1. ISSR
E-Voting
A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Diploma of Information
System
Project team:
Maged Mohamed Farid Elwakil
Abd Elmenaem Zeinhom Abd Elmaksoud
Wesam Rabeh Ali ELAgamy
Rania ElEasawy Abd Elreheem
Amal hassan Ali Talkhan
Mohamed Talaat Rashed Shalash
Under supervision:
Dr. Doaa Nabil
Cairo 2011
2. Document Version History
Ver. No. Ver. Date Prepared By Reviewed By Description
Wesam Rabeh
Mohamed Shalash
Amal Talkhan Initial Document and
1.0.0 12-4-2011
Rania Zora scope
Abd Elmonem
Maged Elwakil
Mohamed Shalash
1.0.1 14-4-2011 Requirement definition
Maged Elwakil
1.0.2 17-4-2011 Maged Elwakil Dr. Doaa Nabil
Wesam Rabeh
Use cases and analysis
1.2.0 4-5-2011 Mohamed Shalash
documents
Maged Elwakil
1.3.0 7-5-2011 Maged Elwakil Design diagrams
Wesam Rabeh
Mohamed Shalash
Amal Talkhan
1.4.0 11-5-2011 Dr.Doaa Nabile Review
Rania Zora
Abd Elmonem
Maged Elwakil
Component, deployment,
1.5.0 Maged Elwakil and network
infrastructure diagrams
Mohamed Shalash
1.6.0 2-6-2011 Rania Zora Application Interfaces
Maged Elwakil
Wesam Rabeh
Mohamed Shalash
Amal Talkhan
2.0.0 15-6-2011 Dr. Doaa Nabil Test plan
Rania Zora
Abd Elmonem
Maged Elwakil
Mohamed Shalash
2.0.1 18-6-2011 Enhancement
Maged Elwakil
Mohamed Shalash Final and approved
2.1.1 1-7-2011 Dr. Doaa Nabil
Maged Elwakil document
Page 2
3. Acknowledgement
On the behalf of the Institute of Statistical Studies and
Research, Cairo University, and on our own behalf, we would like to
express our profound thanks and great attitude to all those
respectable Professors in capacity of Dr. DOAA NABIL who guided us
through the preparation of this project.
We would also appreciate the 25th January revolution and its
spirit which inspired the Egyptians to move towards the
modernization, the establishment and the democracy of future
EGYPT.
Page 3
4. Abstract
Elections allow the populace to choose their representatives
and express their preferences for how they will be governed.
Naturally, the integrity of the election process is fundamental to the
integrity of democracy itself. The election system must be sufficiently
robust to withstand a variety of fraudulent behaviors and must be
sufficiently transparent and comprehensible that voters and
candidates can accept the results of an election.
Unsurprisingly, history is littered with examples of elections
being manipulated in order to influence their outcome.
The design of a “good” voting system, whether electronic or
using traditional paper ballots or mechanical devices must satisfy a
number of sometimes competing criteria. The anonymity of a voter’s
ballot must be preserved, both to guarantee the voter’s safety when
voting against a malevolent candidate, and to guarantee that voters
have no evidence that proves which candidates received their votes.
The existence of such evidence would allow votes to be purchased by
a candidate. The voting system must also be tamper-resistant to
thwart a wide range of attacks, including ballot stuffing by voters and
incorrect tallying by insiders.
Another factor is the importance of human factors. A voting
system must be comprehensible to and usable by the entire voting
population, regardless of age, infirmity, or disability. Providing
accessibility to such a diverse population is an important engineering
problem and one where, if other security is done well, electronic
voting could be a great improvement over current paper systems.
Flaws in any of these aspects of a voting system, however, can lead to
indecisive or incorrect election results.
There have been several studies on using computer
technologies to improve elections. These studies caution against the
risks of moving too quickly to adopt electronic voting machines
because of the software engineering challenges, insider threats,
network vulnerabilities, and the challenges of auditing.
Page 4
5. Table of Contents
Acknowledgement..........................................................................................................3
1.1 Introduction:.............................................................................................................9
1.2 Problem definition:.................................................................................................10
1.3 Glossary & Key terms............................................................................................10
1.4 Goals and Objectives .............................................................................................11
1.5 Project Scope:.........................................................................................................11
1.6 E-Voting Process Framework................................................................................12
1.7 Background research..............................................................................................13
Documented problems.......................................................................................................13
2.1 Methodologies........................................................................................................19
Object Oriented Programming............................................................................................19
Design Patterns..................................................................................................................24
ECC Pattern....................................................................................................................24
Adaptor pattern............................................................................................................25
Three-tier architecture.......................................................................................................25
Web Application................................................................................................................27
Distributed Data Base.........................................................................................................28
2.2 Feasibility Analysis:-.............................................................................................32
SWOT/PEST Analysis...........................................................................................................32
Strengths.........................................................................................................................32
Opportunities..................................................................................................................33
Weaknesses....................................................................................................................34
Threats............................................................................................................................34
2.3 Major Identified Risks...........................................................................................37
2.4 Requirement specification:-..................................................................................38
Functional Requirements:...................................................................................................38
B) Non-Functional Requirements:...................................................................................39
Security Requirements...............................................................................................39
2.5 Domain Model.......................................................................................................42
2.6 Use Cases...............................................................................................................43
Manage Judge/Admin-clerk............................................................................................43
Manage Precinct & Poll Station......................................................................................48
Manage Candidate..........................................................................................................53
Manage Voter.................................................................................................................58
Voting Process Use case .................................................................................................62
Reporting Use Case ........................................................................................................68
2.7 E-voting State Chart Diagram................................................................................72
Page 5
6. ......................................................................................................................................73
2.8 E-voting Activity Diagram.....................................................................................74
2.9 Package Diagram ..................................................................................................75
3.2 E-voting System Database ERD............................................................................78
3.5 Sequence Diagram.................................................................................................81
4.1 Component diagram...............................................................................................84
4.2 Deployment diagram..............................................................................................85
4.3 Network Infrastructure and VPN...........................................................................86
4.4 Application Interface..............................................................................................87
5.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................91
5.1.1 Objectives..................................................................................................................91
5.1.2 Testing Strategy.........................................................................................................91
5.1.4 Reference Material....................................................................................................92
5.2 TEST ITEMS.........................................................................................................92
5.2.1 Program Modules......................................................................................................92
5.2.2 User Procedures.........................................................................................................94
5.2.3 Operator Procedures.................................................................................................94
5.3 Features to Be Tested.............................................................................................94
5.4. FEATURES NOT TO BE TESTED.....................................................................95
5.5. APPROACH.........................................................................................................95
5.5.2- Acceptance testing...................................................................................................96
Check all the links:..........................................................................................................96
Test forms in all pages: ..................................................................................................96
Cookies testing:...............................................................................................................97
Validate HTML/CSS.........................................................................................................97
Database testing.............................................................................................................97
Usability Testing..............................................................................................................98
Compatibility Testing:.....................................................................................................99
Performance testing:......................................................................................................99
Security Testing:...........................................................................................................101
GUI Test........................................................................................................................101
5.6. PASS / FAIL CRITERIA....................................................................................102
5.6.1 Suspension Criteria..................................................................................................102
5.7. Testing Process....................................................................................................103
5.7.1 Test Deliverables......................................................................................................103
5.7.2 Testing Tasks............................................................................................................103
5.7.3 Responsibilities........................................................................................................104
5.7.4 Resources.................................................................................................................104
Physical Resources:.......................................................................................................104
Human Resources:........................................................................................................104
Page 6
9. 1.1 Introduction:
Elections allow the populace to choose their representatives
and express their preferences for how they will be governed.
