Project ID: 2019CSEPID039

Project Report
On
Blockchain-Based Voting System with Polygon
Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement
For the Degree of
Bachelor of Technology
In
Computer Science and Engineering
By
Shubh Agrawal (1902900100157)

Skand Sisodia (1902900100165)

Navya Goyal (1902900100104)

Under the Supervision

of
Prof. (Dr.) Avinash Kumar Sharma

ABES INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, GHAZIABAD

AFFILIATED TO

Dr A.P.J. ABDUL KALAM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW

(2022-23)
 DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the work presented in this report, entitled “Blockchain-Based Voting System Using Polygon”, was carried out by me. I have not submitted

the matter embodied in this report for the award of any other degree or diploma of any other University or Institute.

I have given due credit to the original authors/sources for all the words, ideas, diagrams, graphics, computer programs, experiments, and results, that are not my

original contribution. I have used quotation marks to identify verbatim sentences and given credit to the original authors/sources. I affirm that no portion of my

work is plagiarized, and the experiments and results reported in the report are not manipulated. In the event of a complaint of plagiarism and the manipulation of

the experiments and results, I shall be fully responsible and answerable.

Name: Shubh Agrawal

Roll. No. : 1902900100157
Branch: Computer Science and Engineering

(Candidate Signature)
Name: Skand Sisodia
Roll. No. : 1902900100165
Branch: Computer Science and Engineering
(Candidate Signature)

Name: Navya Goyal

Roll. No. : 1902900100104
Branch: Computer Science and Engineering

(Candidate Signature)

CERTIFICATE

Certified that Shubh Agrawal (1902900100157), Navya Goyal (1902900100104), and Skand Sisodia (1902900100165) have carried out the research work

presented in this thesis entitled “Blockchain-Based Voting System Using Polygon” for the award of Bachelor of Technology from Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam

Technical University, Lucknow under my/our (print only that is applicable) supervision. The report embodies results of original work, and studies are carried out

by the student himself/herself (print only that is applicable) and the contents of the thesis do not form the basis for the award of any other degree to the candidate

or to anybody else from this or any other University/Institution.

Supervisor Signature Signature

Dr. Avinash Kumar Sharma Dr. Avinash Kumar Sharma

Professor Head of Department (CSE)

ABES Institute of Technology, ABES Institute of Technology,

Ghaziabad Ghaziabad

DATE: DATE:

2
 ABSTRACT

It makes sense that voters are worried about election security. Reports of unauthorized voting, voter disenfranchisement, potential foreign involvement in

elections, and failures in technology cast doubt on the fairness of elections worldwide. The assertions that “voting over the Internet” or “voting on the blockchain”

would improve election security are examined in this article, and it is discovered that they are unfounded and deceptive. Internet- and blockchain-based voting

would significantly increase the potential of covert, large-scale election failures, even though current election methods are far from ideal. Voting online may

appear enticing because it is convenient and available from a computer or smartphone. Inconclusive research has shown that internet voting may, in fact, have

little to no impact on turnout and may even increase disenfranchised. More crucially, any rise in voter turnout attributable to the Internet or blockchain-based

voting would be at the expense of losing substantial assurance that votes have been counted as they were cast and have not been covertly changed or deleted,

given the current state of computer security. As long as tried-and-true strategies like malware, zero-day vulnerabilities, and denial-of-service assaults are still

effective, this situation will persist. The security dangers associated with online and electronic voting are examined and systematized in this article, which

demonstrates that not only do these risks still exist in blockchain-based voting systems. Finally, we offer some probing questions for evaluating the security risks

associated with new voting system concepts.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

With deep gratitude I express my earnest thanks to my esteemed supervisor Dr. Avinash Kumar Sharma of supervisor, Professor, Department of Computer

Science & Engineering for his constant involvement, energetic efforts, and proficient guidance, which gave me direction and body to work, respond here. Without

his counsel and encouragement, it would have been impossible to complete the thesis work in this manner. I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. Avinash Kumar

Sharma (Head of the Department), and Dr. Manish Kumar Jha (Director), for their support, guidance, and advice throughout this work. I am thankful to all the

faculty members of the Computer Science and Engineering Department, especially for their intellectual support during my research work. I also want to thank my

friends for their valuable support whenever I needed it. I would like to thank all those people who have helped me in some way or the other in my thesis work.

Lastly, and most importantly, I thank my parents for their moral support and encouragement towards completing my thesis successfully. In the last, I want to

thank Almighty God.

Shubh Agrawal

B. Tech (Final Year)

3
 1902900100157

Skand Sisodia

B. Tech (Final Year)

1902900100165

Navya Goyal

B. Tech (Final Year)

1902900100104

Date: Computer Science & Engineering

Place: Ghaziabad ABES Institute of Technology, Ghaziabad

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Description Page No.

