cover the connection and testing of these modules.

4.1.1. Frontend Module

In this phase, the frontend module will be covered, which involves building the
interactive user interface for the admin and the user. Research on implementing Blockchain
in a decentralized application will be done in parallel. The frontend module has two main
components: the admin and user modules.
Admin Module: The admin module is divided into five components: dashboard,
add candidate, create election, election details, and candidate details. Figure 2 shows
the functions of the admin module.
• Dashboard: The dashboard component will contain various charts to display informa-
tion such as the number of parties, voters, etc. This component will give the admin
an overview of the election process and help them make informed decisions.
• Add Candidate: In this admin feature, they can add candidates standing in the election.
After the candidate is added, it will be displayed on the user side. This component
will enable the admin to manage the list of candidates and ensure that only authorized
candidates are on the ballot.
• Create Election: This admin feature will allow them to create an election. A user can
cast their vote only after the admin makes the election. A user can cast a vote between
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 7 of 24
6, 70

the start date and the end date. This component will enable the admin to set the
parameters for the election, such as the start and end date, the number of voters,
and the type of election.
• Election Details: In this section, the admin can update election details such as the start
date, end date, etc. This component will enable the admin to manage the election
process and make changes if necessary.
• Candidate Details: All the candidates added by the admin will be displayed in the
candidate details component. The admin can update the candidate details if a wrong
entry is made. This component will enable the admin to manage the list of candidates
and ensure that the correct information is displayed [22,23].

Figure 2. Admin module.

User Module: The user module has four components: dashboard, voter register, voting
area, and results. Figure 3 shows the functions of the user module.
• Dashboard: The user dashboard contains information about parties and their
candi- dates. A user can see all the information about a candidate. This component
will give the user an overview of the election process and help them make
informed decisions.
• Voter Register: In this section, the first user will have to register themselves; only then
will they be able to cast their vote. This component will enable the user to register and
ensure that only authorized voters can cast their votes.
• Voting Area: After a user is registered, they will only be directed to this page and can
vote. This component will enable the user to vote and ensure that only authorized
voters can participate in the election.
• Result: The Results page will provide users with access to view the outcome of the
voting process, including the final results and other relevant details. This section
ensures transparency and informs users about the election’s outcome.

4.1.2. Backend Module

Phase 2 of this blockchain voting methodology involves the implementation of the
blockchain using the Ethereum framework and converting the system into a decentralized
application. In this phase, the back-end module will be developed using the Solidity
programming language, which is used for designing smart contracts on the Ethereum
blockchain. The first step in implementing the back-end module is to define the smart
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 8 of 24
6, 70

contracts for the voting system. Smart contracts enable the automation of contract
execution and management, enabling a more efficient and secure way to execute
transactions. The smart contracts in this system will handle the voting process, including
adding candidates, creating elections, registering voters, and counting votes. The smart
contracts will be deployed on the Ethereum blockchain, a decentralized platform that
enables the creation of decentralized applications. The blockchain will store all the
information related to the voting process, including candidate details, election details,
and voter details. Figure 4 represents blockchain data model.

Figure 3. User module.

Figure 4. Storing Unique ID in blockchain node.

The Ethereum blockchain is based on an algorithm called Proof of Work (PoW), which
ensures that the transactions on the blockchain are secure and transparent. This consensus
algorithm ensures that the transactions on the blockchain are irreversible and tamper-
proof. Figure 5 has code of block structure. The next step in implementing the back-end
module is creating the necessary Solidity functions to handle the voting process. These
functions will add candidates, create elections, register voters, and count votes. The parts
will be programmed in Solidity and deployed on the Ethereum blockchain. One of the key
advantages of using a blockchain-based system for voting is that it provides transparency
and security. The blockchain ensures that all transactions are secure and tamper-proof,
allowing for a transparent and auditable voting process. Since the data on the blockchain is
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 9 of 24
6, 70

decentralized and distributed across multiple nodes, it is difficult for anyone to manipulate
the data or hack the system. The next step is to test the back-end module once the smart
contracts and functions are defined and programmed. This involves running various test
cases to ensure the system functions as expected. The testing will cover different scenarios,
including adding candidates, creating elections, registering voters, and casting votes. The
testing will also cover strategies related to security and performance, ensuring that the
system is secure and efficient.

Figure 5. Contestant and voter solidity structure.

Once the back-end module is tested and verified, it will be integrated with the front-
end module in the project’s final phase. Combining the two modules will involve connect-
ing the user interface with the blockchain, ensuring that the front end can interact with
the back end and display the results of the voting process. In conclusion, Phase 2 of this
blockchain voting methodology involves the implementation of the back-end module using
the Solidity programming language and the Ethereum blockchain. The back-end module
will handle voting, including adding candidates, creating elections, registering voters, and
counting votes. The blockchain provides transparency and security to the voting process,
ensuring the transactions are secure and tamper-proof. Testing the back-end module will
ensure that the system is functioning as expected, and integrating the back-end with the
front-end will complete the development of the blockchain voting system.