Naturally, the integrity of the election process is fundamental to the
integrity of democracy itself. The election system must be sufficiently
robust to withstand a variety of fraudulent behaviors and must be
sufficiently transparent and comprehensible that voters and
candidates can accept the results of an election.
Unsurprisingly, history is littered with examples of elections
being manipulated in order to influence their outcome. The design of
a “good” voting system, whether electronic or using traditional paper
ballots or mechanical devices must satisfy a number of sometimes
competing criteria. The anonymity of a voter’s ballot must be
preserved, both to guarantee the voter’s safety when voting against a
malevolent candidate, and to guarantee that voters have no evidence
that proves which candidates received their votes. The existence of
such evidence would allow votes to be purchased by a candidate. The
voting system must also be tamper-resistant to thwart a wide range
of attacks, including ballot stuffing by voters and incorrect tallying by
insiders.
Another factor is the importance of human factors. A voting
system must be comprehensible to and usable by the entire voting
population, regardless of age, infirmity, or disability. Providing
accessibility to such a diverse population is an important engineering
problem and one where, if other security is done well, electronic
voting could be a great improvement over current paper systems.
Flaws in any of these aspects of a voting system, however, can lead to
indecisive or incorrect election results.
There have been several studies on using computer
technologies to improve elections. These studies caution against the
risks of moving too quickly to adopt electronic voting machines
because of the software engineering challenges, insider threats,
network vulnerabilities, and the challenges of auditing.
Page 9
10. 1.2 Problem definition:
Electronic voting systems are increasingly replacing the
traditional paper-based voting systems. These systems can make the
voting process more convenient and may therefore lead to improved
turnout. Electronic recording and counting of votes could be faster,
more accurate and less labor intensive.
The goal of the E-Voting as a product is to automate the voting
process, help in solving fraud problems, decreasing the voting time,
and the process of counting.
a strong relationship between the indicator from one side
and the related parameters from the other side, so reaching the
required data is really a big problem.
1.3 Glossary & Key terms
a group of people living in a particular local area or a
Community
group of nations having common interests
an employee who performs clerical work (e.g., keeps
Clerks
records or accounts)
group of people who evaluate or judge a critical
Judges
opinion
group of people electorate to make a decision or
Voters express an opinion or group of citizens who has a
legal right to vote
a place where voters go to cast their votes in an
Polling
election or a venue established for the purpose of
station/Committe
polling and controlled by staff of the electoral
e
management body
the place where people vote or an inquiry into public
Polls opinion conducted by interviewing a random sample
of people
is the system by which a government records the vital
Civil registry
events of its citizens and residents
someone who administers a business or someone
Administrators
who manages a government agency or department
A person who is elected or nominee to a certain
Candidate position or person seeking or being considered for
some kind of position eg (to be elected to an office)
An election is a formal decision -making process by
Election which a population chooses an individual to hold
public
Page 10
11. 1.4 Goals and Objectives
The e-voting system provides a voting service that allows people
to vote from any poll site in the country electronically. This system
encompasses legal, regulatory, behavioral, and sociological aspects of
the current voting system, while adding additional convenience and
security to the overall voting process.
This system is designed to improve the current voting process in
the following ways
1. Allow voters to vote from any poll site in the country without
the use of absentee ballots
2. Reduce the number of legitimate votes not counted by reducing
the number of over-votes, and eliminating vote tampering
3. Improve the registration process by allowing voters to check
their registration status prior to voting and centralizing
registration databases
4. Increase voter confidence and improve the voting experience
1.5 Project Scope:
The system deals with how an e-vote process should be designed and
implemented in order to comply with the democratic election
principles and rights as well as to other human rights, which
constitute the cornerstone of the international legal civilization.
These issues are discussed in the light of the voting principles and
rights of the users involved in an election process.
The scope of the system is limited to the general public elections, and
also includes every election or decision-making process, which takes
place through voting. It extends also to (Internet or Intranet) polls
without binding effects (if the latter - in view of their nature or their
extent - could influence the public discourse in a given state or
organization).
The significance of the issues addressed herein is clearly manifested
by the volume of debate that lately has begun on them, in many
countries over the globe. This is understandable in view of the fact
that technology usually moves at a pace faster than the legal system
does. However, technological evolution should always be pursued as
a means to improve human life as opposed to an end by itself. In this
Page 11
12. respect, all technological development, in particular those directly or
indirectly affecting fundamental principles should be carefully
reviewed with an eye towards determining their contribution to the
betterment of society. Despite the volume of material published to
support this debate, including user requirements specifications, no
consolidated view on the requirements deriving from constitutional
and legal consideration is available. This is the main contribution of
the system.
The system is structured as follows:
• The main issues associated with e-voting in presidential public
election processes are discussed.
• Requirements for an electronic voting system to be used in
general elections.
• Discusses requirements stemming from the democratic nature
of the election process.
The E-Voting system passes 3 major steps:
1- Pre-Voting (preparing administration, committee, candidates,
and voters)
2- Voting (Voting process itself)
3- Post-Voting(Result counting and generating reports)
1.6 E-Voting Process Framework
E-Voting process Framework 65535
Page 12
13. 1.7 Background research
Polling place electronic voting or Internet voting examples
have taken place in Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Estonia, the
European Union, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, the
Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Switzerland, the United Kingdom,
Venezuela, and the Philippines.
Documented problems
1. the United States:
Florida
- A number of problems with voting systems in Florida since the
2000 Presidential election.
- Punched cards received considerable notoriety in 2000 when their
uneven use in Votomatic style systems in Florida was alleged to
have affected the outcome of the U.S. presidential election.
Invented by Joseph P. Harris, Votomatic was manufactured for a
time under license by IBM. William Rouverol, who built the
prototype and wrote patents, stated that after the patents expired in
1982, lower quality machines had appeared on the market. The
machines used in Florida had five times as many errors as a true
Votomatic, he said.
- Punched-card-based voting systems, the Votomatic system in
particular, use special cards where each possible hole is pre-scored,
allowing perforations to be made by the voter pressing a stylus
through a guide in the voting machine. A problem with this system
is the incomplete punch; this can lead to a smaller hole than
expected, or to a mere slit in the card, or to a mere dimple in the
card, or to a hanging Chad. This technical problem was claimed by
the Democratic Party to have influenced the 2000 U.S. presidential
election in the state of Florida; critics claimed that punched card
voting machines were primarily used in Democratic areas and that
hundreds of ballots were not read properly or were disqualified due
to incomplete punches, which allegedly tipped the vote in favor of
George W. Bush over Al Gore.
- Other punched card voting systems use a metal hole-punch
mechanism that does not suffer nearly as much from this fault,
although most states have eliminated punched card voting systems
Page 13
14. of all types after the 2000 Florida experience. South Korea still
predominantly uses punched card ballots.
Virginia:
- Fairfax County, Virginia, November 4, 2003. Some voters
complained that they would cast their vote for a particular
candidate and the indicator of that vote would go off shortly after.