Declaration 2

Certificate 3

Abstract 4

Acknowledgment 5

Table of Contents 6

List of Tables 7

List of Figures 8

List of Abbreviations 9

Chapter 1: Introduction 10-11

Chapter 2: Literature Survey 12-21

2.1 Mobile Voting 12

2.2 EVM 13

2.3 E-voting 13

2.4 Blockchain overview 14

2.5 Information on Electronic voting systems 16

2.6 Using Blockchain to Transform Electronic Voting System 18

2.7 Current Blockchain-based Electronic Voting System 19

Chapter 3: Problem Description and Proposed Work 22-24

3.1 Problem Statement 22

3.2 Proposed Work 22

4
 3.3 Security Modals 22

3.3.1 Proof of Stake Security 22

3.3.2 Plasma Security 23

3.3.3 Hybrid 24

Chapter 4: Implementation and Result Description 25-26

4.1 Tools Requirement for Implementation 25

4.2 Result Description 26

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Future Scope 27

5.1 Conclusion 27

5.2 Future Scope 27

References 28-32

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Comparison of different types of blockchain 16

Table 2.2 Comparison of existing e-voting platforms 20

Table 2.3 Comparison of Blockchain technologies 21

LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 1.1 Measures of security 11

Fig. 2.1 Popularity of E-Voting in Estonia 14

Fig. 2.2 Overview of E-Voting application architecture 18

Fig. 2.3 Blockchain framework usage rate diagram 20

5
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EVM Electronic Voting Machine

M-EVM Mobile Electronic Voting Machine

MEVM Modified Electronic Voting Machine

IES Indian Electoral System

POW Proof of Work

POS Proof of Stake

POA Proof of Authority

BSC Binance Smart Chain

ESC Ethereum Smart Contracts

VSC Visual Studio Code

HTTP Hyper Text Transfer Protocol

6
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Voting for the demarcation purpose is important and severe in every country. In the field of voting, the most crucial characteristics are always accuracy, security,
and privacy. Conventional paper polling and electronic ballot are the common ways that countries use for voting. In the ever-improving technological era, there is
a need for new digital technologies. Methods of political voting are essential in this regard. From a political perspective, electronic voting technology can increase
voter turnout, trust, and enthusiasm for the electoral process.[1][2] Elections have long been a social issue due to their effectiveness as a democratic decision-
making process.[3]

Citizens are becoming more conscious of the importance of the voting system as more people vote in actual elections. People's confidence in the selection made

by majority vote increased as a result of the traditional or paper-based polling approach. It has aided in making the democratic procedure and election system

valuable for choosing representatives and governments that are more democratic. Out of almost 200 countries, 167 had democracy in 2018; the remaining are

either entirely flawed or hybrid.[4][5] Since the commencement of the voting system, the secret voting model has been utilized to increase trust in democratic

institutions.

In order to give all voters a consistent view, the majority of electronic voting systems require a reliable public bulletin board. Many people realize that Blockchain

technology can be utilized for this purpose. New tools for building trustless and decentralized systems are provided by a blockchain, which serves as a

decentralized database. The blockchain system lacks a centralized, trustworthy coordinator. Instead, the data block is kept locally by each node that is a part of the

blockchain system. A decentralized, open-membership peer-to-peer network maintains the blockchain.[6] Initially, the technology was developed to avoid

tampering with online documents [7], later on in 2008 it was introduced for financial purposes with the introduction of Bitcoin [8], but gradually with increasing

popularity and the emergence of technologies like Ethereum, we have witnessed that there are other applications also other than money transfer.

Blockchain has the potential to serve as a secure public message board for the voting system. Additionally, the blockchain's smart contract functioned as a trusted

computer whose output was accepted by everyone. However, it is not a smart idea to just replace the bulletin board with a blockchain.[9] This might be seen

because there will be too many transactions for voters to distinguish and because computing on a blockchain is exceedingly difficult.

10
 Fig. 1.1

In this study, a decentralized blockchain-based trustless voting system is suggested. The computation is based on a decentralized blockchain in a decentralized

system. The trust is divided among all voters in a system where there is no need for voters to rely on the election administrator. The entire protocol determines if

the system is correct.

The system employs threshold encryption in the absence of a third party trusted to ensure that no one could tally the election results before the polls closed.[9]

Additionally, the outcome of the vote count will remain unchanged even if the election administrator is malicious. It uses a pair of public and private keys to

encrypt data. All parties have access to the secret key in parts; however, no party has access to the entire secret key prior to the key reconstruction stage. The

secret key is recreated when n parties or more upload their secrets.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE SURVEY

E-voting with blockchain is a novel application of blockchain technology that aims to provide a secure, transparent, and decentralized voting system for various

scenarios. Blockchain is a distributed ledger that records transactions in an immutable and verifiable way, without relying on a central authority or intermediary.

E-voting with blockchain can leverage the properties of blockchain to address some challenges and limitations of traditional voting systems, such as ballot box

voting or electronic voting.