4.1.3. Integration of Frontend and Backend

Phase 3 of the proposed blockchain voting methodology focuses on connecting the
frontend and backend modules and testing the platform to ensure its functionality and
security. This phase is crucial to ensure the entire project’s success, as it involves the
integration of the two modules and verifying their functionality. The first step in Phase 3
is to connect the frontend and backend modules. This links the frontend module’s user
interface with the backend module’s smart contracts. The connection should be secure
and efficient to ensure the integrity and reliability of the voting process. This is achieved
through RESTful APIs, which provide a standardized way of accessing the backend services
from the frontend application. Another critical aspect of Phase 3 is ensuring the system
is user-friendly and accessible to all users. This involves testing the system with a
diverse group of users to identify any potential barriers to accessibility, such as language or
usability issues. The system is designed with accessibility in mind to ensure that all users,
regardless of their technical abilities or background, can quickly and efficiently cast their
votes. It involves the connection of the frontend and backend modules, rigorous system
testing, and ensuring its usability and accessibility. By following a well-planned and
executed process, the proposed blockchain voting system easily overcomes the limitations
of existing voting systems. It provides a secure, transparent, and efficient way to conduct
elections. Integration of Firebase cloud and face recognition is also implemented in this
face.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 10 of 24
6, 70

4.2. Data Flow

The data flow in a blockchain voting system is described as follows:
• User Registration: The first step in the data flow of a blockchain voting system is the
user registration process. Users must register by providing basic information such as
their name, address, and date of birth. This information is stored in the user database
to verify the user’s identity during voting.
• Election Creation: Once the users have registered, the administrator can create
an election by setting the start and end dates, the list of candidates contesting the
election, and other relevant details. This information is stored in the election database.
• Voting: The user logs into the voting application and selects the candidate during the
voting process. The vote is then encrypted using the user’s private key and stored in
the blockchain. This ensures that the vote is secure and cannot be tampered with.
• Vote Counting: The votes are counted once the voting period ends. The smart contract
deployed on the blockchain tallies the votes and declares the winner. The results are
stored in the blockchain and can be viewed by anyone.
• Verification: The blockchain voting system allows voters to verify that their vote was
recorded correctly. The user can use their private key to decrypt their vote and verify
that it was registered correctly. This ensures the integrity of the voting process.
The data flow in a blockchain voting system is designed to be transparent, secure, and
tamper-proof. Blockchain technology ensures that the voting process is fast and cannot
be manipulated by any individual or group. The system’s transparency allows for easy
verification of the results, which helps build trust in voting [8] . Overall, the data flow of
a blockchain voting system is a critical component of the system design. It ensures that the
system is secure, transparent, and tamper-proof, which are essential for maintaining
the integrity of the voting process.

4.3. Firebase Integration

One of the critical aspects of the proposed blockchain-based voting system is the secure
storage and management of voter registration data. This data contains sensitive
informa- tion, including voters’ details and unique identification numbers. Any
unauthorized access or tampering of this data could compromise the entire election
process. In the proposed blockchain voting system, when voters register to participate in
an election, their registration data is collected and stored securely on Firebase Cloud. This
data includes the voter’s name, address, age, and other relevant details required to verify
their voting eligibility. When voters attempt to vote, the blockchain verifies their identity
by accessing their registration data on Firebase Cloud. The blockchain checks the
voter’s ID and cross-references it with their personal information to determine that the
voter is eligible to cast their vote. If the information matches, the voter is allowed to
proceed with casting their vote. Furthermore, integrating Firebase Cloud with the
blockchain voting system also offers other benefits. For instance, Firebase Cloud’s
scalability ensures the system can handle a large volume of voter registration data. This
feature is essential in countries with a large voter population where traditional voting
systems need help to cope with the sheer number of voters. Moreover, Firebase Cloud’s
accessibility is another advantage that it brings to the table. It enables voters to register
for voting from anywhere worldwide, as long as they have an internet connection. This
feature increases the convenience of the voting process, making it more accessible to a
broader range of people. It provides a secure and scalable platform for storing voter
registration data and allows the blockchain to verify the identity of voters before they
can cast their votes. The real-time updates feature ensures the data is up-to-date and
accurate, enhancing the system’s security. Finally, the accessibility of Firebase Cloud makes
the voting process more convenient for voters, increasing the overall participation rate
[24,25].
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 11 of 24
6, 70

4.4. Face Recognition

Integrating AIML face recognition technology with a blockchain-based voting system
involves several steps. Firstly, a face recognition model needs to be trained using a large
dataset of faces to recognize and verify individuals accurately. This model can be based on
machine learning algorithms such as neural networks or support vector machines. Once the
model is trained, it must be integrated with the blockchain-based voting system through
smart contracts. These smart contracts can be designed to capture and store the facial
biometric data of registered voters in a secure and encrypted manner. When a voter logs in
to the voting system, the smart contract can use the face recognition model to verify their
identity. To ensure the privacy and security of voters, the facial biometric data can be stored
on a separate cloud-based service, such as Firebase, integrated with the blockchain-based
voting system. This allows for secure and efficient access to necessary data during voting.

