A BIOMETRIC BASED STAND-ALONE ELECTRONIC VOTING UNIT …

ATBU, Journal of Science, Technology & Education (JOSTE); Vol. 5 (1), March, 2017 ISSN: 2277-0011

G. O. Uzedhe, & J. E. Okhaifo. Copyright © 2017 JOSTE. All Rights Reserved (www.atbuftejoste.com)119

A BIOMETRIC BASED STAND-ALONE ELECTRONIC VOTING UNIT FOR E-VOTING IN NIGERIA

By

G. O. Uzedhe, and J. E. OkhaifohElectrical & Electronic Engr. Dept.,

Federal University of Petroleum Resources,Effurun, Delta State, Nigeria

E-mail: [email protected] & [email protected]

ABSTRACTThis paper presents the design of an electronic voting machine suitable for the implementation of transparent e-votingframeworks and cut the cost of running elections using the otherwise traditional means. The system presented here,makes it possible to handle the elections processes in a more effective way through biometric authentication. Thisbiometric based small scale electronic voting machine is designed to handle a limited number of candidates with optionsfor upgrades to meet future demands. A user can be registered and verified through a biometric finger reader and analphanumeric keypad. The voting procedure and final result can be seen on an LCD interface. The system’s operationalalgorithm and interface management procedures are embedded into an ATMEGA2560 microcontroller which serves asthe central processing unit (CPU). The CPU also connects to a GSM radio device that sends election results to the centralcollation office for further actions through SMS. The result obtained shows that the machine is able to do two majorfunctions separately and independent of each other; register voters prior to Election Day and carry out the votingprocess by allowing only eligible voters earlier registered to vote after verification. The results also show that voterregistration and elections can be carried out at a reduced time with an average registration time of 22.67sec and anaverage voting time of 32.93sec per voter.

Keywords: Biometric, voting, GSM, Election, SMS

INTRODUCTIONDemocracy is becoming more acceptable

internationally as a better form of government. One keyfactor for this international acceptance of democraticgovernance is the degree of power given to thecitizenry in deciding the affairs of the state such aselecting their leader, through referendum and publicpolls.

Recently in this present era, countries andstates globally are exploring new technology frontiersto connect with their citizens more closely. In relationto technological progress, exploring methods ofincreasing involvement in democracy and sovereigninstitutions has become more important, as electronicparticipation media presents a seamless

communication process between the electorates andtheir elected representatives. Currently, emerginginformation policies and instruments have madeelectronic governance globally encompassing. Sincetheir initial introduction (Barlow, 2003), electronicgovernment services have been continuously growingand evolving in sophistication. Information andCommunication Technologies (ICT) are continuouslybeing introduced into various aspects of the electoralprocess. Back-end computers are now an integral partof almost all elections held internationally (Douglas,2001). Even in countries not officially exploringelectronic voting implementations, back-end computersystems are most used at some stage of the electoralprocess, either for ballot counting or for voter list



generation. Voter registration databases are nowautomated, ballots are cast into computer basedequipment in an ever-increasing number, and resultsare often computed and transmitted electronically tonecessary locations. These back-end computers couldbe more dreadful (Jacobs and Pieters, 2009) than anefficiently designed and protected electronic votingsystem (Al-Ameen and Talab, 2013). It will be difficult tostop electronic voting in our technically orientedsociety (Ananda et al), where more number ofprocesses link the electronic world and the mobility ofvoters is increasing. It is apparent, in this present timethat the basic questions no longer focus on whetherinformation technology should be accepted in theelectoral process, but rather on what kind of technologyto be implemented and to what extent.