California:
- The Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election
Systems) TSx voting system disenfranchised many voters in
Alameda and San Diego Counties during the March 2, 2004
California presidential primary due to non-functional voter card
encoders. On April 30 California's secretary of state Kevin Shelley
decertified all touch-screen machines and recommended criminal
prosecution of Diebold Election Systems. The California Attorney-
General decided against criminal prosecution, but subsequently
joined a lawsuit against Diebold for fraudulent claims made to
election officials. Diebold settled that lawsuit by paying $2.6
million On February 17, 2006 the California Secretary of State
Bruce McPherson then recertified Diebold Election Systems DRE
and Optical Scan Voting System. Napa County, California, March
2, 2004, an improperly calibrated mark sense scanner overlooked
6,692 absentee ballot votes.
- Problems in the United States general elections, 2006:
o During early voting in Miami, Hollywood and Fort Lauderdale,
Florida in October 2006 three votes intended to be recorded for
Democratic candidates were displaying as cast for Republican.
Election officials attributed it to calibration errors in the touch
screen of the voting system.
o In Pennsylvania, a computer programming error forced some to
cast paper ballots. In Indiana, 175 precincts also resorted to
paper. Counties in those states also extended poll hours to
make up for delays.
o Cuyahoga County, Ohio: The Diebold computer server froze
and stopped counting votes then the printers jammed so paper
copies could not be retrieved for many votes and there was no
way to be sure of the accuracy of the votes when the votes
were being counted.
o Walsenburg, Arkansas: The touch screen computer tallied zero
votes for one mayoral candidate who confirmed that he
Page 14
15. certainly voted for himself and therefore there would be a
minimum of one vote, this is a case of disappearing votes on
touch screen machines. The subsequent investigation found
that the under vote was not caused by software error. Poor
ballot design was widely acknowledged as the cause of the
under vote.
- Instances of faulty technology and security issues surrounding
these machines were documented on August 1, 2001 in the
Brennan Center at New York University Law School. NY
University Law School released a report with more than 60
examples of e-voting machine failures in 26 states in 2004 and
2006. Examples included Spanish language ballots that were cast
by voters but not counted in Sacramento in 2004.
- 2008 United States Elections:
o Virginia, Tennessee, and Texas: Touch screen voting
machines flipped votes in early voting trials
o Humboldt County, California: A security flaw erased 197
votes from the computer database. California top to bottom
review.
In May 2007, California Secretary of State Debra Bowen
commissioned a "Top to Bottom review" of all electronic voting
systems in the state. She engaged computer security experts led by
the University of California to perform security evaluations of
voting system source code as well as "red teams" running "worst
case" Election Day scenarios attempting to identify vulnerabilities
to tampering or error. The Top to Bottom review also included a
comprehensive review of manufacturer documentation as well as a
review of accessibility features and alternative language
requirements.
The end results of the tests were released in the four detailed
Secretary of State August 3, 2007 resolutions (for Diebold Election
Systems, Hart InterCivic, Sequoia Voting Systems and Elections
Systems and Software, Inc.) and updated October 25, 2007 revised
resolutions for Diebold and Sequoia voting systems. The security
experts found significant security flaws in all of the manufacturers'
voting systems, flaws that could allow a single non-expert to
compromise an entire election.
On August 3, 2007 Bowen decertified machines that were tested in
her top to bottom view including the ES&S InkaVote machine,
which was not included in the review because the company
submitted it past the deadline for testing. The report issued July 27,
2007 was conducted by the expert "red team" attempting to detect
the levels of technological vulnerability. Another report on August
Page 15
16. 2, 2007 was conducted by a source code review team to detect
flaws in voting system source code. Both reports found that three
of the tested systems fell far short of the minimum requirements
specified in the 2005 Voluntary Voting System Guidelines
(VVSG). Some of the systems tested were conditionally recertified
with new stringed security requirements imposed. The companies
in question have until the February 2008 California Presidential
Primaries to fix their security issues and insure that election results
can be closely audited.
The Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election
Systems) AccuVote-TSx voting system was studied by a group of
Princeton University computer scientists in 2006. Their results
showed that the AccuVote-TSx was insecure and could be
"installed with vote-stealing software in under a minute." The
scientists also said that machines can transmit computer viruses
from one to another "during normal pre- and post-election activity
2. India:
- Omesh Saigal, an IIT alumnus and IAS officer blew the top of the
Election Commissioner Navin Chawla in front of the whole nation
when he successfully demonstrated that the 2009 elections in India
when Congress Party of India came back to power might be rigged.
This forced the election commission to review the current EVMs
and brought bad reputation for Mr. Navin Chawla.
- On October 30, 2006 the Dutch Minister of the Interior withdrew
the license of 1187 voting machines from manufacturer Suds NV,
about 10% of the total number to be used, because it was proven by
the General Intelligence and Security Service that one could
eavesdrop on voting from up to 40 meters using Van Eck
phreaking. National elections are to be held 24 days after this
decision. The decision was forced by the Dutch grass roots
organization Wij vertrouwen stem computers net ("We do not trust
voting computers").
3. Finland:
- In Finland, the Supreme Administrative Court declared invalid the
results of a pilot electronic vote in three municipalities, and ordered
a rerun of the municipal elections. The system had an usability
problem where the messages were ambiguous on whether the vote
had been cast. In a total of 232 cases (2% of votes), voters had
logged in, selected their vote but not confirmed it, and left the
booth; the votes were not recorded. Following the failure of the
Page 16
17. pilot election, the Finnish government has abandoned plans to
introduce electronic voting to the country.
Page 17
19. 2.1 Methodologies
Object Oriented Programming
Object-oriented programming (OOP) is a programming
paradigm that uses "objects" – data structures consisting of
data fields and methods together with their interactions – to
design applications and computer programs. Programming
techniques may include features such as data abstraction,
encapsulation, modularity, polymorphism, and inheritance. It
was not commonly used in mainstream software application
development until the early 1990s. Many modern
programming languages now support OOP.
An object is a discrete bundle of functions and procedures,
often relating to a particular real-world concept such as a voter
or candidate. Other pieces of software can access the object
only by calling its functions and procedures that have been
allowed to be called by outsiders. A large number of software
engineers agree that isolating objects in this way makes their
software easier to manage and keep track of. However, a
significant number of engineers feel the reverse may be true:
that software becomes more complex to maintain and
document, or even to engineer from the start. The conditions
under which OOP prevails over alternative techniques (and
vice-versa) often remain unstated by either party, however,
making rational discussion of the topic difficult, and often
leading to "religious wars" over the matter.
Object-oriented programming has roots that can be traced to
the 1960s. As hardware and software became increasingly
complex, manageability often became a concern. Researchers
studied ways to maintain software quality and developed
object-oriented programming in part to address common
problems by strongly emphasizing discrete, reusable units of
programming logic. The technology focuses on data rather than
processes, with programs composed of self-sufficient modules
("classes"), each instance of which ("objects") contains all the
information needed to manipulate its own data structure
("members"). This is in contrast to the existing modular
programming which had been dominant for many years that
focused on the function of a module, rather than specifically the
data, but equally provided for code reuse, and self-sufficient
reusable units of programming logic, enabling collaboration
Page 19
20. through the use of linked modules (subroutines). This more
conventional approach, which still persists, tends to consider
data and behavior separately.
