Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

UFS student’s research project aims to protect the country’s whistleblowers

24 November 2023 | Story André Damons | Photo SUPPLIED

Ricus Krause, an honours student in the Department of Computer Science and Informatics at the University of the Free State (UFS), receives his awards during the Suid-Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns (The South African Academy for Science and Arts) Student Symposium in Natural Sciences.

An honours student in the Department of Computer Science and Informatics at the University of the Free State (UFS) project on using blockchain technology to protect whistleblowers secured him first place for the best project and presentation in his session at the annual Suid-Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns (The South African Academy for Science and Arts) Student Symposium in Natural Sciences.

Ricus Krause, who presented his project, titled “Blokskakel Fluitjieblaser-Stelsel” (Blockchain Whistleblower System), at the symposium, also received the Eureka DIY Solutions Prize for an Outstanding Contribution to Computer Sciences and Mathematical Sciences. The symposium was hosted by the University of Pretoria in October.

His research aimed to address the shortcomings of current systems for protecting whistleblowers and to design a robust computer system that ensures the confidentiality and integrity of information by using blockchain technology. This system had to protect whistleblowers’ identities and securely preserve evidence of corruption.

Interested in Cybersecurity

“I have been interested in Cybersecurity ever since I started studying. I approached Dr Wynand Nel (supervisor) at the start of my honours year to ask if he had any ideas for a security-focused project, and he introduced me to blockchain technology and the blockchain research group. Blockchain piqued my security interest and allowed me to explore the field further.”

“After meeting with the group, the idea of a blockchain-based system for whistleblowers was born, and I started researching South Africa’s biggest problems, where corruption is at the top. During my initial research, I also discovered that whistleblowers face extreme consequences much more frequently than we think,” says Krause.

He identified the main problem with whistleblowing as the revelation of a whistleblower’s identity before it is safe. Thus, a system was needed to protect a whistleblower’s anonymity and facilitate safe communication to contact investigators.

On winning the awards, Krause said he knew he was competing against master’s and PhD students and did not expect to win. “This was the first time I’d presented my project at an event, so I was surprised when my name was called for the first prize in my session. I wanted to pinch myself to make sure I wasn’t dreaming.”

“I am genuinely grateful to have had the opportunity to present months of research to my peers and experts in their fields. I will always look back at the event with fond memories. I am proud of myself and my fellow students for presenting their research at the symposium when others did not dare to,” he says.

Address shortcomings of current systems

Krause is supervised by Dr Nel and Dr Rouxan Fouché, lecturers in the Department of Computer Science and Informatics and this research project falls within the department’s research focus area of Blockchain Technologies, headed by Dr Nel. The digital transformation of industries, known as Industry 4.0 has already started, and blockchain forms part of the digital revolution. The research areas include blockchain algorithms and data structures, blockchain security, blockchain applications and crypto assets.

With the recent high-profile killings of two whistleblowers in South Africa and with many other whistleblowers becoming victims of intimidation and violence to silence them after their identities were exposed, the researchers believe it is necessary to conduct research and develop a computer system to address the glaring shortcomings of current systems.

“Our research identified blockchain technology as a potential solution that meets these needs. Blockchain provides an immutable structure, supports non-repudiation, and grants accessibility to all stakeholders. It has the potential to provide a security-focused system that preserves the confidentiality and integrity of evidence. The system involves the anonymous registration of whistleblowers, the processing and storage of evidence, and the use of cryptography to ensure the privacy of messages,” says Krause.

According to him, implementing this system in the real world, including the composition of the blockchain structure, seems daunting, especially regarding scalability and legal issues. With this project, he explains, they built a working blockchain system on a single computer. The project can be improved by expanding the blockchain system to multiple nodes communicating over a network. This improvement will take the Blockchain Whistleblower project from a concept to a valuable contribution to society.