11
It is important to do thorough research on the existing products available in the market and the technologies that have been used in the past. Research has been

going on in this field for a long time and there have been several developments. A short summary of some developments has been discussed in the following

sections.

Technology has become increasingly important in addressing global issues and has also been utilized in Voting Systems. For example, in 2011, a secure E-voting

system was developed that utilized web-based technology and fingerprint authentication. The system administrator could input information about the election,

parties, village headmen, polling clerks, and candidates into the database and set election timings. Village headmen were responsible for registering electors'

fingerprints, while polling clerks were authorized to start the election in their designated areas. Electors could only vote during the designated election time and

their fingerprints were authenticated against those already registered in the database. Each voter was only permitted to cast one vote. After the election process

was completed by the system administrator, the election results for the relevant region would be displayed.

2.1 Mobile Voting

In the traditional voting system, the country was witnessing a decrease in the voting percentage on a daily basis. To address this issue, an e-voting system using

mobile SMS was proposed with the name “M-EVM or MEVM”.

There are two distinct modes in this system. The option for those without mobile phones is an antiquated, conventional method, but there is also another mode for

those with mobile phones, which is a requirement for using M-EVM.

The voter's name and cell phone number must be recorded in the EVM in order to use the M-EVM database. By submitting the message in the necessary format,

voters can express their preference for a certain candidate, and the M-EVM will notify them that their vote was received. After casting a ballot, the person would

be removed from the list, so they could no longer cast ballots. After the election's one hour of voting, all registered cell phone numbers will be informed of the

results via this mechanism.

2.2 EVM

In this process, Electronic Voting Machines are used for voting. This is a centralized system and the information can be manipulated, there is no way for voters to

verify that their vote was actually cast. Various research introduces blockchain in this system, where each machine is linked to a network. There are three parts of

integrity: fingerprint, peer verification transaction, and chain manipulation detection.

2.3 E-Voting

[10] This literature presents a system of E-voting where the voting is conducted over the Internet. There is a basic issue that an online system can be hacked. In

[11] a fresh model for the IES is created. However, important factors such as Confidentiality, credibility, privacy, and fairness have not been discussed. The user

account is created on the smart device and the user needs their voting ID to create for authentication.

According to [12] with more than 43% of Estonians casting ballots online, the country's introduction of an online voting system was a success.

This graph shows us the growth of the voter Estonia has seen due to E-Voting:

12
 Fig. 2.1

2.4 Blockchain Overview

Hearing the name blockchain, the first thing that comes into our mind is cryptocurrency and smart contracts. These are made famous because of the popular

initiatives of Bitcoin and Ethereum. The first cryptocurrency to employ a blockchain data structure was Bitcoin. Ethereum introduced smart contracts that make

use of the immutability and widespread consensus of the blockchain while providing a cryptocurrency alternative to Bitcoin. A smart contract in Ethereum is a

piece of code that is published to the network for public access. A consensus mechanism and every network participant collectively verify the outcome of running

this code. [13]

A blockchain is a continuously growing list of blocks that are linked and secured using cryptography. Blockchain is a cryptographically secure transactional

singleton machine with a shared state. The working process of blockchain is rather simple, whenever fresh data needs to be added, a new block is created and

attached to the chain. After it has been attached, all the computers connected to the blockchain network update their cloned copy of the Blockchain. This is

because it is decentralized and distributed to all the people in the network, so everyone needs to have the same copy of the blockchain. [14]

Blockchain creates a series of blocks that are replicated on a peer-to-peer network. The blocks present in the chain have a cryptographic hash and timestamp

added to the previous block. Blockchain in itself is a data structure in which the written data is divided into blocks and each block has a hash of the data from the

previous block [15]. To ensure that none of the data is altered, only the hash of the most recent block can be considered. [16]

The nodes on a peer-to-peer network use a consensus mechanism to decide which block of transactions to append to the shared ledger. The consensus mechanism

guarantees that the ledger is accurate and synchronized across all nodes. Different blockchain systems use different consensus mechanisms, such as PoW, PoS, or

PoA. These mechanisms have different trade-offs in terms of security, efficiency, and scalability. [18] The solution is hard to find, but easy to verify by other

nodes. The first node that finds a valid solution broadcasts it to the network and receives a reward in cryptocurrency and transaction fees. This is called “mining”.

[19] On the other hand, PoS is a consensus mechanism for blockchains that selects validators based on their stake in the cryptocurrency. PoS chains create and

verify new blocks by staking coins, rather than using intensive computation. PoS validators are randomly chosen depending on how many coins they stake,

13
instead of competing for the next block with complex puzzles.[20][21]. Besides these, some other blockchain networks have adopted different consensus

protocols that rely on other concepts such as proof of importance, proof of capacity, and proof

of weight. These protocols aim to address some limitations and challenges of the more popular consensus protocols, such as POW and POS. [22]

Smart contracts have given blockchain solutions new life. They promoted the use of blockchain technology in initiatives to advance several fields. A smart

contract is simply a piece of coded

logic in and of itself. However, in combination with the immutability offered by a blockchain data structure and distributed consensus, it can serve as an

unconditionally trusted third party. [23] A smart contract, once written, cannot be altered.