An object-oriented program may thus be viewed as a collection
of interacting objects, as opposed to the conventional model, in
which a program is seen as a list of tasks (subroutines) to
perform. In OOP, each object is capable of receiving messages,
processing data, and sending messages to other objects. Each
object can be viewed as an independent 'machine' with a
distinct role or responsibility. The actions (or "methods") on
these objects are closely associated with the object. For
example, the data structures tend to 'carry their own operators
around with them' (or at least "inherit" them from a similar
object or class). In the conventional model, the data and
operations on this data doesn't have a tight formal association.
Fundamental concepts and features
A survey by Deborah J. Armstrong of nearly 40 years of
computing literature identified a number of "quarks", or
fundamental concepts, found in the strong majority of
definitions of OOP.
Not all of these concepts are to be found in all object-oriented
programming languages, and so object-oriented programming
that uses classes is called sometimes class-based programming.
In particular, prototype-based programming does not typically
use classes. As a result, a significantly different yet analogous
terminology is used to define the concepts of object and
instance.
Class
'A class defines' the abstract characteristics of a thing (object),
including its characteristics (its attributes, fields or
properties) and the thing's behaviors (the things it can do, or
methods, operations or features). One might say that a class
is a blueprint or factory that describes the nature of something.
For example, the class Voter would consist of traits shared by
all voters, such as Name and age color (characteristics), and the
ability to cast vote (behaviors). Classes provide modularity and
structure in an object-oriented computer program. A class
should typically be recognizable to a non-programmer familiar
with the problem domain, meaning that the characteristics of
the class should make sense in context. Also, the code for a
Page 20
21. class should be relatively self-contained (generally using
encapsulation). Collectively, the properties and methods
defined by a class are called members.
Object
An instance (that is, an actual example) of a class. Example 1:
The class Voter is a pattern or blueprint for candidate objects
by listing the characteristics and behaviors they can have; the
object Ahmed is one particular candidate.
Instance
One can have an instance of a class; the instance is the actual
object created at run-time. In programmer vernacular, the
Ahmed object is an instance of the voter class. The set of
values of the attributes of a particular object is called its state.
The object consists of state and the behavior that's defined in
the object's class.
Method
An object's abilities. In language, methods (sometimes referred
to as "functions") are verbs. Ahmed, being a voter, has the
ability to submit a vote So submit () is one of Ahmed's methods.
He may have other methods as well, for example Login().
Within the program, using a method usually affects only one
particular object; all voters can submit a vote, but you need
only one voter to submit one vote.
Message passing
"The process by which an object sends data to another object
or asks the other object to invoke a method."Also known to
some programming languages as interfacing. For example, the
object called AdminClerk may tell the Ahmed object to apply by
passing a "submit" message which invokes Ahmed's "submit"
method. The syntax varies between languages, for example:
[Ahmed submit] in Objective-C. In Java, code-level message
passing corresponds to "method calling". Some dynamic
languages use double-dispatch or multi-dispatch to find and
pass messages.
Inheritance
"Subclasses" are more specialized versions of a class, which
inherit attributes and behaviors from their parent classes, and
can introduce their own.
For example, the class person might have sub-class called
Page 21
22. voter. In this case, Ahmed would be an instance of the voter
subclass. Suppose the people class defines a method called
View() and a property called name. Each of its sub-classes
(voter, candidate, and judge) will inherit these members,
meaning that the programmer only needs to write the code for
them once.
Each subclass can alter its inherited traits. For example, the
voter subclass might specify that the default status for a voter
is true. The Subclasses can also add new members. The voter
subclass could add a method called submit(). So an individual
Ahmed instance would use a high-pitched submit() from the
voter subclass.
The Baradey object would also have the apply() method, but
Ahmed would not, because he is a candidate, not a voter. In
fact, inheritance is an "a... is a" relationship between classes,
while instantiation is an "is a" relationship between an object
and a class: a voter is a person ("a... is a"), but ahmed is a voter
("is a"). Thus, the object named Ahmed has the methods from
both classes voter and person.
Multiple inheritances is inheritance from more than one
ancestor class, neither of these ancestors being an ancestor of
the other. For example, independent classes could define
person and community, and a Ahmed object could be created
from these two which inherits all the (multiple) behavior of
person and community. This is not always supported, as it can
be hard to implement.
Abstraction
Abstraction is simplifying complex reality by modeling classes
appropriate to the problem, and working at the most
appropriate level of inheritance for a given aspect of the
problem.
For example, Ahmed the Voter may be treated as a voter much
of the time, a community instance when necessary to access
community-specific attributes or behaviors, and as a person
(perhaps the parent class of voter).
Encapsulation
Encapsulation conceals the functional details of a class from
objects that send messages to it.
For example, the voter class has a submit() method. The code
Page 22
23. for the submit() method defines exactly how a submition
happens (e.g., by login() and then verify(), at a particular pitch
and volume). Ali, Ahmed's friend, however, does not need to
know exactly how he votes. Encapsulation is achieved by
specifying which classes may use the members of an object.
The result is that each object exposes to any class a certain
interface — those members accessible to that class. The reason
for encapsulation is to prevent clients of an interface from
depending on those parts of the implementation that are likely
to change in the future, thereby allowing those changes to be
made more easily, that is, without changes to clients. Members
are often specified as public, protected or private,
determining whether they are available to all classes, sub-
classes or only the defining class. Some languages go further:
Java uses the default access modifier to restrict access also to
classes in the same package, C# and VB.NET reserve some
members to classes in the same assembly using keywords
internal (C#) or Friend (VB.NET), and Eiffel and C++ allow
one to specify which classes may access any member.
Polymorphism(Subtype)
Polymorphism allows the programmer to treat derived class
members just like their parent class's members. More
precisely, Polymorphism in object-oriented programming is
the ability of objects belonging to different data types to
respond to calls of methods of the same name, each one
according to an appropriate type-specific behavior. One
method, or an operator such as +, -, or *, can be abstractly
applied in many different situations.
Decoupling
Decoupling allows for the separation of object interactions
from classes and inheritance into distinct layers of abstraction.
A common use of decoupling is to polymorphically decouple
the encapsulation, which is the practice of using reusable code
to prevent discrete code modules from interacting with each
other. However, in practice decoupling often involves trade-
offs with regard to which patterns of change to favor. The
science of measuring these trade-offs in respect to actual
change in an objective way is still in its infancy.
Page 23
24. Design Patterns
In software engineering, a design pattern is a general reusable
solution to a commonly occurring problem in software design.
A design pattern is not a finished design that can be
transformed directly into code. It is a description or template
for how to solve a problem that can be used in many different
situations. Object-oriented design patterns typically show
relationships and interactions between classes or objects,
without specifying the final application classes or objects that
are involved.
Design patterns reside in the domain of modules and
interconnections. At a higher level there are Architectural
patterns that are larger in scope, usually describing an overall
pattern followed by an entire system.
Not all software patterns are design patterns. For instance,
algorithms solve computational problems rather than software
design problems.
Design patterns can speed up the development process by
providing tested, proven development paradigms. Effective
software design requires considering issues that may not
become visible until later in the implementation. Reusing
design patterns helps to prevent subtle issues that can cause
major problems, and it also improves code readability for
coders and architects who are familiar with the patterns.
In order to achieve flexibility, design patterns usually introduce
additional levels of indirection, which in some cases may
complicate the resulting designs and hurt application
performance.