In recent years, official pilots and trials havebeen held internationally, by a number of countries,aiming to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks ofelectronic voting Uzedhe and Okhaifoh (2016), butevidence does not seem to be conclusive; mostly due tothe diversity of the systems implemented, which aremeant to support a mixed range of contexts andrequirements. Although the benefits of introducingelectronic voting systems are often stated, concernswhich are most often voiced are not just based on thesecurity risks, but also sociological and politicalimplications, that may be raised from the introductionof this technology. Using digital technologies betweengovernments and the “people” is a process necessaryto be viewed within a wider framework. Electronicvoting is a social and political project not just atechnical project and must be handed with a verifiablestructure.

Electronic voting technology can speed up theentire electoral process as was demonstrated in theBrazilian general election in which after the winnerswere determine in few minutes after the close ofelection (Filho et al, 2003). E-voting technology can alsoreduce both the short and long-term cost of elections.In the short term, it can reduce the manpower requiredin the conduct of election by a very large per cent,

eliminate the cost of producing specialized IdentityCards for voters and most interestingly remove thecost of printing ballot papers and result sheets totally.In the long term, there will be significant savings fromthe reduction in numerous post-election litigations thatusually characterized the traditional voting system.E-voting can also improve accessibility for disabledvoters, and eliminate multiple voting completely. Allthese will positively affect the outcome of election andreshape the present political ideologies for betterelections.

In this paper, an automated standalone e-voting machine was designed and constructed. It allowsa voter to walk into the polling unit for which he hasbeen registered prior to the election, insert hisfingerprint on the machine-humane interface whichverifies the voter using automated fingerprintidentification system (AFIS). If the voter is verified, thekiosk automatically grants access to the voter throughit access control unit. Once the voter is authenticatedhe gains access to vote. At the close of voting theresults of the election are automatically tallied andwinners for the polling unit displayed outside the votingbooth and a true electronic copy of the result isautomatically transmitted to the central database for afinal collation. A back up copy of the result is also storedin a tamperproof non-removable memory for thepurpose of auditability.

Review of Existing SystemElectronic voting system has brought

revolutionary change in the traditional manual votingsystem. It makes the voting process simple and peoplefriendly (Alaguvel, Gnanavel, and Jagadhambal, 2013).The main purpose of an e-voting machine is to recordvotes and provide result very fast. The term “electronicvoting” is potentially broad, and refers to severaldistinct possible stages of electronic usage during thecourse of an election.

The electronic voting system is emerging as one ofmost preferred system in the 21st century. It may beadopted in the entire voting process or just a part of



the process. The use of electronic-voting machines hasbeen faced with so many challenges over the years.Scientists who have done work in, or are interested inelectronic-voting all seem to agree on two things:

i. Internet voting does not meet therequirement for public elections.

ii. The widely developed voting systems needimprovement.

Voting on the internet using everyday computersoffer only weak security, but its main disadvantages arein the areas of anonymity and protection againstcoercion and/or vote selling (Bungale and Sridhar). Areview of electronic voting machines (Kumar andBegum, 2012) reveals that there is a strong need forbiometric based e-voting devices to mitigate thesecurity of electronic voting. Iloanusi and Osuagwu(2008) in an overview of biometric recognitionprocesses and a comparison of their performanceindicates that iris and fingerprint biometricrecognitions are much more suitable for electronicvoting devices. Sudhakar and Sai (2015) in their workdeveloped a biometric based e-voting system with aArm9 microcontroller which connects to a centralserver through its Ethernet interface. In a similar work,Anandaraj et al (2015) and Anjum et al (2014) presentedsecured biometric based voting machines withdatabases held in a connected PC. The work of Syed etal (2015) provided a better secured biometric based e-voting device as a standalone system that is notconnected to external devices. It however implementsa removable SD card as its database. Though theauthors claimed a non-evasive security of the system,the use of such removable data card could impose astrong security threat. Biometric security alone cannothowever be guaranteed if a process information can beaccessed from a centre server or any external device.It is therefore necessary to draft out operationalcriteria to enhance the development of biometric basede-voting machines.