The design of a blockchain can vary depending on the privacy needs and goals of its users. A blockchain can be classified into three main types: public, private or

consortium. A public blockchain is open to anyone who wants to join and participate in its network. It offers high transparency and security,[24] but also low

scalability and efficiency. Examples of public blockchains are Bitcoin and Ethereum.[19] A private blockchain is restricted to a specific group of users who have

permission to access and modify its data. It offers high scalability and efficiency, but also low transparency and trustlessness. Examples of private blockchains are

Hyperledger Fabric and Corda. [25] A consortium blockchain is a hybrid between public and private blockchains. It allows a selected set of nodes to validate

transactions and maintain consensus, while other nodes can only read the data. It offers a balance between transparency, security, scalability, and efficiency.

Examples of consortium blockchains are R3CEV and BSC.

A comparison of the type of blockchain networks is shown in the following table:

Table 2.1

As we can observe from the above table that the transaction duration of a Public Blockchain is long if we want to implement voting on a good scale then it will

pose serious slowdowns.

Blockchain technology has disadvantages, just like any other technology. Network performance is not improved by adding more nodes because each node must

conduct every transaction individually and this procedure is not shared among the nodes. [18]

Transactions are blocked together in an irreversible chain: a blockchain:

Each additional block strengthens the verification of the previous block and hence the entire blockchain. This renders the blockchain tamper-evident, delivering

the key strength of immutability. This removes the possibility of tampering by a malicious actor — and builds a ledger of transactions you and other network

members can trust.

14
2.5 Information on Electronic Voting Systems

The e-voting system consists of several processes that ensure the validity and security of the votes. These processes are:

- Registration: This is where voters sign up for the e-voting system and provide their personal details and credentials. This process helps to create a voter database

and prevent duplicate or ineligible voters.

- Verification and authentication: This is where voters prove their identity and eligibility on election day using their credentials. This process helps to prevent

impersonation or fraud.

- Casting and collation: This is where voters cast their votes using electronic devices such as EVMs, computers, phones, etc. The votes are encrypted and

verifiable by the voters. The votes are also transmitted to a central server for storage and aggregation.

- Counting and presentation of results: This is where the votes are decrypted, counted, and displayed according to the design of the election. The results are

auditable and transparent.

The e-voting system aims to enhance the electoral process by reducing costs, increasing efficiency, improving accessibility, and ensuring the votes' accuracy,

confidentiality, anonymity, and integrity. [26]

The electronic voting system was initially implemented in the United States in the year 2000. Other countries soon followed suit, with France introducing the

system in 2001, the UK in 2002, Spain in 2003, Ireland in 2004, Estonia and Portugal in 2005, and the Netherlands in 2004, 2006, and 2007.

Additionally, Paraguay and Finland adopted the system in 2008, while Austria and Germany implemented it in 2009, and Norway in 2011. Estonia was the first

nation to permit remote electronic voting in the 2007 national parliamentary election, having already used the system in a smaller-scale election in 2005. [27]

Some of the features that should be present in the e-voting systems are:

1. The system should not produce any receipt to prove the voter’s choice [28]

2. Fairness, preliminary findings that had an impact on other voters' choices [29][30]

3. Each vote is recorded as intended and cannot be altered in any way thanks to data integrity. [31]

4. Voter anonymity/Privacy, Voters' names, and the candidates they support shouldn't be made public. Only registered voters should be allowed to cast

ballots.[32][33]

5. Election systems must function securely without a loss of votes in order to be reliable and robust. There should be no malicious code or mistakes

when developing software and processes [34]

6. Uniqueness, the voter should not be able to vote more than once [35][36]

15
 Fig. 2.2

2.6 Using Blockchain to Transform Electronic Voting System

With regard to elections, blockchain technology addressed issues with the current system by making the voting process transparent and easy to use, preventing

fraudulent voting, enhancing data security, and verifying the results. The adoption of the electronic voting process on the blockchain is quite important. [37].

Blockchain technology opens up new possibilities in e-voting by removing the centralized voting authority, where if the central system is compromised then the

whole process is put at risk, and modification of cast votes is easy as we have to make changes to only one place. In the case of Blockchain, however, everything

is distributed, and the alteration is not easy.

Literature [38] explains the benefits that Blockchain provides in the E-voting space, these include making the polling mechanism accessible, stopping illegal

voting, and protecting data. There is a small comparison shown of the voting process that we have been using compared to the voting with Blockchain. The main

focus lies on the distributed structure of Blockchain technology. Along with the benefits, problems are also mentioned in the stated literature. The text goes into

detail about the various issues that need to be fixed, these include issues like Eligibility, Unreadability, Privacy, and Fairness. Along with the functional issues,

there are also some security requirements that a voting system must comply with. These requirements include Anonymity, Accuracy, Integrity, and Transparency.