How it works

“In a nutshell, this research has highlighted the potential of a blockchain-based whistleblower system to overcome the challenges surrounding corruption. It is a step forward in the fight against crime and the protection of those with the courage to expose misconduct. However, it is essential to continue with research and implementation to make this system a reality and fulfil its promise,” Dr Nel says.

Traditionally, Krause explains, a central system is used where a single organisation controls the system. The potential danger is that the system provider becomes a single point of failure for the system and, thus, a target for cyberattacks. Another concern of a centralised system is the organisation’s ability to manipulate data and uncover the identities of whistleblowers. The integrity of the evidence can also be questioned when it is stored in a centralised database where modifications from a single point of access can affect all data.

A centralised system, therefore, would not be reliable enough for the high-risk circumstances of whistleblowers. They have concluded that a distributed or decentralised system would be an appropriate solution to the problem. A distributed system will continue to function as a whole even if a part is compromised.

The Blockchain Whistleblower System aims to make a proof-of-concept contribution to the field of blockchain technology. The system is installed locally on the user’s computer, where whistleblowers and investigators use an anonymous profile to interact with the system, which interacts with the blockchain. After signing in, users can choose to report a new incident or view messages on the blockchain.

Reporting a crime

If the user wants to blow the whistle on a crime, the process starts with a report to gather more information about the incident. The whistleblower then selects the evidence of the crime on their computer. A hash function algorithm processes the evidence to create a fixed-length evidence hash. Hashing is a one-way cryptographic process that uniquely represents the input data. It is important to note that only the evidence hash is stored on the blockchain, not the evidence itself. The selected evidence is stored in a password-protected encrypted folder on the whistleblower’s computer. Investigators can later use this evidence hash to verify the integrity of the evidence when they eventually receive it.

What is next for this project?

Krause says he would like to implement his project with nodes communicating via a network in the future. A network opens a new box of security considerations to explore and discover and would also enable the programme to be used at any location, making it accessible to whistleblowers everywhere.

“This project started with the idea to protect whistleblowers’ identities and provide a platform for them to contact investigators safely. The end goal is for the project to provide a platform where whistleblowers can anonymously report misconduct, safely communicate with investigators, and verify the integrity of their evidence.

“My hope for the project is to build a better South Africa by fighting corruption, one of the biggest obstacles to our country’s growth. By solving the many challenges whistleblowers encounter, I hope to foster a culture where whistleblowers are not afraid to speak out against crime.”

News Archive

Media: Sunday Times

2006-05-20

Sunday Times, 4 June 2006

True leadership may mean admitting disunity

In this edited extract from the inaugural King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture at the University of the Free State, Professor Njabulo S Ndebele explores the leadership challenges facing South Africa

RECENT events have created a sense that we are undergoing a serious crisis of leadership in our new democracy. An increasing number of highly intelligent, sensitive and committed South Africans, across class, racial and cultural spectrums, confess to feeling uncertain and vulnerable as never before since 1994.

When indomitable optimists confess to having a sense of things unhinging, the misery of anxiety spreads. We have the sense that events are spiralling out of control and that no one among the leadership of the country seems to have a definitive handle on things.

There can be nothing more debilitating than a generalised and undefined sense of anxiety in the body politic. It breeds conspiracies and fear.

There is an impression that a very complex society has developed, in the last few years, a rather simple, centralised governance mechanism in the hope that delivery can be better and more quickly driven. The complexity of governance then gets located within a single structure of authority rather than in the devolved structures envisaged in the Constitution, which should interact with one another continuously, and in response to their specific settings, to achieve defined goals. Collapse in a single structure of authority, because there is no robust backup, can be catastrophic.

The autonomy of devolved structures presents itself as an impediment only when visionary cohesion collapses. Where such cohesion is strong, the impediment is only illusory, particularly when it encourages healthy competition, for example, among the provinces, or where a province develops a character that is not necessarily autonomous politically but rather distinctive and a special source of regional pride. Such competition brings vibrancy to the country. It does not necessarily challenge the centre.