By definition, a pattern must be programmed anew into each
application that uses it. Since some authors see this as a step
backward from software reuse as provided by components,
researchers have worked to turn patterns into components.
Meyer and Arnout claim a two-thirds success rate in
componentizing the best-known patterns.
Often, people only understand how to apply certain software
design techniques to certain problems. These techniques are
difficult to apply to a broader range of problems. Design
patterns provide general solutions, documented in a format
that doesn't require specifics tied to a particular problem.
ECC Pattern
Engine-Collection-Class, a Design Pattern for Building Reusable
Enterprise Components The Enterprise Computing Center
Page 24
25. (ECC) is a research center of the ETH Zürich established in
collaboration with industry to promote education, research,
and technology transfer in the general areas of enterprise IT
architecture, enterprise computing, enterprise application
integration, middleware, high performance and large scale data
management, multi-tier architectures, and service oriented
architectures.
The charter of the ECC involves:
• To conduct advanced research as part of joint projects with
the industrial partners.
• To pursue graduate education programs (Master / Ph.D.
level) that better prepare students for the problems they will
encounter in industry.
• To establish a permanent dialogue between academic
research and industry on technology, education, and research,
acting as a vehicle and catalyst for information exchanges
across companies and the development of a better
understanding of the problems surrounding enterprise
computing.
Adaptor pattern
In computer programming, the adapter design pattern (often
referred to as the wrapper pattern or simply a wrapper)
translates one interface for a class into a compatible interface.
An adapter allows classes to work together that normally could
not because of incompatible interfaces, by providing its
interface to clients while using the original interface. The
adapter translates calls to its interface into calls to the original
interface, and the amount of code necessary to do this is
typically small. The adapter is also responsible for
transforming data into appropriate forms. For instance, if
multiple Boolean values are stored as a single integer but your
consumer requires a 'true'/'false', the adapter would be
responsible for extracting the appropriate values from the
integer value.
Three-tier architecture
is a client–server architecture in which the user interface,
functional process logic ("business rules"), computer data
storage and data access are developed and maintained as
independent modules, most often on separate platforms. It was
developed by John J. Donovan in Open Environment
Page 25
26. Corporation (OEC), a tools company he founded in Cambridge,
MA.
The three-tier model is a software architecture and a software
design pattern.
Apart from the usual advantages of modular software with
well-defined interfaces, the three-tier architecture is intended
to allow any of the three tiers to be upgraded or replaced
independently as requirements or technology change. For
example, a change of operating system in the presentation tier
would only affect the user interface code.
Typically, the user interface runs on a desktop PC or
workstation and uses a standard graphical user interface,
functional process logic may consist of one or more separate
modules running on a workstation or application server, and
an RDBMS on a database server or mainframe contains the
computer data storage logic. The middle tier may be multi-
tiered itself (in which case the overall architecture is called an
"n-tier architecture").
Three-tier architecture has the following three tiers:
Presentation tier
This is the topmost level of the application. The
presentation tier displays information related to such
services as browsing merchandise, purchasing, and
shopping cart contents. It communicates with other tiers
by outputting results to the browser/client tier and all
other tiers in the network.
Application tier (business logic, logic tier, data access tier, or
middle tier)
The logic tier is pulled out from the presentation tier and,
as its own layer, it controls an application’s functionality
by performing detailed processing.
Data tier
This tier consists of database servers. Here information is
stored and retrieved. This tier keeps data neutral and
independent from application servers or business logic.
Giving data its own tier also improves scalability and
performance.
Page 26
27. 3 tier Architecture 1
Web Application
In system software, a web application is an application that is
accessed over a network such as the Internet or an intranet.
The term may also mean a computer software application that
is hosted in a browser-controlled environment (e.g. a Java
applet)[citation needed] or coded in a browser-supported
language (such as JavaScript, combined with a browser-
rendered markup language like HTML) and reliant on a
common web browser to render the application executable.
Web applications are popular due to the ubiquity of web
browsers, and the convenience of using a web browser as a
client, sometimes called a thin client. The ability to update and
maintain web applications without distributing and installing
software on potentially thousands of client computers is a key
reason for their popularity, as is the inherent support for cross-
platform compatibility. Common web applications include
webmail, online retail sales, online auctions, wikis and many
other functions.
The web interface places very few limits on client functionality.
Through Java, JavaScript, DHTML, Flash and other technologies,
application-specific methods such as drawing on the screen,
playing audio, and access to the keyboard and mouse are all
possible. Many services have worked to combine all of these
Page 27
28. into a more familiar interface that adopts the appearance of an
operating system. General purpose techniques such as drag
and drop are also supported by these technologies. Web
developers often use client-side scripting to add functionality,
especially to create an interactive experience that does not
require page reloading. Recently, technologies have been
developed to coordinate client-side scripting with server-side
technologies such as PHP. Ajax, a web development technique
using a combination of various technologies, is an example of
technology which creates a more interactive experience.
Applications are usually broken into logical chunks called
"tiers", where every tier is assigned a role. Traditional
applications consist only of 1 tier, which resides on the client
machine, but web applications lend themselves to a n-tiered
approach by nature. Though many variations are possible, the
most common structure is the three-tiered application
Distributed Data Base
We can define a distributed database (DDB) as a
collection of multiple logically interrelated databases
distributed over a computer network, and a distributed
database management system (DDBMS) as a software system
that manages a distributed database while making the
distribution transparent to the use.
A collection of files stored at different nodes of a network and
the maintaining of interrelationships among them via
hyperlinks has become a common organization on the Internet,
with files of Web pages.
Reasons of DDB
1. More computer power is harnessed to solve a complex task,
and.
2. Each autonomous processing element can be managed
independently and develop its own applications.
Page 28
29. Some different database system architectures.
(a) Shared nothing architecture.
(b) A networked architecture with a centralized database at one
of the sites.
(c) A truly distributed database architecture.
Shared nothing architecture. 1
A networked architecture with a centrali 1
Page 29
30. Truly distributed database architecture 1
Advantages of DDB:
- Increased reliability and availability: These are two of the most
common potential advantages cited for distributed databases.
Reliability is broadly defined as the probability that a system is
running (not down) at a certain time point, whereas
availability is the probability that the system is continuously
available during a time interval. When the data and DBMS
software are distributed over several sites, one site may fail
while other sites continue to operate. Only the data and
software that exist at the failed site cannot be accessed. This
improves both reliability and availability. Further
Page 30
31. improvement is achieved by judiciously replicating data and
software at more than one site. In a centralized system, failure
at a single site makes the whole system unavailable to all users.
In a distributed database, some of the data may be
unreachable, but users may still be able to access other parts of
the database.
- Improved performance: A distributed DBMS fragments the
database by keeping the data closer to where it is needed most.
Data localization reduces the contention for CPU and I/O
services and simultaneously reduces access delays involved in
wide area networks. When a large database is distributed over
multiple sites, smaller databases exist at each site. As a result,
local queries and transactions accessing data at a single site
have better performance because of the smaller local
databases. In addition, each site has a smaller number of
transactions executing than if all transactions are submitted to
a single centralized database. Moreover, inter query and inter
query parallelism can be achieved by executing multiple
queries at different sites, or by breaking up a query into a
number
The potential advantages Of DDBMS
The DDBMS software must be able to provide the following
functions in addition to those of a centralized DBMS:
- Keeping track of data: The ability to keep track of the data
distribution, fragmentation, and replication by expanding the
DDBMS catalog.