Ncumann (1993) gives a list of suggestions for“generic voting criteria” which suggests that a votingsystem should be so hard to tamper with and so

resistant to failure that no commercial system is likelyto ever meet the requirements and developing asuitable custom system would be extremely difficultand prohibitively expensive.The NSF Voting Report (2001) addresses the feasibilityof different forms of internet voting from both thetechnical and social science perspectives, and definesa research agenda to pursue if internet voting is to beviable in the future. It groups internet voting systemsinto three general categories as follows:

i. Poll-site internet voting: It offers the promise ofgreater convenience and efficiency in that voterscould cast their ballots from any poll-site, andtallying process would be both fast and certainmore importantly, since election officials wouldcontrol both the voting platform and physicallymanaging the security risks of such systems isfeasible.

ii. Kiosk voting: Voting machines would be locatedaway from traditional polling places in suchconvenient locations as malls, libraries, orschools. The voting platforms would still be underthe control of election officials, and physicalenvironment could be modified as needed andmonitored. (E.g. by election officials’ volunteers oreven cameras) to address security and privacyconcerns, and prevent coercion or other forms ofintervention.

iii. Remote internet voting: It seeks to maximize theconvenience and access of the voters by enablingthem to cast ballots from virtually any location thatis internet accessible. While this concept isattractive and offers significant benefits, it alsoposes substantial security risks and otherconcerns relative to civic culture. Current andnear-term technologies are inadequate to addressthese risks.

METHODOLOGY AND SYSTEM DESIGNPolling administration is a very important

aspect of any electoral process and devices used mustbe acceptable to voters and concern bodies. Electronic



voting devices must then be tailored towards voter’ssatisfaction while still ensuring accuracy,transparency, and trust. As pointed out by Uzedhe andOkhaifoh (2016), problems could arise if therepresentation of these devices are not open enough —both in hardware and software development.Standalone polling units can be complex to develop if allmeasures must be considered in terms of humanbehaviour. The units must however be made simpleenough to reduce polling time and encourage voterparticipation. Of course, the polling unit must becompact enough but not complex to setup, and shouldbe provided with a simple access. The voter shouldeasily understand the voting process; therefore, thesystem must have a very simple interface for text andgraphics information. The units should be made to beadaptable to different weather conditions and tamperproof against physical security.

To handle this complexity with simplicity, thework presents a modularized micro-processing methodin which simple modular units are interfaced through acontrol software algorithm. By this method, the controlalgorithm is embedded in a microcontroller andinteracts with modular agent algorithms thatcoordinate the activities of each modular interface. Thetwo most notable modular agent algorithms handlevoter registration and voter verification. These modularagents are individually enabled to take control of thephysical modular devices with the flexibility to switchfrom one function to another. This software agentdevice sharing method makes it possible to provide avery simple user interface that can help speeds upelectoral processes. Unexpected human behaviour ishandled through error notations and switch-backmodes. These modes include access denial and processcancellation that helps to avoid vote invalidation andswing voting.

Design AnalysisIn the design for this project, the most important

requirements were characterized as:

i. Voters are only eligible to vote if theirbiometrics are found in the database.

ii. Eligible voters are verified and authenticatedby their unique characteristics.

iii. Eligible voters are not allowed to cast morethan one vote.

iv. Result of election should be secret until theend of an election.

v. Voter privacy must be ensuredvi. While voting is on, there should not be a

method of knowing intermediate result thatcan affect the remaining voters' decisions

vii. All valid votes must be counted correctly andthe system outputs the final tally.

With these requirements in mind, the standalonevoting unit must include a dynamic database in an in-built memory device form which can be updated at alltimes but with the capacity to retain its content. Theremust be an algorithm to control the flow of data withnecessary data protection through encryption or otherdata protection techniques. The data protectionprocess is a necessary step to voter verification,authentication, security and privacy. Therefore, thevoting unit should include such device that can helpidentify unique treat of voters and as well containmodular agent algorithms for proper identification.Such algorithm must be able to authenticate theuniqueness of a voter’s treat. It must also verifywhether the voter have been registered or not, or thathe/she has voted or not. Of course, the use of such analgorithm ensures that multiple registrations are notallowed to a single voter and that a voter cannot castmore than one vote in a single election.