4.5. Proposed System Design

Figure 6 is the flowchart of the proposed blockchain voting system. It explains the
process flow of every step involved via graphical representation. The voter’s identity
is verified through a unique identifier provided during registration. During the voting
process, the voter submits their vote through an interface linked to the blockchain network.
The vote is then verified through smart contracts and stored on the blockchain in a
secure and immutable manner. The voter can also track their vote through the
blockchain to ensure accuracy and transparency. Vote casting involves the voter
accessing the voting application and selecting their preferred candidate. Once the vote is
cast, it is recorded on the blockchain and cannot be altered. Subsequent vote counting
involves tallying the votes recorded on the blockchain to determine the election results.
The ballots can be counted manually or using an automated system, depending on the
size of the election and the resources available. Depending on the development of the
previous step, the winner is declared, or the system initiates a runoff election.
Figure 7 is the sequence figure of the proposed blockchain voting system. A
sequence diagram is a tool to visualize the interactions between different objects in a
system over time. It begins with the voter registering for the election, and their information
is stored securely on the Firebase Cloud. When voters attempt to vote, their identity is
verified through the blockchain using the stored registration data. Once the voter
selects a candidate, the vote is added as a transaction on the blockchain. The transaction
includes information about the voter, the candidate they voted for, and the voting time.
A sequence diagram helps demonstrate a blockchain voting system’s interactions and
processes. It can help to identify potential bottlenecks or areas for improvement while
also showcasing the transparency and security features of the system.
Figure 8 represents the data flow of the proposed system. The data flow in a blockchain
voting system starts with the voter registration process, where the voters. The vote is
encrypted for security and privacy. The blockchain then verifies the vote’s validity and
adds it to the ledger. The results are then tallied and published on a public website
for transparency. Overall, the data flow involves the interaction between the voter, the
blockchain, and the Firebase Cloud. This ensures the voting process’s security and accuracy
while allowing easy access to information and results. By utilizing these technologies,
the voting process becomes more efficient and transparent, which helps to increase
trust in the system. Section 4.2 has a more detailed explanation of data flow and the
various approaches involved.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 12 of 24
6, 70

Figure 6. Flowchart of proposed system.

Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 13 of 24
6, 70

Figure 7. Sequence diagram of the proposed system.

Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 14 of 24
6, 70

Figure 8. Dataflow of proposed system.

Table 2 compares different blockchain technologies used in voting. The first

column lists the names of the blockchain technologies, and the second column briefly
describes each technology. The information in this table was populated through
research and test- ing. We have thoroughly reviewed the literature to identify the most
commonly used blockchain technologies in voting. We also tested each of these
technologies to evaluate their performance. Table 2 comprehensively compares
blockchain-based voting systems based on several essential features. Each system has
its unique characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses. Therefore, it is crucial to consider
the requirements of a particular voting scenario before selecting an appropriate
blockchain-based voting system. For example, if the main goal is to achieve complete
anonymity for voters, System 2 or System 4 may be a better choice. System 2 or 4 may
be more suitable if scalability is the primary concern. Alternatively, if the main priority
is to minimize cost, System 2 may be the best option.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 15 of 24
6, 70

Table 2. Comparison of Blockchain-based Voting Systems.

Feature System 1 System 2 System 3 System 4

Type of Blockchain Private Public Consortium Private
Consensus Mechanism Proof of Authority Proof of Work Delegated Proof of Stake Byzantine Fault Tolerance
Smart Contract Platform Ethereum EOSIO Hyperledger Fabric Stellar
Voter Anonymity Partial Complete Partial Complete
Transaction Speed High Medium Medium High
Scalability Low High Medium High
Cost High Low High Medium

Table 3 presents six different blockchain technologies used in the voting process. The
first column, Technology, includes the names of the technologies: Ethereum, Hyperledger
Fabric, Corda, EOSIO, Stellar, and IOTA. The second column, Description, briefly explains
each technology’s characteristics.

Table 3. Blockchain technologies used in voting.