- Distributed query processing: The ability to access remote sites
and transmit queries and data among the various sites via a
communication network.
- Distributed transaction management: The ability to devise
execution strategies for queries and transactions that access
data from more than one site and to synchronize the access to
distributed data and maintain integrity of the overall database.
- Replicated data management: The ability to decide which copy
of a replicated data item to access and to maintain the
consistency of copies of a replicated data item.
- Distributed database recovery: The ability to recover from
individual site crashes and from new types of failures such as
the failure of a communication links.
Page 31
32. - Security: Distributed transactions must be executed with the
proper management of the security of the data and the
authorization/access privileges of users.
- Distributed directory (catalog) management: A directory
contains information (metadata) about data in the database.
The directory may be global for the entire DDB, or local for
each site. The placement and distribution of the directory are
design and policy issues.
2.2 Feasibility Analysis:-
SWOT/PEST Analysis
In this section, not only the SWOT but also the PEST factors are
examined to assess the current and prospective states of e-voting in
Egypt by using a practical approach.
SWOT analysis is employed to discuss strengths (S), weaknesses (W),
opportunities (O) and threats (T) of e-Voting in Egypt. Each of the
four components of SWOT analysis is further examined according to
PEST factors, referring to political (P), economic (E), social (S) and
technological (T) determinants.
Strengths
The strengths of Egypt to develop and maintain e-Voting lie with the
public policy. This is an important political determinant in the PEST
model.
Political:
After 25 January revolution, the need for a system that automate the
election process, to facilitate the participation of the large amount of
voters into the process of the election, and help in getting rid of all
means of fraud.
Economic:
Implementing E-Voting system with central database will decrease
transposition cost for voting boxes, as this costs will be replaced by
the cost of intranet used for voting system.
Implementing such a system will guide business to such a field of
providing services to the government and automating their process,
this will open new job vacancies for IT people.
Social:
Page 32
33. Implementing such a system in Egypt will gain the attention of
people to IT, and hence this system can help in removing technology
Illiteracy.
Automating the system will decrease the time of voter verification
and hence will decrease the time of the voting process and voting
queues, helping in preventing valance among voters.
The idea of automating voting process will gain voter respects and
trust, since no one has control on their decisions.
Technology strengths:
The system will utilize the technology and make benefits of it. New
infrastructure will be added, and the system will reflect the effect of
technology on the public live and will encourage innovation.
Opportunities
Political:
In spite of the abovementioned shortcomings, there are many
opportunities for E-Voting to grow in Egypt. The political willingness
of leaders to build and automate the voting process creates an
opportunity for businesses in Egypt to show their commitment to E-
Voting, and government may help in planning, designing and
implementing such a system.
Economic:
People with IT proficiency have better opportunities for employment
since computer literacy is a requirement for most industries in Egypt.
Thus, people are motivated to learn computer skills. Time constraints
are another motive to urge the public to adopt e-Services.
Social:
The system provide opportunities for the society as it direct their
attention to the technology and how it can they help them in their
live to improve, provide opportunities for voters to get rid from their
fairs of frauds by all its means or affecting their opinions.
Technology:
The development of new technology applications presents
opportunities for better, cheaper and more efficient e-services.
Page 33
34. Weaknesses
Political:
Traditionally, the public believe that the old government always
wants to introduce new methods and new approaches to return to
political live. This belief may cause people to hesitate in trying E-
Voting. Other weaknesses are the public feelings of insecurity and
concern about making mistakes and being fined. These issues
discourage people from tapping into E-Voting.
Economic:
Economic costs for providing all infrastructures required to run the
system and so the original version of software applications used.
Social:
Large portion of blue-collar workers and the older generation is still
computer illiterate. Others may find it difficult to follow instructions
on the Internet or may be discouraged by computer-related
problems.
Technology:
Less IT-savvy people and the older generation are afraid of computer
related problems. The performance and traffic on the server is
another issue.
Threats
Political:
Opposition system may take advantage of the Internet to spread
propaganda on their ideologies and to create social disorder as they
can question about the electronic system depending on most people
illiteracy with the IT.
Security breaches are another problem for E-Voting. The loopholes in
the legal system and advanced technology make it easy for hackers to
penetrate portal and steal confidential information.
This will create insecurity among voters who then may not be so
willing to trust service.
Internet and computer related crimes, such as hacking, scam, spam,
phishing or identity fraud and theft, will hinder the development of
E-Voting.
If problems relating to security and privacy are not properly
addressed, voter could hesitate to use the service.
Economic:
Page 34
35. Economic threat for increasing of technologies costs.
Social:
Rapid development of telecommunication and competition is major
threats. Mobile voting may be developed that lead the user to avoid
using our system.
Competition may lead another company to develop a system with
easier technologies and infra structure.
Technology:
The dependence of people on technology may produce the adverse
effect of people serving technology, instead of technology serving
people.
An electronic crisis may disrupt activities and the whole country
could be paralyzed without any Internet connection. Computer
viruses, worms and computer bugs may affect the result counting
function. Network problems are also a major barrier. Users may feel
helpless when they have to deal with technological problems.
Page 35
36. SWOT/PEST Analysis Summery
SWOT/ Strength Weaknesses Opportunities Threats
PEST (S) (W) (O) (T)
- Cyber
terrorism
- Public policy Conservation in and cyber
Political Political
trying e- crimes
aspect (P) willingness
Services - Security
breach
- Economic
policies
- Funds for
eservices
IT-proficient
To improve
Infrastructure people can have Infrastructure
Economic social and
costs better costs
aspect (E) physical
Software costs opportunity for Software costs
infrastructure
employment
- Low cost
of Internet
subscripti
on
- Remove
technology Workers and The rapid
- IT
Illiteracy older development of
Social aspect Education
- Decrease generation mobile
(S)
are computer - Fraud technology
violence
illiterate prevention competition
Gain voter
trust
- Some
government
Dependency on
- High-tech websites are
IT, i.e. small
Technological based unfriendly-user Broadband
technical
aspect Economy - Over- facilitates faster
problems will
(T) - Innovatio capacity connection
disrupt the
n of the Internet
entire networks
highway due to
heavy traffic
Page 36
37. 2.3 Major Identified Risks
Threat Consequence Likelihood Counter
measures
Trojan horse
No known example,
installed by
Wholesale but theoretically
Operating
possible
System vendor
Prevents Develop
Lack of
adequate testing Certain standards (a
standards
of Voting system slow process)
Configuration
Stronger legal
Lack of change could Known problems with
sanctions – but
configuration introduce new configuration
oversight is
oversight voting oversight
expensive
compromises
Potential for Better testing
multiple voting, and
Buggy software Unknown
loss of voter certification of
privacy voting systems
Common, occurred No simple
Denial of Disenfranchisem
during Canadian counter
Service ent
Internet election measures
Detection
difficult.
Individual PCs
Trojan horse can be
spyware to Vote theft, loss of Widely available tools protected, but
change or privacy for this assuring
monitor votes compliance
difficult,
especially for
public PCs.