Voter privacy is a very important tool that canaffect participation and swing voting. Therefore, thedesign of the standalone unit must be done to avoid thepossibility of other voters or the official predictingwhich candidate or party a particular voter cast for.Such secrecy occasioned by voter privacy will securethe electoral process and greatly improves voterparticipation and reduce swing voting.



The final result of an election from a voting unit is veryimportant aspect of the process. Here, trust must beguaranteed by a way of using a trustworthy algorithmthat tallies the votes correctly. This part of thealgorithm must be open for people of all interest andverifiable that the results are skewed in favour of anycandidate or party.

Hardware Design

In order to meet with the requirement of the electronicvoting machine, the hardware system was sectionedinto units as shown in Figure 1. These units which includethe balloting unit, the identification unit, thecommunication unit, display unit, and alarm unit,interfaced the processing unit with respect to theirindividual component specifications and data and/orcontrol protocol.

Ballot UnitThe ballot unit is implemented using an

alphanumeric keypad connected to the digital pins ofthe Arduino mega 2560. Different function keys areused to represent the candidates for each category ofelection during a voting session. The functions can beadjusted depending on the type of election. For eachcategory of election, the number of candidatesdetermines the number of function keys configured forselection to prevent the possibility of invalid votes. Onlyone key can be pressed for each category. Thiscondition was also set to prevent multiple voting. Themicrocontroller reads the output state of the buttonsof the keypad in real time, once a high state is detectedon any of the buttons, the vote for that candidate isincremented by one provided all necessary votingconditions have been met.Identification unit:

One of the key requirements of the system isthat only eligible voters are allowed to vote. Therefore,

authentication and verification must be done throughidentification of voter specific treats. In this work, anautomated fingerprint identification unit was used toachieve this requirement. The biometric finger printreader (R305) applied here is a small embedded modulethat consists of an optical sensor mounted on a smallcircuit board. The optical sensor scans a fingerprintand the microcontroller and software codes providesthe modules functionality which automaticallyprocesses the scanned fingerprint. The module isresponsible for the reading and identification of thefingerprints with an on-board optical sensor and a 32-bit CPU. This device was selected based on itsspecification as shown in Table 1.1 and its compactnature that allow easy mounting.



Table 1: R305 Module Specification (Source: www.rhydolabz.com)Power DC 3.6V-6.0V Interface UART(TTL logical level)/ USB 1.1

Working current 150mA (max) Matching Mode 1:1 and 1:N

Baud rate (9600*N)bps, N=1—12 Character file size 256 bytes

Image acquiring time <0.5s Template size 512 bytes

Storage capacity 256 Security level 5 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5(highest))

False Acceptance Rate <0.001% False Rejection Rate <0.1%

Average searchingtime

< 1s (1:1000) Window dimension 18mm*22mm

Working environment Temp: -10℃- +40℃RH: 40%-85%

Storage environment Temp: -40℃- +85℃RH: <85%

Communication unitThe communication unit consists of a GSM

radio modular device that sends that enablesconnection to the central administration office. Theradio implements two different interface protocols thatenable connection to either a microcontroller or a PC.With its TTL output protocol, a range ofmicrocontrollers can easily be linked to the GSMnetwork for communication with available devices. Theradio device also provides access to a PersonalComputer (PC) through an RS232 protocol. The radiodevice module also has provisions to attachmicrophone and speaker, to take out +5V or othervalues of power and ground connections. These types ofprovisions vary with different modules. SIM900A GSMModule was used in this project, since it supportscommunication in 900MHz band. This is the band inwhich most mobile network providers in Nigeriaoperate. The SIM900 GSM module includes featuressuch as: Dual-Band 900/ 1800 MHz, GPRS multi-slotclass 10/8, GPRS mobile station class B, Compliant toGSM phase 2/2+, Class 4 (2 W @900 MHz), Class 1 (1 W@ 1800MHz), Control via AT commands (GSM 07.07,07.05 and SIMCOM enhanced AT Commands), Supplyvoltage range: 3.1- 4.8V, Low power consumption:1.5mA(sleep mode) and Operation temperature of -40°Cto +85°C