Most of these concerns are however been addressed by the distributed blockchain architecture of Blockchain and the use and nature of ESC.

Literature [39] goes into the research methodology to narrow down on some requirements that the blockchain-based voting system may satisfy. These include

discussing the gaps that the current e-voting systems have and how can Blockchain be used to solve these gaps.

16
Literature [40] goes into detail about the selection and development of a blockchain-based system that can fill the gaps with traditional e-voting. A proper method

with background research of a country and an approximation of how the efficiency of the system will be after the implementation is discussed.

2.7 Current Blockchain-based Electronic Voting System

[39] Blockchain-based applications can be created using blockchain technologies. The most well-known blockchain frameworks include Bitcoin, Ethereum,

Hyperledger, and R3 Corda. We looked for the most popular ways for delving into the specifics of the chosen articles. However, we discovered that most

publications only provided broad definitions and lacked adequate information on the technical implementation specifics. Numerous research focus on the basic

concept of blockchain-based electronic voting and various challenges related to it. The notion that blockchain technology can be used in electronic voting systems

appears to be broadly accepted. However, technical specifics and implementation suggestions are not made clear. Figure 2 there is an illustration of the use of

various technologies.

Fig. 2.3

Some organizations and business have created an online voting solution and Table 1 list the many internet platforms, their popularity, and the system's

technology. [41]

17
 Table 2.2

These systems developed are suitable for use on a small scale.

Table 2.3

From the data shown in Table 2.3, we can observe that on a certain all these current blockchain solutions will take a large amount of time and resources to carry
out a transaction or in this case a vote.

18
 CHAPTER 3

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION & PROPOSED WORK

3.1 Problem Statement:

Voting is an essential part of any democratic culture; voting decides who represents a county. Voting is a very old method and constantly several improvements

are being done to make this method more secure, trustworthy, and fair. In India, EVM has been introduced to remove Ballot papers which made the election

process faster, but several concerns exist questioning the fairness and security of EVMs. Currently, people must go to the voting centers to cast their vote, but for

physically disabled people it becomes difficult to do so. E-Voting with blockchain aims to remove this problem of traveling to vote along with the major issues of

current systems i.e., Security, Fairness, and Trust.

3.2 Proposed Work

To solve the issue of scalability, some technology needs to be implemented that can aid in solving the scalability issue of the current blockchain solutions.

One such solution can be obtained with the use of Polygon technology. [42] Polygon is a Layer-2 scaling solution that helps to bring mass adoption to the

Ethereum platform. Polygon functions mainly through commit chains, which are transaction networks that operate adjacent to Ethereum. The commit chains

bundle together batches of transactions and confirm them on masses before returning data to the main chain. Theoretically, when connected to a main chain like

Ethereum, Polygon will eventually have thousands of chains scaling together to enhance throughput, having the potential to one day produce millions of

transactions per second (TPS).

3.3 Security Models

A developer can use one of three security models provided by Polygon to build their D-Apps:

3.3.1 POS security

The layer created on top of Tendermint, Heimdall & Bor, offers PoS security. Only when two-thirds of the validators have signed on do checkpoints become part

of the root chain.

We use a set of Ethereum-based staking management contracts, along with a group of compensated validators running Heimdall and Bor nodes, to implement the

PoS process on our site. The following features are implemented by this:

● Anyone can stake MATIC tokens on an Ethereum smart contract and become a Validator, which is how the system works.

● Earn incentives for staking on Polygon by confirming state changes.

In terms of Plasma, the PoS technique also mitigates the issue with our sidechains' lack of data availability.

We have a fast finality layer that uses checkpoints to regularly finalize the sidechain state. We can solidify the side chain state thanks to the quick finality. The

chain that is EVM compatible features fewer validators, quicker block times, and higher throughput. Scalability is preferred above a strong decentralized

component. Heimdall uses a huge validator set and therefore a high degree of decentralization to ensure that the final state commit is error-free and passes.

19
The process is as easy as taking your smart contract and deploying it on the Polygon PoS network as a dApp developer utilizing PoS security. The account-based

architecture, which enables an EVM-compatible side chain, makes this viable.

3.3.2 Plasma security

Regarding various attack scenarios, Polygon offers "Plasma Guarantees." The following are the top two cases:

● Chain operator is corrupt

● The user is corrupt

In any scenario, users must begin mass departing if their assets on the plasma chain have been hacked. Utilizable root chain smart contract structures are offered

by Polygon. Read on for more information, including technical specifics, about this construction's design and the attack vectors are taken into account.

By effectively piggybacking on Ethereum's security, Polygon's Plasma contracts provide security. Users' money is never at risk unless Ethereum succeeds. Simply

put, a plasma chain's consensus mechanism is just as safe as the main chain's. From this, it can be inferred that the plasma chain can employ very basic consensus

techniques while remaining secure.