Page 37
38. 2.4 Requirement specification:-
Functional Requirements:
The main features in the system are:
A- Pre-voting phase:
1- Manage admin
2- Manage election committee
3- Manage candidates
4- Manage voters
B- Voting phase
1- Submit vote
C- Post-voting phase
1- View results
2- Generate reports
Module 1: Manage Admin Module
1- Super admin must be able to add new admin with specific
privileges to the system.
2- Super admin must be able to edit admin.
3- Super admin shall be able to delete admin.
4- Super admin shall be able to view admin information and
privileges.
Page 38
39. 5- Super admin may be able to sort admins by committee,
privileges, and names.
6- Super admin may be able to filter admins by committee,
privileges.
7- Super admin may be able to search for a specific admin
Module 2: Manage election committee Module
1- Admin must be able to add new committee election.
2- Admin must be able to edit exiting committee election.
3- Admin shall be able to delete existing committee election.
4- Admin shall be able to view committee information.
5- Admin may be able to sort committee by name, location.
6- Admin may be able to filter committee by locations.
7- Admin may be able to search for a specific committee.
Module 3: Manage candidate
1- Admin must be able to add new candidate.
2- Admin must be able to edit exiting candidate.
3- Admin shall be able to delete existing candidate.
4- Admin shall be able to view candidate.
5- Admin may be able to sort candidate by name, location.
6- Admin may be able to filter candidate by committee.
7- Admin may be able to search for a specific candidate.
Module 4: Manage Voters
1- Admin must be able to add new Voter.
2- Admin must be able to edit exiting voter.
3- Admin shall be able to delete existing voter.
4- Admin shall be able to view voter.
5- Admin may be able to sort voter by name, location.
6- Admin may be able to filter voter by committee assigned to.
7- Admin may be able to search for a specific voter.
Module 5: Voting Voters module
1- Voter must be able to login to the system.
2- User must be able to submit vote.
3- Admin must be able to verify user SSN.
Module 6: Result management module
1- Judge/auditor must be able to filter result according to
votes per committee, votes per candidates, and votes per
candidate and committee.
B) Non-Functional Requirements:
Security Requirements
- The security requirements for this system span all aspects of
the voting process and include voter authenticity, voter
Page 39
40. anonymity, data confidentiality, data integrity, system
accountability, system integrity, system availability, system
assurance, and system reliability
- An individual not registered to vote must not be able to cast a
ballot
- A voter must not be able to vote more than once
- The privacy of the vote has to be guaranteed during the casting,
transfer, reception, collection, and tabulation of votes
- No voter should be able to prove that they voted in a certain
way
- None of the participants involved in the voting process
(organizers, election officials, trusted third parties, voters, etc)
should be able to link a vote to an identifiable voter
- Each vote is recorded precisely as the voter intended
- Each voter is ensured a "clean slate" of the system to ensure
equality, confidence, and minimize system tampering
- The outcome of the voting process must correspond to the
votes cast
- It should be infeasible to exclude a valid vote from the
tabulation, and to validate a non-valid one
- System and voter operations are logged and audited
- The system cannot be re-configured during operation
- Access to voted ballots is prohibited until after the close of the
polls
- Additional ballots cannot be cast once the polling place has
closed
- The system must be open to independent inspection and
auditing
- The system is protected against accidental and malicious denial
of service attacks
Privacy: the voting system has to protect privacy, concealing the
relation between voter and his/her cast vote, and ensuring that the
voter's choice will remain anonymous. This requirement must be
fulfilled once the voter has cast his/her vote and must be preserved
during the counting processes.
Integrity: A voting system has to protect the vote against
manipulation once it is cast and until it is counted. Therefore the
channel must to provide measures to prevent and/or detect any
attempted to change the voter's intent once the vote has been cast.
Page 40
41. Voter Verifiability – Cast as Intended: Voter must have the
possibility to check that his/her vote has been accurately recorded.
In the case of remote voting, this implies the availability to check if
the vote received by the election officials and stored in the remote
Ballot Box (in a physical or electronic manner) is the same as cast by
the voter. It is important to note that the requirement cannot conflict
with others once.
Voter Verifiability – Counted as Cast: In the counted as cast
verification, voters must have the possibility to verify the inclusion of
his/her vote in the final tally. It is considered as security
improvement.
Prevention of Intermediate results: It is important to prevent the
disclosure of intermediate results before the election is closed. This
way, or the voters have the same information during the voting stage.
This implies that the secrecy of the vote must be preserved until the
tally process.
Ballot Box Accuracy: Protection of the ballot box against the
addition of bogus ballots or the elimination of valid ballots is needed.
In the case that multiple voting is allowed, this measured must
guarantee that one vote per voter will be counted.
Prevention of Voting Errors: The voting channel has to prevent
involuntary voting errors by voters when casting their votes (e.g.,
under-voting, over-voting). This practice is becoming more common
for poll-site voting in complex elections.
Ease of Use: the voting channel must be easy to use by average
voters. In remote voting this requirement is of paramount
importance to prevent disenfranchisement and facilitate the
participation of voters.
Correctness: All input votes are correctly counted and no other
votes are counted
Robustness: The counting tolerates the corrupt or faulty behavior of
any group of authorities up to a threshold.
Page 41
44. Administrator add new judge /
admin-clerk
Description Administrator must be able to add judge / admin-clerk.
Administrator add judge / admin-clerk
Title:
Administrator adds judge/admin-clerk personal.
Intent:
Describe Administrator interacts with the system during
add data about new judge/admin-clerk as an initial data.
Preconditions
Administrator login to the system
Actors
• Administrator
Main Scenario
1- Administrator enters data about new judge/admin-
clerk
(User id – user name – SSN – title – address -
mission).
Specification
2- Administrator press save button
s
3- Data is saved and confirmation message appear that
data is saved successfully.
Alternate Scenario1
1- Wrong User id entered (duplicate User id)
2- System displays a message that (invalid User id,
User id already exist)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 44
45. Administrator edit judge / admin-
clerk
Description Administrator must be able to edit judge / admin-clerk.
Administrator edits judge / admin-clerk
Title:
Administrator edits judge/admin-clerk personal data.
Intent:
Describe Administrator interacts with the system during
editing judge/admin-clerk personal data.
Preconditions
Administrator login to the system.
Judge/admin-clerk data already recorded.
Actors
1- Administrator
Main Scenario
1- Administrator selects judge/admin-clerk user id for
the record to be displayed.
2- Administrator amends data.
3- Administrator press save button
4- Confirmation message appear that data is saved
Specification
successfully.
s Alternate Scenario1
1- Wrong user id entered.
2- System displays a message that (invalid user id,
user id does not exist)
Alternate Scenario2 (Voting Day)
1- The system does not permit editing during voting
Process.
2- System displays a message that (Voting is in
process)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 45
46. Administrator deletes judge / admin-
clerk
Description Administrator must be able to delete judge / admin-clerk
Administrator deletes judge / admin-clerk
Title:
Administrator deletes judge / admin-clerk ion.
Intent:
Administrator interacts with the system during deleting
judge / admin-clerk.
Preconditions
Administrator login.
judge / admin-clerk data already recorded.
Actors
1- Administrator
Main Scenario
1- Administrator selects judge / admin-clerk to be
displayed and press delete.
2- Confirmation message displayed to confirm deletion
Specification process.
s 3- Administrator press delete button.
4- Precinct and Poll Station is deleted.
Alternate Scenario1 (Voting Day)
1- The system does not permit deleting during voting
Process.