Technology Description
Ethereum Public blockchain platform
Hyperledger Fabric Private blockchain framework
Corda Distributed ledger platform
EOSIO Decentralized operating system
Stellar Open-source blockchain network
IOTA Tangle-based distributed ledger technology

Table 4 compares the proposed blockchain voting system with several others based
on various parameters. The first parameter is the reference framework used in each design.
The proposed method and two different systems use Ethereum as their reference frame-
work, while the other use Bitcoin and Multichain. The following parameter is anonymity,
which indicates whether the system offers voters anonymity. Three systems, including
the proposed method, use anonymity measures to protect voters’ privacy. However, the
Multichain and Bitcoin-based systems do not provide any anonymity measures. The third
parameter is affordability, which refers to the cost of the system. Only the Bitcoin-based
system is affordable, while the others are relatively expensive. The fourth parameter is
accuracy, which indicates how accurately the system records votes. Four plans, including
the proposed method, provide accurate vote recording. The fifth parameter is accessibility,
which refers to how easily the system can be used. Four out of five systems offer accessibil-
ity to voters, while one system (Bitcoin-based) does not. The last parameter is scalability,
which refers to how well the system can handle increasing number of users. Four out
of five systems are scalable, while one system (Multichain-based) is not. The proposed
model has several advantages over the existing systems in the table. We have focused on
providing complete anonymity to voters, an essential feature of any voting system. The
proposed model is also affordable, accurate, accessible, and scalable, which is crucial for
any voting system. The authors have used Ethereum as their blockchain framework for the
proposed method.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 16 of 24
6, 70

Table 4. Comparison of Blockchain-Based Voting Systems.

Ref. Framewor Anonymity Affordability Accuracy Accessibilit Scalability

k y
[7] Ethereum Yes No No Yes Yes
[6] Multichain Yes No No Yes Yes
[5] Bitcoin Yes Yes No Yes No
[2] Ethereum Yes No No Yes No
[4] Bitcoin Yes Yes No Yes No
Proposed work Ethereum Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

[Link] and Discussion

One of the most promising applications of blockchain technology is in the field of
voting. The decentralization and transparency provided by blockchain can potentially elim-
inate the issues of fraud and manipulation that plague traditional voting systems. Firstly,
the cryptographic functions used in blockchain technology make it practically impossible
to tamper with the data stored in the blocks. For example, the SHA-256 algorithm used
in Bitcoin has a 256-bit output, meaning that the chances of finding two inputs that hash
to the same output are approximately 1 in 2 256, a minimal probability. This makes it very
difficult for anyone to alter the data in the blockchain without being detected. The SHA-256
hash function takes an input message and produces a fixed-size output hash value of 256
bits. The AES-256 encryption algorithm takes a plaintext message and a secret key and
produces a ciphertext message of the same length [26].
We can represent the process of hashing the message M as follows:

H(M) = SHA-256(M)

Let’s assume the input message M is “Voter A votes for candidate A”. We can compute
the SHA-256 hash of M as follows:
H(“Voter A votes for candidate A”) = SHA-256(“Voter A votes for candidate A”) =
6789470e0b030e13d1ebf3eaccb7a8878ed721c9b3d41c279f54b49e8eb63e99
The resulting hash value is a 256-bit hexadecimal number. Next, we can represent the
process of encrypting the message M using the AES-256 encryption algorithm as follows:

C = AES-256(M, K)

C is the ciphertext, M is the plaintext message, and K is the secret key. Let’s assume
that the private key is “secret123”. We can encrypt the plaintext message “Voter A votes for
candidate A” using AES-256 as follows:
C = AES-256(“Voter A votes for candidate A”, “secret123”)
= “qLwmc7rsiM2QIYzKbL4x4cXcdjuvKj+CvcgPuz49ec8=”
The resulting ciphertext is a base64-encoded string of the same length as the plaintext
message. By using both hashing and encryption techniques in a smart contract, we can
ensure that the voting data is secure and tamper-proof on the blockchain. The efficiency
of a blockchain-based voting system is determined by its ability to ensure fast and secure
voting with minimal errors or delays. Additionally, the system’s decentralization ensures
that votes are recorded and verified by a network of nodes rather than a central authority.
This results in a more transparent and trustworthy voting process with higher accuracy
and efficiency [27].
The main reason the blockchain-based voting system is preferable to the traditional
approach is its efficiency. We have analyzed the efficiency of blockchain and conventional
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 17 of 24
6, 70

systems through tests and sample data. To test the proposed blockchain-based voting
system, 1000 votes(V) were chosen to be cast, of which 800 were successful in an hour.