Display unitThe display unit is a Liquid Crystal Display

(LCD) and provides a dynamic human-machine interfacefor the voting unit. With the LCD all operations, duringvoter registration and voting processes, are madeinteractive to the user. The LCD used in this projectwork, is a 20-character by 4-line LCD module that isreadily available. This was considered for the design tomeet with required system non-complexity and the factthat it offers enough character blocks needed certainconfiguration commands.

Alarm unitThe alarm unit is a buzzer that is enabled by

the processing unit to trigger an alarm sound wheneverthere is an error indication. The power requirement ofthe buzzer is +5v dc supply and can be controlled froma single pin of the microcontroller.

DatabaseThe system’s database is implemented in the

microcontroller internal EEPROM memory (whichstores the votes accumulated) and the fingerprintmodule internal memory that provides a database forstoring the biometrics of all voters registered prior tothe voting process.

Processing unitAs shown in Figure 2, the processing unit

contains mainly a microcontroller (ATmega2560) which



served as the system’s CPU. It houses the mainprocessing and control algorithm that enablesconnection to other peripheral devices. The processingunit handles all process manipulations, protocolmanagement and peripheral device control. Theselection of ATmega2560 is mainly due to its numerablefeatures that made it a good choice for the votingmachine. It has internal EEPROM memory of 4Kbyte withdata retention of up to 20years at 85oC which makes itpossible to store enough information in the unit withlittle or no cost for a long period of time. With its 8Kbyteinternal RAM, data and I/O manipulation is flexible andadaptable. The ATmega2560 implements the necessaryinterface protocols (I2C, SPI, USART) that providesrobust interface with other external devices. The deviceruns an Advanced RISC Architecture that enables the

use of few number of program code to implementcomplex functions.

Software DesignModern electronic systems are made of two

dependent components that create flexibility,controllability at reduce complexity and physical size.The software component design needs a properconsideration to ensure system requirements are met.It implements the systems algorithms as controlsequences for necessary operations. The algorithmsare the formal definition of the system functions andmust be properly considered in order to present theright operation to the user. The function definitions ofthe standalone electronic voting machine areextraction of the system’s requirement and are listedhere as follows:

i. System initializes at power-up—LCD turned on,finger print sensor activated and with a beepfrom the buzzer.

ii. Administrative access information—LCDdisplays instruction to grant access to its twomain features: enrolment of voters and votingrespectively.