You must create your own custom predicates for your smart contracts if you want to create dApps on Polygon with the Plasma security guarantee. Writing the

external contracts that address the dispute conditions established by the Polygon plasma structures basically entails doing this.

3.3.3 Hybrid

There is also a hybrid solution that developers can use, which essentially entails having both Plasma and POS assurances on some specific operations of the

dApp. Pure Plasma security and pure Proof of Stake security are both achievable in dApps deployed on Polygon.

An illustration will help you better comprehend this strategy.

Consider a gaming dApp with a collection of smart contracts outlining the rules of the game. Let's assume that the game rewards players with its own ERC20

token. Now, it is possible to immediately deploy the smart contracts that define the game logic on the Polygon side chain, assuring their Proof of Stake security,

while the ERC20 token transfer can be secured with Plasma assurances and fraud-proof included in the root chain contracts of Polygon.

20
 CHAPTER 4

IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULT DESCRIPTION

4.1 TOOLS REQUIRED FOR IMPLEMENTATION

● VSC: VSC is a source code editor that supports Java, JavaScript, Go, Node.js, and Python, among other programming languages. It's built on the
Electron framework, which is used to create Node.js Web apps that leverage the Blink layout engine. The same editor component (code named "Monaco") that is
used in Azure DevOps is used in VSC (formerly called Visual Studio Online and Visual Studio Team Services). VSC comes with rudimentary support for the
majority of programming languages out of the box. Syntax highlighting, bracket matching, code folding, and customizable snippets are all included in this basic
package.

● Metamask: It is a browser plugin that serves as an Ethereum wallet, and is installed like any other browser plugin. Once it's installed, it allows users
to store Ether and other ERC-20 tokens, enabling them to transact with any Ethereum address.

● Blockchain: A blockchain is a distributed ledger that duplicates and distributes transactions across the network of computers participating in the
blockchain.

● Hardhat: Hardhat is an Ethereum development environment for professionals. It facilitates performing frequent tasks, such as running tests,
automatically checking code for mistakes, or interacting with a smart contract.

● Solidity: Solidity is an object-oriented programming language for implementing smart contracts on various blockchain platforms, most

notably, Ethereum. Solidity is licensed under GNU General Public License v3.0. Solidity was designed by Gavin Wood and developed by Christian Reitwiessner,
[11]
Alex Beregszaszi, and several former Ethereum core contributors.  Programs in Solidity run on Ethereum Virtual Machine or on compatible virtual machines.

● web3.js: web3.js is a collection of libraries that allow you to interact with a local or remote Ethereum node using HTTP, IPC, or WebSocket.

● React JS: React is a free and open-source front-end JavaScript library for building user interfaces based on components. It is maintained by Meta and
a community of individual developers and companies

● Node JS: Node.js is a cross-platform, open-source server environment that can run on Windows, Linux, Unix, macOS, and more. Node.js is a back-
end JavaScript runtime environment, that runs on the V8 JavaScript Engine.

● Mongo DB: MongoDB is a source-available cross-platform document-oriented database program developed by Alfons Kemper. Classified as a

NoSQL database program, MongoDB uses JSON-like documents with optional schema.

4.2 RESULT DESCRIPTION

The report presents the design and implementation of a secure and scalable voting system based on blockchain technology using polygon, a framework for
building and connecting Ethereum-compatible blockchain networks. The report evaluates the performance and security of the system in terms of throughput,
latency, cost, and resistance to common attacks. The report also discusses the challenges and opportunities of using blockchain for voting applications, such as
privacy, verifiability, and governance.

The main findings of the report are:

The system can achieve high throughput and low latency by leveraging polygon’s features such as fast consensus, adaptive gas fees, and interoperability with
other blockchains.

21
The system can ensure the integrity and transparency of the voting process by storing the votes and the voter identities on the blockchain, which is immutable and
auditable by anyone.

The system can protect the privacy and anonymity of the voters by using zero-knowledge proofs and encryption techniques, which prevent anyone from linking a
vote to a voter or revealing the voter's preferences.

The system can enable verifiability and governance by allowing voters to verify their own votes and the overall results.

The report concludes that voting with blockchain using polygon is a feasible and promising solution for enhancing the security, scalability, and efficiency of
voting systems while preserving the democratic principles of voting. The report also provides recommendations for future work and research directions in this
field.