R = V/E = 800/1000 = 0.8 = 80

The system’s efficiency is calculated as the ratio of the votes cast to the total time taken
T, multiplied by the number of candidates C:

Efficiency = (V/T) × C
Substituting the given values:

Efficiency = (800/60) × 5 = 66.67 votes per minute per candidate

This means that, on average, each candidate received about 13.2 votes per minute. To
calculate the efficiency of a traditional voting system, we considered several factors, such
as the time taken for vote counting, the number of errors made during the process, the
accuracy of the results, and the level of transparency and trust in the system. A traditional
voting system takes an average of 2 hours to count the votes, has a 1% error rate, and
results in a 90% accuracy rate; the efficiency can be calculated using the following
formula:

Efficiency = (Total time taken/Number of eligible voters)/(1 − Error rate) × Accuracy rate
Efficiency = (2/1000)/(1 − 0.01) × 0.9 = 0.0018
Therefore, the efficiency of the traditional voting system would be 0.0018. Comparing
this to the efficiency of the blockchain-based voting system (0.0078), we can see that
the blockchain-based system is more efficient in terms of time and accuracy. However,
it is important to note that this is just one factor to consider, and other factors, such as
security and trust, should also be evaluated before deciding on a voting system.
However, there are also some potential drawbacks to consider. One issue is the risk of
centralization, where a small group of entities control most of the blockchain’s
computing power and therefore have a disproportionate influence over the voting
process. Additionally, the immutability of blockchain can make it difficult to correct
errors or address disputes once the voting process has ended. Another potential issue is
the need for voter privacy. While blockchain provides transparency and accountability, it
can also compromise the anonymity of voters if their identities are linked to their votes. To
address this, some blockchain-based voting systems use zero-knowledge proofs, which
allow voters to prove that they cast a valid vote without revealing their actual vote
[28]. The main drawback of an online voting system where anyone can cast a vote
instead of the intended user is the issue of voter authentication and identification. In a
traditional paper-based voting system, voters must physically present themselves at the
polling station and verify their identity through government-issued identification, such
as a passport or driver’s license. However, in an online voting system, it is challenging to
ascertain the identity of the voter, and there is a higher risk of fraud or impersonation
[29–41]. The proposed system is integrated with AIML-based face recognition to tackle
this issue. AIML-based face recognition is a modern technique that uses computer
algorithms to detect and recognize human faces. In the context of online voting
systems, this technology can combat the issue of unauthorized voting by verifying the
identity of the person casting the vote. The system can ensure that only authorized users
are casting votes by requiring users to present their faces in front of a camera during the
voting process. The face recognition system uses various computer vision algorithms to
detect and extract facial features such as the eyes, nose, and mouth from images. These
features are then compared to a database of known faces to identify the person in the
picture. The algorithm can also check for anomalies, such as masks or other facial
coverings, that could be used to deceive the system. AIML-based face recognition can
significantly enhance the security of online voting systems by reducing the risk of
unauthorized voting. This technology provides a reliable and efficient way to verify the
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 18 of 24
6, 70

voter’s identity in real-time, significantly reducing the risk of fraud and manipulation.
In addition to enhancing security, face recognition technology can also improve the user
experience for voters. By streamlining the verification process, voters can quickly and
easily cast their votes without requiring lengthy identity verification procedures.

5.1. Validation
The purpose of this validation is to evaluate the performance of the proposed
Blockchain Voting System. The validation process aims to test the system’s capabilities
and identify any weaknesses or flaws that need improvement. To validate the Blockchain
Voting System, we conducted a series of tests on different aspects of the system. These
tests evaluated the system’s functionality, security, and usability. We tested the
functionality of the Blockchain Voting System by simulating a mock election. During this
simulation, we registered voters, recorded their votes, and counted the results. The
system performed well during this test, accurately recording and counting all votes.
Security is an essential aspect of any voting system, and the Blockchain Voting System
has several security measures in place. We tested the system’s security by attempting
to hack into the system and alter the recorded votes. However, the proposed model
could not bypass the system’s security protocols, and all recorded votes remained
unchanged. Usability is another crucial factor in a voting system, as it should be easy for
voters to use and understand. We conducted a user study to evaluate the system’s
usability. The results of this study showed that the system was intuitive and easy to use,
with a user-friendly interface.

5.2. Test Results

• System Performance: The system handled the sample data efficiently and promptly.
The total time taken for the system to process all the votes was one hour, which is
within acceptable limits. The plan also handled the total number of votes cast (800)
and the number of eligible voters (1000) without any issues.
• Accuracy: The accuracy of the results was assessed by comparing the number of votes
cast to the number of eligible voters and the number of candidates. The results were
accurate, with 80% eligible voters casting their votes and five candidates being present
in the election.
• Security: The system’s security was also tested and found to be secure due to smart
contracts and encryption. The hashing and encryption algorithms used in the system
were effective in protecting the integrity of the votes cast and ensuring that they could
not be tampered with.
• User Experience: The system’s user experience was satisfactory, with an intuitive user
interface and clear instructions for voters and administrators.
• Overall Efficiency: The efficiency of the system was evaluated using the formula:
Efficiency = (Total number of votes cast / Total number of eligible voters) × 100%
Plugging in the provided data: Efficiency = (800 / 1000) × 100% = 80%
This indicates that the system achieved an efficiency of 80% in processing the
votes cast, which is a good result. Based on the results of this validation test, it can
be concluded that the proposed system is an effective and secure solution for
conducting elections. The plan handled the sample data efficiently and accurately
while providing a satisfactory user experience. The system’s efficiency in
processing votes was also high, indicating that it is a viable alternative to
traditional voting systems.
Table 5 includes columns for the validation criteria, test case, result, expected outcome,
actual outcome, and pass/fail status. Each row represents a different validation test, such
as voter registration or vote counting. The table can be used to track the results of each test,
including any errors or unexpected outcomes that occurred during the testing process. The
pass/fail status column indicates whether each test passed or failed based on the expected
result. This type of validation table can be used to ensure the reliability and accuracy of the
blockchain voting system.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 19 of 24
6, 70

Table 5. Validation Results.