PG5/OC0B 1

PE0/RXD0/PCINT8/PDI2

PE1/TXD0/PDO3

PE2/XCK0/AIN04

PE3/OC3A/AIN15

PE4/OC3B/INT46

PE5/OC3C/INT57

PE6/T3/INT68

PE7/ICP3/CLKO/INT79

PH0/RXD2 12

PH1/TXD2 13

PH2/XCK2 14

PH3/OC4A 15

PH4/OC4B 16

PH5/OC4C 17

PH6/OC2B 18

PB0/SS/PCINT019

PB1/SCK/PCINT120

PB2/MOSI/PCINT221

PB3/MISO/PCINT322

PB4/OC2A/PCINT423

PB5/OC1A/PCINT524

PB6/OC1B/PCINT625

PB7/OC0A/OC1C/PCINT726

PH7/T4 27

PG3/TOSC2 28

PG4/TOSC1 29

RESET30

XTAL233 XTAL134

PL0/ICP4 35

PL1/ICP5 36

PL2/T5 37

PL3/OC5A 38

PL4/OC5B 39

PL5/OC5C 40

PL6 41

PL7 42

PD0/SCL/INT043

PD1/SDA/INT144

PD2/RXD1/INT245

PD3/TXD1/INT346

PD4/ICP147

PD5/XCK148

PD6/T149

PD7/T050

PG0/WR 51

PG1/RD 52

PC0/A853

PC1/A954

PC2/A1055

PC3/A1156

PC4/A1257

PC5/A1358

PC6/A1459

PC7/A1560

PJ0/RXD3/PCINT9 63

PJ1/TXD3/PCINT10 64

PJ2/XCK3/PCINT11 65

PJ3/PCINT12 66

PJ4/PCINT13 67

PJ5/PCINT14 68

PJ6/PCINT15 69

PG2/ALE 70

PA7/AD771 PA6/AD672 PA5/AD573 PA4/AD474 PA3/AD375 PA2/AD276 PA1/AD177 PA0/AD078

PJ7 79

PK7/ADC15/PCINT23 82PK6/ADC14/PCINT22 83PK5/ADC13/PCINT21 84PK4/ADC12/PCINT20 85PK3/ADC11/PCINT19 86PK2/ADC10/PCINT18 87PK1/ADC9/PCINT17 88PK0/ADC8/PCINT16 89

PF7/ADC7/TDI 90PF6/ADC6/TDO 91PF5/ADC5/TMS 92PF4/ADC4/TCK 93PF3/ADC3 94PF2/ADC2 95PF1/ADC1 96PF0/ADC0 97

AREF98

AVCC100

D7

14D

613

D5

12D

411

D3

10D

29

D1

8D

07

E6

RW5

RS

4

VSS

1

VDD

2

VEE

3

1 2 3

654

8 97

0

F1

F2

F3

F4STOPSTART

A

B

C

D

1 2 43TXVin

GNDRX

TX

RX

GND

Vin

Fing

erpr

intM

odul

eG

SMM

odul

e(S

IM90

0A)

Atmega2560

20 X 4 LCD

(R30

5)

Figure 2: Circuit diagram of the stand-alone e-voting machine

Buzz

er

+5V

+5V

+5V

+5V

+5V



iii. Password—to access any of the two features,a unique administrative password is required.

iv. Starting and Stopping a section—the use of the‘START’ and ‘STOP’ buttons begins and endseach section of the enrolment and votingprocesses.

v. User interaction—the machine must beinteractive all through a process, providing asimple step by step guideline to the user.

vi. Multiple registration—during registration, anindividual who has been registered beforecannot be registered again.

vii. Voter access permit—before voting, everyvoter must be identify and only permitted tovote, if his/her identity is found on thedatabase.

viii. Multiple vote casting—a registered voter isonly permitted to vote once after which accessmust be denied.

ix. Closing the voting process—to end a votingprocess, an administrative password isrequired to prevent illegal processtermination.

x. Result publications—at the close of electoralprocess, results are displayed on the LCD andcopies sent through SMS to the centraladministrative office.

3.3.1 Agent AlgorithmsAs mentioned in section 3.0, a number of modular agentalgorithms are needed to handle different aspects ofthe standalone electronic voting system. Figure 3shows the main control algorithm that provide link tothe two major modular algorithms for registrationprocess (Figure 4) and the voting process (Figure 5).

ENTER USER PASSWORD

CORRECTPASSWORD?

INITIALLIZE

START

ACTIVATE PROCESS OPTIONSF1 REGISTRATION PROCESS

F2 VOTING PROCESS

F1?

F2?

ENTERREGISTRATION

PROCESS

ENTER VOTINGPROCESS

STOP?

SOUND BUZZER

NOYES

YES

NO

YES

NO

NO

YES

Figure 3: Main Device Control Algorithm





RESULTSTo test the operation of the standalone voting

machine shown in Figure 6, a sample of fifteen studentswere asked to register secretly with either the right orleft thumb. After registration, they were asked to votecast vote for three choices with a YES or NO option bypressing F1 for YES and F2 for NO on the keypad. The

results of these experiments are as tabulated in tables2 and 3.