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

5.1 CONCLUSION

The goal of this research is to analyze and evaluate current research on blockchain-based electronic voting systems. The article discusses recent electronic voting
research using blockchain technology. The blockchain concept and its uses are presented first, followed by existing electronic voting systems. Then, a set of
deficiencies in existing electronic voting systems are identified and addressed. The blockchain’s potential is fundamental to enhancing electronic voting, current
solutions for blockchain-based electronic voting, and possible research paths on blockchain-based electronic voting systems. Numerous experts believe that
blockchain may be a good fit for a decentralized electronic voting system. Furthermore, all voters and impartial observers may see the voting records kept in these
suggested systems. On the other hand, researchers discovered that most publications on blockchain-based electronic voting identified and addressed similar
issues. There have been many study gaps in electronic voting that need to be addressed in future studies. Scalability attacks, lack of transparency, reliance on
untrustworthy systems, and resistance to compulsion are all potential drawbacks that must be addressed. As further research is required, we are not entirely aware
of all the risks connected with the security and scalability of blockchain-based electronic voting systems. Adopting blockchain voting methods may expose users
to unforeseen security risks and flaws. Blockchain technologies require a more sophisticated software architecture as well as managerial expertise. Despite its
appearance as an ideal solution, the blockchain system could not wholly address the voting system’s issues due to these flaws. This research revealed that
blockchain systems raised difficulties that needed to be addressed and that there are still many technical challenges. That is why it is crucial to understand that
blockchain-based technology is still in its infancy as an electronic voting option.

5.2 FUTURE SCOPE

The Future scope of the Blockchain-based voting system includes improvements to be made as this product passes through different testing stages and performs
in the real world. Implementing this system for a real election will be the final judgment about the working of Blockchain for voting. One of the most occurring
problems in voting is boot capturing which is forcing people to vote for a particular candidate but putting pressure on them. This can be the case in the current
implementation that a powerful candidate can harass local voters to vote in his favor. The current system requires people to go to a dedicated polling station for

22
casting votes which eliminates the possibility of a threat to a large extent. But in the case of an online system, there is a greater possibility of these kinds of
threats. One other case can be theft of the credentials. A powerful candidate can steal threats from people and vote on their behalf. For this however a biometric
system can be implemented to verify the authenticity of voters, but it will incur extra hardware costs which will become a barrier to voting.

REFERENCES

[1] Liu, Y.; Wang, Q. An E-voting Protocol Based on Blockchain. IACR Cryptol. Eprint Arch. 2017, 2017, 1043

[2] Shahzad, B.; Crowcroft, J. Trustworthy Electronic Voting Using Adjusted Blockchain Technology. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 24477–24488

[3] Racsko, P. Blockchain and Democracy. Soc. Econ. 2019, 41, 353–369

[4] The Economist. EIU Democracy Index. 2017. Available online: https://infographics.economist.com/2018/DemocracyIndex/ (accessed on 18 January 2020)

[5] Cullen, R.; Houghton, C. Democracy online: An assessment of New Zealand government web sites. Gov. Inf. Q. 2000, 17, 243–267

[6] Nakamoto, S. Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. Available online: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

[7] Haber, S.; Stornetta, W.S. How to time-stamp a digital document. J. Cryptol. 1991, 3, 99–111.

[8] Bitcoin Homepage. Available online: https://bitcoin.org/ (accessed on 17 August 2019).

[9] Blockchain Based E-Voting System Prof. Mrunal Pathak , Amol Suradkar , Ajinkya Kadam , Akansha Ghodeswar , Prashant Parde2. doi :

https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST2182120

[10] R.Keerthana .L.Suganya .S.Krishnakumar M.Santhosh, S.Kavitha. Electronic voting machines using the internet. International Journal of Communication

and Computer Technologies, 03 2016.

[11] Pooja Patil Nilisha Raut Prof. Swati Gawhale, Vishal Mulik. Iot-based e-voting system. International Journal for Research in Applied Science Engineering

Technology (IJRASET), 5, 05 2017

[12] https://analyticsindiamag.com/free-fair-elections-in-india-and-artificial-intelligence/

[13] Wood, G. Ethereum: A secure decentralized generalized transaction ledger. Ethereum Proj. Yellow Pap. 2014, 151, 1–32.

[14] What is Blockchain? https://www.scaler.com/topics/what-is-blockchain/

[15] Jaffal, R.; Mohd, B.J.; Al-Shayeji, M. An analysis and evaluation of lightweight hash functions for blockchain-based IoT devices. Clust. Comput. 2021.

[16] Nofer, M.; Gomber, P.; Hinz, O.; Schiereck, D. Blockchain. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2017, 59, 183–187.

[17] Tan, B.Q.; Wang, F.; Liu, J.; Kang, K.; Costa, F. A Blockchain-Based Framework for Green Logistics in Supply Chains. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4656

23
[18] Zheng, Z.; Xie, S.; Dai, H.; Chen, X.; Wang, H. An Overview of Blockchain Technology: Architecture, Consensus, and Future Trends. In Proceedings of the

2017 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigData Congress), Honolulu, HI, USA, 25–30 June 2017; pp. 557–564.

[19] Lin, I.-C.; Liao, T.-C. A Survey of Blockchain Security Issues and Challenges. Int. J. Netw. Secur. 2017

[20] Luo, Y.; Chen, Y.; Chen, Q.; Liang, Q. A New Election Algorithm for DPos Consensus Mechanism in Blockchain. In Proceedings of the 2018 7th

International Conference on Digital Home (ICDH), Guilin, China, 30 November–1 December 2018; pp. 116–120.