2- System displays a message that (Voting is in
process)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Administrator displays judge / admin-clerk
Description Administrator must be able to display judge / admin-
Page 46
47. clerk.
Administrator displays judge / admin-clerk
Title:
Administrator displays judge / admin-clerk data.
Intent:
Describe Administrator interacts with the system during displaying
judge / admin-clerk tion data.
Preconditions
Administrator login.
Judge / admin-clerk data already recorded.
Actors: Administrator
Main Scenario
1- Administrator login to Manage judge / admin-clerk module.
All judge / admin-clerk appear with their basic data (User id –
user name – SSN – title – address - mission).
2- Administrator selects a judge / admin-clerk.
3- judge / admin-clerk information is displayed in details.
Alternate Scenario1
1- The first time Administrator is logged to the system and no
judge / admin-clerk exists
Specification 2- The system displays a message welcome the Administrator
and tells him that there is no data is recorded in the system
s yet.
Uses/Extends
Included1 Sort:
1- Administrator presses any column title in the display page
(User id – user name – SSN – title – address - mission).
2- Precinct and Poll Station are sorted according to the pressed
column title.
Included2 Search:
1- Administrator type judge / admin-clerk name and press
search button
2- Matching judge / admin-clerk appear in the result.
3- If there is no result, not found message appear.
Included3 Filter:
1- Administrator selects criteria to filter with (title, mission)
2- Matching candidates appear in the result.
3- If there is no result, not found message appear.
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 47
49. Add new Precinct and Poll Station
Administrator must be able to add new Precinct or Poll
Description
Station.
Administrator adds precinct and poll station
Title:
Administrator adds new Precinct or Poll Station.
Intent:
Describe Administrator interacts with the system during
add data about new Precinct or Poll Station as an initial
data.
Preconditions
Administrator login to the system
Actors
• Administrator
Main Scenario
4- Administrator enters data about new Precinct or
Poll Station
(Code – name – governorate - district - address –
Judge ID)
Specifications 5- Administrator press save button
6- Data is saved and confirmation message appear that
data is saved successfully.
Alternate Scenario1
3- Wrong code entered (duplicate code)
4- System displays a message that (invalid code,
code already exist)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 49
50. Edit Precinct and Poll Station data
Administrator must be able to edit Precinct and Poll
Description
Station.
Administrator edits Voter
Title:
Administrator edits Precinct and Poll Station data.
Intent:
Describe Administrator interacts with the system during
editing Precinct and Poll Station data.
Preconditions
Administrator login to the system.
Precinct and Poll Station data already recorded.
Actors
2- Administrator
Main Scenario
5- Administrator selects Precinct and Poll Station id for
the record to be displayed.
6- Administrator amends data.
7- Administrator press save button
8- Confirmation message appear that data is saved
Specification
successfully.
s Alternate Scenario1
3- Wrong code entered.
4- System displays a message that (invalid id, id does
not exist)
Alternate Scenario2 (Voting Day)
3- The system does not permit editing during voting
Process.
4- System displays a message that (Voting is in
process)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 50
51. Delete Precinct and Poll Station data
Administrator must be able to delete Precinct and Poll
Description
Station
Administrator deletes Precinct and Poll Station
Title:
Administrator deletes Precinct and Poll Station.
Intent:
Administrator interacts with the system during deleting
Precinct and Poll Station.
Preconditions
Administrator login.
Precinct and Poll Station data already recorded.
Actors
2- Administrator
Main Scenario
5- Administrator selects Precinct and Poll Station to be
displayed and press delete.
6- Confirmation message displayed to confirm deletion
Specifications process.
7- Administrator press delete button.
8- Precinct and Poll Station is deleted.
Alternate Scenario1 (Voting Day)
3- The system does not permit deleting during voting
Process.
4- System displays a message that (Voting is in process)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 51
52. Display Precinct and Poll Station Data
Administrator must be able to display Precinct and Poll
Description
Station.
Administrator displays Precinct and Poll Station
Title:
Administrator displays Precinct and Poll Station data.
Intent:
Describe Administrator interacts with the system during
displaying Precinct and Poll Station data.
Preconditions
Administrator login.
Precinct and poll data already recorded.
Actors
1- Administrator
Main Scenario
4- Administrator login to Manage Precinct and Poll Station
module.
All Precinct and Poll Station appear with their basic data
(Code – name – governorate - district - address – Judge ID)
5- Administrator selects a Precinct and Poll Station.
6- Precinct and Poll Station information is displayed in
details.
Alternate Scenario1
Specification 3- The first time Administrator is logged to the system and
s no Precinct and Poll Station exists
4- The system displays a message welcome the
Administrator and tells him that there is no data is
recorded in the system yet.
Uses/Extends
Included1 Sort:
3- Administrator press any column title in the display page
(code, Name, governorate, district- address- judge id)
4- Precinct and Poll Station are sorted according to the
pressed column title.
Included2 Search:
4- Administrator type Precinct and Poll Station name and
press search button
5- Matching Precinct and Poll Station appear in the result.
6- If there is no result, not found message appear.
Included3 Filter:
4- Administrator selects criteria to filter with (governorate,
judge)
5- Matching candidates appear in the result.
6- If there is no result, not found message appear.
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 52
54. Add new Candidate
Description Administrator must be able to add new candidate.
Administrator adds candidate
Title:
Administrator adds Voter data.
Intent:
Describe Administrator interacts with the system during
add data about candidate as an initial data.
Preconditions
Administrator login to the system
Actors
• Administrator
Main Scenario
7- Administrator enters data about Candidate
(SSN - name - Birth date –Age – Governorate -
District – Address, image, election symbol).
Specification 8- Administrator press save button
s 9- Data is saved and confirmation message appear that
data is saved successfully.
Alternate Scenario1
5- Wrong SSN entered (duplicate id)
6- System displays a message that (invalid id, id
already exist)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 54
55. Edit Voter date
Description Administrator must be able to edit Voter.
Administrator edits Voter
Title:
Administrator edits candidate data.
Intent:
Describe Administrator interacts with the system during
editing candidate data.
Preconditions
Administrator login to the system.
Candidate data already recorded.
Actors
3- Administrator
Main Scenario
9- Administrator enters candidate id for the record to
be displayed.
10-Administrator amends data.
11-Administrator press save button
12-Confirmation message appear that data is saved
Specification
successfully.
s Alternate Scenario1
5- Wrong id entered.
6- System displays a message that (invalid id, id does
not exist)
Alternate Scenario2 (Voting Day)
5- The system does not permit editing during voting
Process.
6- System displays a message that (Voting is in
process)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 55
56. Delete Candidate data
Description Administrator must be able to delete candidate.
Administrator deletes candidate
Title:
Administrator deletes candidate.
Intent:
Administrator interacts with the system during deleting
canidate.
Preconditions
Administrator login.
candidate data already recorded.
Actors
3- Administrator
Main Scenario
9- Administrator selects candidate to be displayed and
press delete.
10- Confirmation message displayed to confirm deletion
Specification process.
s 11- Administrator press delete button.
12-Candidate is deleted.
Alternate Scenario1 (Voting Day)
5- The system does not permit deleting during voting
Process.
6- System displays a message that (Voting is in
process)
Uses/Extends
N/A
Frequency
Frequent
Issues
N/A
Priority High
Page 56