Figure 6: Finished standalone biometric e-voting



Table 3: Voter Authentication and VerificationSN VOTER REGISTRATION

SIGNATURE FINGER1st VOTER VOTING

SIGNATURE FINGER REMARK2nd VOTER VOTINGSIGNATURE FINGER

REMARK

1 Left thumb Right thumb NR Left thumb R2 Left thumb Left thumb R Left thumb AV3 Right thumb Right thumb R Right thumb AV4 Left thumb Left thumb R Left thumb AV5 Left thumb Left thumb R Right thumb NR6 Right thumb Right thumb R Left thumb AV7 Right thumb Left thumb NR Right thumb R8 Left thumb Right thumb NR Right thumb NR9 Right thumb Left thumb NR Right thumb R10 Left thumb Right thumb NR Left thumb R11 Right thumb Left thumb NR Right thumb R12 Right thumb Right thumb R Right thumb AV13 Right thumb Right thumb R Left thumb NR14 Right thumb Left thumb NR Right thumb R15 Left thumb Right thumb NR Left thumb R

AVAlready Voted, RRegistered, NRNot Registered

Table 2: Process timing and Choice SelectionSN REGISTRATION TIME

(in seconds)VOTING TIME(in seconds)

VOTING CHOICE REMARKPRESIDENT SENATE HOUSE OF

REP1 27 35 NO YES YES Successful2 25 34 NO YES NO Successful3 23 31 YES NO YES Successful4 24 33 YES YES NO Successful5 24 33 NO YES YES Successful6 22 32 NO YES NO Successful7 26 30 NO YES YES Successful8 27 31 YES NO YES Successful9 29 33 YES NO NO Successful10 21 37 YES YES NO Successful11 20 34 YES NO NO Successful12 23 34 NO YES NO Successful13 28 35 YES NO YES Successful14 22 31 NO YES NO Successful15 23 31 YES NO NO Successful

Total: 340s = 5.67minAverage: 22.67s

Total: 494s = 8.23minAverage: 32.93s



As seen from table 1, the fifteen studentsregistered for the exercise in a total of 5.67min with anaverage registration time of 22.67s. The total votingtime for these fifteen students as shown is 8.23min withan average voting time of 32.93s. Table 3 shows thateight students try at first to vote with the wrong fingerand the machine responded that they are notregistered. On a second-round voting, three studentsvoted with the wrong finger and the machine respondedwith Not Registered (NR). The machine equallyresponded Already Voted (AV) for five students whoattempted to vote again with the correct finger.

CONCLUSIONE-voting is an important process that must be

considered if transparency and trust must be built withincrease participation. Such voting system areundoubtedly better than the orthodox ballot votingsystem which is quite expensive to conduct, and facedwith a lot of irregularities. The results from this workhave shown that elections can be conducted faster andat reduced cost since the e-voting machines areadaptive and re-usable over a long period of time. Thesecurity layers and technology featured in the gadgetwould surely serve as a basis for conducting securedelections. Voting process with this system overcomesmost of the problems faced during the election periodand its adoption for use in any electoral process willbuild confidence on our national elections.

REFERENCES1. Lelia Barlow (2003), “An Introduction to Electronic

Voting”,https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/87e0/50a900fce2fbc373fa3e5f33ac7f80ed4032.pdf , [17/05/17].

2. Douglas W. Jones (2001), “Counting Votes withComputers”, presented for the League of WomanVoters of Johnson County, Iowa City,Iowa May, http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/voting/

3. Bart Jacobs and Wolter Pieters (2009), “ElectronicVoting in the Netherlands: from early Adoption toearly Abolishment”, Published in: Foundations ofSecurity Analysis and Design V: FOSAD2007/2008/2009 Tutorial Lectures. SpringerLNCS 5705, p. 121-144.