[21] Solat, S. RDV: An Alternative to Proof-of-Work and a Real Decentralized Consensus for Blockchain. arXiv 2019, arXiv:170705091

[22] Hölbl, M.; Kompara, M.; Kamišali´c, A.; Nemec Zlatolas, L. A Systematic Review of the Use of Blockchain in Healthcare. Symmetry 2018, 10, 470

[23] Mohanta, B.K.; Jena, D.; Panda, S.S.; Sobhanayak, S. Blockchain technology: A survey on applications and security privacy challenges. Internet Things

2019, 8, 100107.

[24] 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.

[25] 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.

[26] Jardí-Cedó, R.; Pujol-Ahulló, J.; Castellà-Roca, J.; Viejo, A. Study on poll-site voting and verification systems. Comput. Secur. 2012, 31, 989–1010.

[27] Esteve, J.B.; Goldsmith, B.; Turner, J. International Experience with E-Voting. Available online: https: //www.parliament.uk/documents/speaker/digital-

democracy/IFESIVreport.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2020).

[28] Ali, S.T.; Murray, J. An Overview of End-to-End Verifiable Voting Systems. arXiv 2016, arXiv:160508554

[29] Anane, R.; Freeland, R.; Theodoropoulos, G. e-Voting Requirements and Implementation. In Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Conference on E-

Commerce Technology and the 4th IEEE International Conference on Enterprise Computing, E-Commerce and E-Services (CEC-EEE 2007), Tokyo, Japan, 23–

26 July 2007; pp. 382–392.

[30] Fujioka, A.; Okamoto, T.; Ohta, K. A practical secret voting scheme for large scale elections. In Advances in Cryptology—AUSCRYPT’92; Seberry, J.,

Zheng, Y., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1993; Volume 718, pp. 244–251, ISBN 978-3-540-57220-6.

[31] Keshk, A.E.; Abdul-Kader, H.M. Development of remotely secure e-voting system. In Proceedings of the 2007 ITI 5th International Conference on

Information and Communications Technology, Cairo, Egypt, 16–18 December 2007; pp. 235–243.

24
[32] Anane, R.; Freeland, R.; Theodoropoulos, G. e-Voting Requirements and Implementation. In Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Conference on E-

Commerce Technology and the 4th IEEE International Conference on Enterprise Computing, E-Commerce and E-Services (CEC-EEE 2007), Tokyo, Japan, 23–

26 July 2007; pp. 382–392.

[33] Zhang, W.; Yuan, Y.; Hu, Y.; Huang, S.; Cao, S.; Chopra, A.; Huang, S. A Privacy-Preserving Voting Protocol on Blockchain. In Proceedings of the 2018

IEEE 11th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD), San Francisco, CA, USA, 2–7 July 2018; pp. 401–408.

[34] Ryan, P.Y.A.; Bismark, D.; Heather, J.; Schneider, S.; Xia, Z. PrÊt À Voter: A Voter-Verifiable Voting System. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2009, 4,

662–673.

[35] 5Bokslag, W.; de Vries, M. Evaluating e-voting: Theory and practice. arXiv 2016, arXiv:160202509.

[36] Sun, X.; Wang, Q.; Kulicki, P. A Simple Voting Protocol on Quantum Blockchain. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 2019, 58, 275–281.

[37] Xiao, S.; Wang, X.A.; Wang, W.; Wang, H. Survey on Blockchain-Based Electronic Voting. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent

Networking and Collaborative Systems, Oita, Japan, 5–7 September 2019.

[38] Blockchain for Electronic Voting System—Review and Open Research Challenges. Sensors 2021, 21,5874. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21175874

[39] A Systematic Review of Challenges and Opportunities of Blockchain for E-Voting - Ruhi Tas and Ömer Özgür Tanrıöver.

[40] Trustworthy Electronic Voting Using Adjusted Blockchain Technology - Basit Shazad and Jon Crowcroft

[41] Blockchain for Electronic Voting System—Review and Open Research Challenges - Uzma Jafar, Mohd Juzaiddin Ab Aziz and Zarina Shuku

[42] https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/polygon-crypto-matic-network-dapps-erc20-token

[43] https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/threats/cross-site-scripting/

[44] https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/threats/sql-injection/

[45] https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/glossary/denial-of-service/

[46] https://eci.gov.in/

[47] https://www.ibm.com/topics/rest-apis

[48] https://eci.gov.in/candidate-political-parties/candidate-politicalparties/

[49] https://www.devoven.com/string-to-bytes32

[50] https://soliditylang.org/

25
[51] https://jeancvllr.medium.com/solidity-tutorial-all-about-bytes-9d88fdb22676

[52] https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/transactions/

[53] https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/gas/

26