Devolved autonomy is vital in the interests of sustainable governance. The failure of various structures to actualise their constitutionally defined roles should not be attributed to the failure of the prescribed governance mechanism. It is too early to say that what we have has not worked. The only viable corrective will be in our ability to be robust in identifying the problems and dealing with them concertedly.

We have never had social cohesion in South Africa — certainly not since the Natives’ Land Act of 1913. What we definitely have had over the decades is a mobilising vision. Could it be that the mobilising vision, mistaken for social cohesion, is cracking under the weight of the reality and extent of social reconstruction, and that the legitimate framework for debating these problems is collapsing? If that is so, are we witnessing a cumulative failure of leadership?

I am making a descriptive rather than an evaluative inquiry. I do not believe that there is any single entity to be blamed. It is simply that we may be a country in search of another line of approach. What will it be?

I would like to suggest two avenues of approach — an inclusive model and a counter-intuitive model of leadership.

In an inclusive approach, leadership is exercised not only by those who have been put in some position of power to steer an organisation or institution. Leadership is what all of us do when we express, sincerely, our deepest feelings and thoughts; when we do our work, whatever it is, with passion and integrity.

Counter-intuitive leadership lies in the ability of leaders to read a problematic situation, assess probable outcomes and then recognise that those outcomes will only compound the problem. Genuine leadership, in this sense, requires going against probability in seeking unexpected outcomes. That’s what happened when we avoided a civil war and ended up with an “unexpected” democracy.

Right now, we may very well hear desperate calls for unity, when the counter-intuitive imperative would be to acknowledge disunity. A declaration of unity where it manifestly does not appear to exist will fail to reassure.

Many within the “broad alliance” might have the view that the mobilising vision of old may have transformed into a strategy of executive steering with a disposition towards an expectation of compliance. No matter how compelling the reasons for that tendency, it may be seen as part of a cumulative process in which popular notions of democratic governance are apparently undermined and devalued; and where public uncertainty in the midst of seeming crisis induces fear which could freeze public thinking at a time when more voices ought to be heard.

Could it be that part of the problem is that we are unable to deal with the notion of opposition? We are horrified that any of us could be seen to have become “the opposition”. The word has been demonised. In reality, it is time we began to anticipate the arrival of a moment when there is no longer a single, overwhelmingly dominant political force as is currently the case. Such is the course of history. The measure of the maturity of the current political environment will be in how it can create conditions that anticipate that moment rather than seek to prevent it. We see here once more the essential creativity of the counter-intuitive imperative.

This is the formidable challenge of a popular post-apartheid political movement. Can it conceptually anticipate a future when it is no longer overwhelmingly in control, in the form in which it is currently, and resist, counter-intuitively, the temptation to prevent such an eventuality? Successfully resisting such an option would enable its current vision and its ultimate legacy to our country to manifest in different articulations, which then contend for social influence. In this way, the vision never really dies; it simply evolves into higher, more complex forms of itself. Consider the metaphor of flying ants replicating the ant community by establishing new ones.

We may certainly experience the meaning of comradeship differently, where we will now have “comrades on the other side”.

Any political movement that imagines itself as a perpetual entity should look at the compelling evidence of history. Few movements have survived those defining moments when they should have been more elastic, and that because they were not, did not live to see the next day.

I believe we may have reached a moment not fundamentally different from the sobering, yet uplifting and vision-making, nation-building realities that led to Kempton Park in the early ’90s. The difference between then and now is that the black majority is not facing white compatriots across the negotiating table. Rather, it is facing itself: perhaps really for the first time since 1994. Could we apply to ourselves the same degree of inventiveness and rigorous negotiation we displayed leading up to the adoption or our Constitution?

This is not a time for repeating old platitudes. It is the time, once more, for vision.

In the total scheme of things, the outcome could be as disastrous as it could be formative and uplifting, setting in place the conditions for a true renaissance that could be sustained for generations to come.

Ndebele is Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape Town and author of the novel The Cry of Winnie Mandela

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept