August/September 2017
CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED
Courts Today 69 Lyme Road, Hanover, NH 03755
Q&A: Judicial Leaders Speak About Top Tech Challenges
Vol. 15 No. 4
Revolutionary Technology
with alternative & diversion programs
Publisher & Executive Editor Thomas S. Kapinos Assistant Publisher Jennifer Kapinos
A U G U S T / S E P T E M B E R 2 017
Editor Donna Rogers
VOLU M E 15 N U M B E R 4
Contributing Editors Michael Grohs, Bill Schiffner G.F. Guercio, Kelly Mason
F EATU R E S
Art Director Jamie Stroud Marketing Representatives Bonnie Dodson (828) 479-7472
10 Q&A: Judicial Leaders Speak About Their Top Tech Challenges
20 Revolutionary Technology: Court
Art Sylvie (480) 816-3448 Peggy Virgadamo (718) 456-7329
Product Innovations on Display at CTC 2017
28 The Evolution Solution— Which CMS for Your Court?
34 Gone Phishing... Beware: Cyber Attacks!
with alternative & diversion programs
is published bi-monthly by: Criminal Justice Media, Inc PO Box 213 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 310.374.2700 Send address changes to: COURTS TODAY 69 Lyme Road Hanover, NH 03755 or fax (603) 643-6551
DE PARTM E NTS
42 Ad Index
To receive a FREE subscription to COURTS TODAY submit, on court letterhead, your request with qualifying title; date, sign and mail to COURTS TODAY 69 Lyme Road Hanover, NH 03755 or you may fax your subscription request to (603) 643-6551 Subscriptions: Annual subscriptions for non-qualified personnel, United States only, is $60.00. Single copy or back issues-$10.00 All Canada and Foreign subscriptions are $90.00 per year. Printed in the United States of America, Copyright © 2017 Criminal Justice Media, Inc.
The CT Advantage • Our readership are: Court Administrators, Presiding Judges, Court Clerks, IT Services Managers, Chief Probation & Parole Officers, and more • We analyze technological trends and developments • We cover case studies of project implementations • We are the only magazine targeted directly to the judiciary
Be in the know! Sign up for our print and online issues.
BY G. F. G U ERC I O, C O N T R I B U T I N G E D IT O R
Q A &
TOP TECH CHALLENGES & SOLUTIONS
!$"& # &#" % &#&"% % $& ! & & # & %# %!"&
$ &# "$!#$ !"&# & ! &$ %&$% & "$! & $ % ! $ $"& &$ %& $ %"& # % & &$ %& !$"&# & # "& $ &$# %&$ % & %!%&#!%&$ % !&!%" "%"
Mark Lanterman, founder and chief technology officer, Computer Forensic Services, Inc., discusses how future technology can change courthouse processes. He is expected to deliver the keynote at the CTC conference in Salt Lake City in September.
A Q&A
OF PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS FROM PROMINENT PROFESSIONALS IN THE COURT ENVIRONMENT :
INDUSTRY LEADERS, TECH LEADERS, COURT ADMINISTRATORS, COURT-RELATED COMPANIES—WERE ASKED TO HASH OUT PRESENT AND FUTURE TECH PROBLEMS
& SOLUTIONS.
August/September 2017 10
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
#$& "&$ %& !%#$%"$&$% # & # % %& ! !$"& &# & &$ %& % $ %& %#!" & #$& & &"%%&#"&$ % " $ & #! &# & !$ "$! & %# %!& " %!"
tion. Only through education and training will judges, juries, and attorneys be able to communicate using the same language. PROBLEM: Courts have been hesitant to adopt technology, especially in older or historic courthouses. Bringing something new and advanced into a well-established judicial system seems contradictory, but with technology being the norm for our everyday lives, it’s no won-
PROBLEM: Presently, courts and those within the legal community tend to focus on e-discovery. With this in mind, I believe that the greatest future challenge will be the preMark Lanterman, Founder and Chief Technology Officer, Computer Forensic Services, Inc., CTC Keynote Speaker
sentation and review of evidence generated by the ever-expanding and developing Internet of Things. This includes the analysis of digital evidence related to hacking water processing plants, electrical systems in hospitals, and wind turbines, among others. In this sense, cybersecurity cases will become increasingly prevalent and dangerous, and will require a broader scope of understanding than what simple e-discovery methodologies currently offer. SOLUTION: At the present time, there are no clear-cut, cure-all, solutions. The complexity of the Internet of Things and its constantly evolving nature requires an understanding of cybersecurity as being flexible and adaptive to current digital climates. With that being said, the only “solution� or counter-measure is educa-
Maddie Flowers, Director of Sales, Infax
der that courts are starting to implement dynamic digital systems. That said, the challenge that courts are faced with is the ever-growing amount of technology offered. SOLUTION: With multiple companies offering variations of the same technology, the court is often left comparing their practices with the solution that best covers all their needs. The solution to the challenge of an oversaturated court technology market is education. Courts can educate themselves on the various software companies, the options they provide and how each option will best help the court move from the past, into the present and continue to help in the future. PROBLEM: The greatest technical challenge right now is digital transformation and disruption. All industries are facing challenges by historic outsiders entering their arena in a disruptive fashion. To stay relevant we must remember that we are a great repository of
August/September 2017 12
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
Jack McCarthy, Chief Information Officer (CIO), State of NJ Judiciary
information, in some cases dating back decades in various silos within legacy systems. That information must be leveraged to make processes more efficient, allow decisionmaking to occur real-time with the most up-to-date information to the decision makers, and make data available to the public to continue the transparency of the government processes. SOLUTION: First, don’t treat legacy systems as a burden. They are a goldmine and generally serve the purpose they were designed to achieve. Spend resources exposing those legacy systems using services and APIs (application programming interfaces make it easier to develop a software program). Once the data is available, build new systems that leverage modern technologies to efficiently analyze data. Exceptional solutions are found visiting insurance, finance, energy [and those in other fields]. We all have the same problems: We should leverage data to be more efficient. PROBLEM: The greatest technological challenge is for the courts to
Jeffrey A. Newman, Business Development, CourtSmart Digital Systems Inc.