4. Abdalla Al-Ameen and Samani Talab (2013), “TheTechnical Feasibility and Security of E-Voting”, TheInternational Arab Journal of InformationTechnology, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp397—404.

5. Dev Ananda, Amanda Bui, Janet Gonzalez and MarthaPrempeh, “The Future of E-Voting”, InformationTechnology and Public Policy,https://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/csep590/04au/clearedprojects/Ananda.pdf , [17/05/17].Pp1—27.

6. G. O. Uzedhe and J. E. Okhaifoh (2016) “ATechnological Framework For Transparent E-VotingSolution In Nigeria Electoral System”, NigerianJournal of Technology (NIJOTECH), Vol. 35 No. 3,pp. 627—636. www.nijotech.com

7. R.N. Costa Filho, M.P. Almeida, J.E. Moreira, J.S.Andrade Jr, (2003) “Brazilian elections: voting fora scaling democracy”, Science Direct, Physica A322, pp. 698 – 700.

8. Alaguvel R., Gnanavel G., and Jagadhambal K. (2013),“Biometrics using Electronic Voting System withEmbedded Security”, International Journal ofAdvanced Research in Computer Engineering &Technology (IJARCET) Volume 2, Issue 3, pp1065—1072.

9. Prashanth P. Bungale and Swaroop Sridhar,“Requirements for an Electronic Voting System”,Department of Computer Science The JohnsHopkins University,http://www.cs.jhu.edu/~rubin/courses/sp03/group-reports/group4/group4_requirements.pdf ,[17/05/17]

10. D. Ashok Kumar and T. Ummal Sariba Begum (2012),“Electronic Voting Machine – A Review”,

YES

YES

YES

NOYES

NOYES



Proceedings of the International Conference onPattern Recognition, Informatics and MedicalEngineering,https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ashok_Kumar_D/publication/261394443_Electronic_voting_machine_-_A_review/links/5569639608aeab777220fce6.pdf , [17/05/2017]

11. Iloanusi, O. N and Osuagwu C. C, (2008) “BiometricRecognition: Overview and Applications”, NIGERIANJOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 27 NO.2, pp36—45.

12. M.Sudhakar, B.Divya Soundarya Sai (2015),“Biometric System Based Electronic Voting MachineUsing Arm9 Microcontroller”, IOSR Journal ofElectronics and Communication Engineering (IOSR-JECE), Volume 10, Issue 1, Ver. II, PP 57-65.

13. Anandaraj S, Anish R and Devakumar P.V. (2015)“Secured Electronic Voting Machine usingBiometric”, IEEE Sponsored 2nd InternationalConference on Innovations inInformation,Embedded and Communicationsystems (ICIIECS),

http://wineyard.in/Abstract/mtech/Embedded/2015/bp/15EM32.pdf , [17/05/17].

14. B.Farhath Anjum M.Deepa Mrs.C.N. Kalaivani, (2014)“Advanced Microcontroller Based Bio-MetricAuthentication Voting Machine”, IOSR Journal ofEngineering (IOSRJEN), Vol. 04, Issue 05, ||V1|| PP29-40.

15. Syed Razwanul Haque, Miah Md. Asaduzzaman,Prasanta Bhattacharjee, Akhlak Uzzaman Ashik,Robi Kormokar (2015), “Finger Print EnabledElectronic Voting Machine with Enhanced Security”,International Journal of Engineering andTechnology Volume 5 No. 6, pp368—374.

16. Neumann, P. (1993) “Security Criteria for ElectronicVoting”, Proceedings of the 16th National ComputerSecurity Conference, Baltimore, MD.http://www.csl.sri.com/users/neumann/ncs93.html , [17/05/17]

17. National Science Foundation (US),https://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/press/01/pr0118.htm , [17/05/2017]

A BIOMETRIC BASED STAND-ALONE ELECTRONIC VOTING UNIT …

Documents