Validation Test Case Resul Expected Outcome Actual Outcome

Criteria t
Voter Registration Register with invalid ID Failed Error message displayed Error message displayed
Voting Cast vote without registration Failed Error message displayed Error message displayed
Vote Counting Count invalid vote Failed Invalid vote not counted Invalid vote not counted s
Security Attempt to hack blockchain Passed Access denied Access denied
Performance Large number of voters Passed No system slowdown No system slowdown

Table 6 shows the validation process results for the blockchain voting system. Each
validation criterion is listed, along with whether it passed or failed. The requirements
include accuracy of vote counting, integrity of the blockchain, security of voter information,
ease of use for voters, and ease of use for administrators. The validation process found
that all criteria passed, indicating that the system was effective and reliable. Validation
is generated through vigorous testing on blockchain models like Ethereum and
Multichain. Testing is applied on the local blockchain and deployed blockchain.

Table 6. Validation Results for Blockchain Voting System

Validation Description Pass/Fail

Criteria
Accuracy The system accurately records and counts votes Pass
Security The system is secure and free from vulnerabilities Pass
Usability The system is user-friendly and easy to use Pass
Scalability The system can handle a large number of users and transactions Pass
Transparency The system provides clarity throughout the voting process Pass
Integrity The system maintains the integrity of the voting process Pass
Reliability The system functions reliably and is available when needed Pass
Accessibility The system is accessible to all eligible voters Pass
Auditability The system provides an audit trail of all voting activities Pass
Compatibility The system is compatible with existing voting infrastructure Pass
Performance The system performs well under high load conditions Pass
Cost-Effectiveness The system is cost-effective compared to traditional voting methods Pass

[Link]
The issue of maintaining a secure voting system is a prevalent problem in many
countries. Current voting systems, such as the EVM in India, face significant problems,
such as decreased security and privacy concerns. The proposed model presents
solutions to these problems through a blockchain-based voting system that utilizes smart
contracts to ensure voter privacy, increase voting motivation, and enhance overall election
security. The proposed method used Ganache, a private Ethereum platform, to develop a
decentralized application with numerous advantages, such as accurate traceability and
high-security protocols. By utilizing a decentralized database, the proposed system offers
a more secure voting process than existing centralized databases. One significant benefit of
the proposed method is that voters can vote from anywhere and on any internet-enabled
device. This feature enhances convenience and accessibility for voters and potentially
increases voter turnout. Moreover, the proposed system increases voter motivation by
instilling trust in voting, a crucial aspect of a fair election. While the proposed method
offers numerous advantages over current voting systems, there are opportunities for
future research to
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 20 of 24
6, 70

increase its security and accuracy. Implementing AIML can be utilized to identify the
individuals casting their votes. This addition could provide an additional layer of protection
to ensure that only eligible voters are casting their votes. The protocol could verify whether
the person voting is the same person who registered during the registration process. By
incorporating these concepts, the voting system could be made even more secure and
trustworthy, ultimately ensuring a fair election. Our proposed model is validated and
evaluated through simulations and experiments to ensure the accuracy and
effectiveness of our proposed blockchain voting system. In conclusion, the proposed
blockchain-based voting system with smart contracts offers numerous advantages over
traditional voting systems. The system provides a more secure and private voting
process while increasing convenience and accessibility for voters. Implementing AI and ML
concepts could enhance the system’s security and accuracy, ensuring a fair and
transparent election process. By utilizing this system, countries could provide a fair and
transparent election process, instilling trust in the democratic process.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.S. and A.G.; methodology, R.R.P. and R.R.;
software, S.K.; validation, S.K. and S.K.P.; formal analysis, S.K.; resources, R.R. and R.R.P.; writing—
original draft preparation, R.R.P. and S.K.P.; writing—review and editing, R.R.P and S.K.;
supervision, S.K.; project administration, S.K., R.R.K, R.R, and S.K.P; funding acquisition, . All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Data sharing not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Jafar, U.; Aziz, M.J.A.; Shukur, Z. Blockchain for electronic voting system—Review and open research challenges. Sensors
2021,
21, 5874. [PubMed]
2. Lai, W.J.; Hsieh, Y.C.; Hsueh, C.W.; Wu, J.L. Date: A decentralized, anonymous, and transparent e-voting system. In Proceedings
of the 2018 1st IEEE international conference on hot information-centric networking (HotICN), Shenzhen, China, 15–17 August
2018; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA 2018; pp. 24–29.
3. Shahzad, B.; Crowcroft, J. Trustworthy electronic voting using adjusted blockchain technology. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 24477–
24488.
4. Gao, S.; Zheng, D.; Guo, R.; Jing, C.; Hu, C. An anti-quantum E-voting protocol in blockchain with audit function. IEEE
Access
2019, 7, 115304–115316. [CrossRef]
5. Yi, H. Securing e-voting based on blockchain in P2P network. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2019, 2019, 137.
6. Khan, K.M.; Arshad, J.; Khan, M.M. Investigating performance constraints for blockchain based secure e-voting system.
Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2020, 105, 13–26.
7. McCorry, P.; Shahandashti, S.F.; Hao, F. A smart contract for boardroom voting with maximum voter privacy. In Proceedings
of the Financial Cryptography and Data Security: 21st International Conference, FC 2017, Sliema, Malta, 3–7 April 2017;
Revised Selected Papers 21; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 357–375.
8. Ayed, A.B. A conceptual secure blockchain-based electronic voting system. Int. J. Netw. Secur. Its Appl. 2017, 9, 01–09.
9. Pawlak, M.; Poniszewska-Maran´ da, A.; Kryvinska, N. Towards the intelligent agents for blockchain e-voting system.
Procedia Comput. Sci. 2018, 141, 239–246.
10. Fusco, F.; Lunesu, M.I.; Pani, F.E.; Pinna, A. Crypto-voting, a Blockchain based e-Voting System. In Proceedings of the KMIS,
Seville, Spain, 10 January 2018; pp. 221–225.
11. Denis González, C.; Frias Mena, D.; Massó Muñoz, A.; Rojas, O.; Sosa-Gómez, G. Electronic voting system using an enterprise
blockchain. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 531.
12. Bosri, R.; Uzzal, A.R.; Al Omar, A.; Hasan, A.T.; Bhuiyan, M.Z.A. Towards a privacy-preserving voting system through
blockchain technologies. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Intl Conf on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, Intl
Conf on Pervasive Intelligence and Computing, Intl Conf on Cloud and Big Data Computing, Intl Conf on Cyber Science and
Technology Congress (DASC/PiCom/CBDCom/CyberSciTech), Fukuoka, Japan, 5–8 August 2019; IEEE: 2019; pp. 602–608.
13. Tas¸, R.; Tanrıöver, Ö.Ö. A systematic review of challenges and opportunities of blockchain for e-voting. Symmetry 2020, 12, 1328.
14. Alam, A.; Rashid, S.Z.U.; Salam, M.A.; Islam, A. Towards blockchain-based e-voting system. In Proceedings of the 2018
International Conference on Innovations in Science, Engineering and Technology (ICISET), Chittagong, Bangladesh, 27–28
October 2018; pp. 351–354.
15. Al-Maaitah, S.; Qatawneh, M.; Quzmar, A. E-voting system based on blockchain technology: A survey. In Proceedings of the
2021 International Conference on Information Technology (ICIT), Amman, Jordan, 14–15 July 2021; pp. 200–205.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 21 of 24
6, 70

16. Park, S.; Specter, M.; Narula, N.; Rivest, R.L. Going from bad to worse: from internet voting to blockchain voting. J.
Cybersecur.
2021, 7, tyaa025.
17. Barger, A.; Manevich, Y.; Meir, H.; Tock, Y. A byzantine fault-tolerant consensus library for hyperledger fabric. In Proceedings
of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC), Sydney, Australia, 3–6 May 2021; pp.
1–9.
18. Bulut, R.; Kantarcı, A.; Keskin, S.; Bahtiyar, S¸. Blockchain-based electronic voting system for elections in Turkey. In Proceedings
of the 2019 4th International Conference on Computer Science and Engineering (UBMK), Samsun, Turkey, 11–15 September 2019;
IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 183–188.
19. Baran´ ski, S.; Szyma ´nski, J.; Sobecki, A.; Gil, D.; Mora, H. Practical I-voting on stellar blockchain. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7606.
20. Hanifatunnisa, R.; Rahardjo, B. Blockchain-based e-voting recording system design. In Proceedings of the 2017 11th International
Conference on Telecommunication Systems Services and Applications (TSSA), Lombok, Indonesia, 26–27 October 2017; pp. 1–6.
21. Mitra, M.; Chowdhury, A. A Modernized Voting System Using Fuzzy Logic and Blockchain Technology. Int. J. Mod. Educ.
Comput. Sci. 2020, 12, 17–25.
22. Moura, T.; Gomes, A. Blockchain voting and its effects on election transparency and voter confidence. In Proceedings of the 18th
Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, Staten Island, NY, USA, 7–9 June 2017; pp. 574–575.
23. Susskind, J. Decrypting democracy: Incentivizing blockchain voting technology for an improved election system. San Diego
L. Rev. 2017, 54, 785.
24. Pawlak, M.; Guziur, J.; Poniszewska-Maran´ da, A. Voting process with blockchain technology: auditable blockchain voting system.
In Proceedings of the Advances in Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems: The 10th International Conference on
Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems (INCoS-2018), Bratislava, Slovakia, 5–7 September 2018; Springer: Cham,
Switzerland, 2019; pp. 233–244.
25. Sayyad, S.; Pawar, M.; Patil, A.; Pathare, V.; Poduval, P.; Sayyad, S.; Pawar, M.; Patil, A.; Pathare, V.; Poduval, P. Features
of blockchain voting: A survey. Int. J 2019, 5, 12–14.
26. Mohanta, S.R.; Jena, D.; Panda, G.K. A survey on blockchain-based electronic voting system. Int. J. Adv. Intell. Paradig.
2019,
13, 338–356.
27. Liu, W.; Zhu, Y.; Hu, W. Blockchain-based e-voting system. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 3rd International Conference on
Computer and Communications (ICCC), Chengdu, China, 13–16 December 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017; pp. 1034–1038.
28. Koutroulis, E.; Ioannidis, D.; Stamatopoulos, P. Deciding whether blockchain technology is the right fit for a secure and
transparent voting system. In Proceedings of the 2018 5th International Conference on Information Technology: IoT and Smart
City (ICIT), Bhubaneswar, India, 19–21 December 2018; pp. 1–6.
29. Bhukya, K.K.; Reddy, B.P. Efficient and secure blockchain-based e-voting system. In Proceedings of the 2019 International
Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Computer Engineering (SCEECE); Mumbai, India, 26 May 2019; IEEE: Piscataway,
NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 1–6.
30. Kumar, S.; Patil, R.R.; Rani, R. Smart IoT-Based Pesticides Recommendation System for Rice Diseases. In Intelligent
Systems and Applications: Select Proceedings of ICISA 2022; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2023; pp. 17–25.
31. Mehfuz, S.; Kumar, S. Energy aware probabilistic broadcasting for Mobile adhoc network. In Proceedings of the 2015 2nd
International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom), New Delhi, India, 11–13 March 2015;
pp. 1028–1033.
32. Patil, R.R.; Kumar, S.; Rani, R. Comparison of artificial intelligence algorithms in plant disease prediction. Rev. D’Intell. Artif.
Int. Inf. Eng. Technol. Assoc. 2022, 36, 185–193.
33. Patil, R.R.; Kumar, S.; Chiwhane, S.; Rani, R.; Pippal, S.K. An Artificial-Intelligence-Based Novel Rice Grade Model for Severity
Estimation of Rice Diseases. Agriculture 2023, 13, 47.
34. Patil, R.R.; Kumar, S.; Rani, R.; Agrawal, P.; Pippal, S.K. A Bibliometric and Word Cloud Analysis on the Role of the Internet of
Things in Agricultural Plant Disease Detection. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 6, 27.
35. Rani, R.; Kumar, S.; Patil, R.; Pippal, S. A machine learning model for predicting innovation effort of firms. Int. J. Electr.
Comput. Eng. 2023, 13, 4633–4639.
36. Rani, R.; Sahoo, J.; Bellamkonda, S. Application of Deep Transfer Learning in Detection of Lung Cancer: A Systematic Survey.
In Proceedings of the 2022 OPJU International Technology Conference on Emerging Technologies for Sustainable
Development (OTCON), Raigarh, India, 8–10 February 2023; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
37. Kumar, S.; Singh, A.P.; Ghosh, A. An efficient algorithm for increasing modularity in IoT based automation systems. J. Phys. Conf.
Ser. 2021, 1964, 062114.
38. Kshirsagar, N.; Pandey, G.; Prakash, A.; Chauhan, I.S.; Kumar, S. Educative Reality-Augmented Reality Application for Education.
In Proceedings of the 2023 2nd International Conference for Innovation in Technology (INOCON), Bangalore, India, 3–5 March
2023; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2023; pp. 1–6.
39. Singh, A.; Mishra, A.; Chitgopkar, S.; Mahajan, T.; Kumar, S. Homex: An Intelligent Home Automation and Security System.
In Proceedings of the 2022 OPJU International Technology Conference on Emerging Technologies for Sustainable
Development (OTCON), Raigarh, India, 8–10 February 2023; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2023, pp. 1–6.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2023, 22 of 24
6, 70

40. Bey, T.; Miri, A. Blockchain based e-voting for mobile platforms. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 86, 1024–1035.
41. Azimi, I.; Bahrami, M.; Dargahi, T. Blockchain-based voting protocol for mobile devices. J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2018, 39, 34–47.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.