keep pace with the expectations of attorneys and litigants who will demand instant, 24-hour access to the courts. According to the Pew Research Center, Mobile Fact Sheet, January 12, 2017, the majority of Americans—95 percent—own a cellphone; 77 percent smartphones, up from 35 percent in 2011. SOLUTION: Courts no longer can close their doors at the end of the day. Courts must find ways to provide services after hours such as paying fines, filing cases, issuing
warrants and protective orders, arraignments, visitation, and many other services. Attorneys and litigants will expect to use smartphones to present evidence on monitors, obtain docket information, and to navigate the facilities. Jurors will expect information on parking, transportation, and where to eat lunch. This requires the courts to build and maintain robust websites which scale to any screen size, and to design easy to navigate court Apps to assist litigants.
PC to AI: The Path to Beyond When asked about technology challenges the courts face, I reflected on 35 years of creating court-focused software solutions, starting in the days of the first IBM PC, then the next greatest thing called the Internet, and most recently, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. Over this period of time the concept that litigation is expensive, time consuming, and that no one wants to go to court if they can avoid it has remained constant. Thus, over time we see the business of the courts going to alternative sources of resolution—processes that take less time, are less expenHenry Sal, President, sive, are easier to participate in, etc. Computing System Innovations With such alternatives for dispute resolution, a significant challenge facing the courts is to remain the gold standard for justice, while at the same time adopting technologies to remain competitive. The courts are a business; they have customers—albeit some not by choice—but as a business they need to make use of the advancements in technology the same as private sector businesses. E-filing surely has helped, but automation of court workflows to provide case information to discern dispute fact from fiction is still a manual human-centric process. I suggest that the fourth industrial revolution, artificial intelligence (AI), is upon us and that the courts can use AI software to reduce the time and effort to process cases. That is not by eliminating responsibilities and years of judicial expertise, but by providing guided assistance with document summaries, case facts, conflict of facts, timelines, relationships and data that exist within documents requiring human review to locate. AI will not make case decisions, but will make facts more accessible and transparent to those who require them. One can’t always determine where the next backlog will occur, the past being our foreclosure crisis, our current being the opioid epidemic, or America’s immigration case backlog. Instead of hiring or reassigning judicial resources to assist with the increased workload, I suggest providing the courts with tools available and in use by private sector organizations, which will revolutionize the valuable gold standard in services that courts provide. — Henry Sal, president, Computing System Innovations
August/September 2017 14
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
The Justice Building, Arkansas Judiciary, Little Rock, Ark. Tim Holthoff, Director, Court Information Systems, Administrative Office of the Courts, Arkansas
PROBLEM: I think the greatest challenge is to meet the growing technology expectations of court customers resulting from the ubiquity of powerful and easy-to-use commercial software on mobile devices. Nearly everyone is Internet-connected through a plethora of mobile devices, and they expect to interact with government entities, including the courts, in the same fashion with which they’ve become accustomed in the commercial sector. SOLUTION: Court technology leaders must continue to work strategically to find secure, affordable, and possibly non-traditional sources to leverage in order to meet growing expectations. Further, as technologies provide increases in efficiency and improvements in service, court leaders should shift those savings towards technology to continue improvement and prevent stagnation. PROBLEM: Our judicial system faces many challenges, of which two very significant factors are budgetary and time constraints. Real-time reporters Debra A. Dibble: RDR, CRR, CRC, National Court Reporters Association (NCRA) SecretaryTreasurer
provide many technological solutions to facilitate efficiency in courtrooms and legal system. SOLUTION: When every infrastructure dollar counts, real-time reporters offer smart 21st Century solutions by improving efficiency with their ability to connect to judge’s and counsel’s laptops to instantly view, highlight, or make written remarks/reports of the testimony in real-time; allowing judges and counsel access to instant “readbacks,” rough drafts, daily copy, and expedited transcript services. Unlike electronic recordings or voice recognition software, if a witness mumbles, speaks with an accent, or nods, a real-time reporter will clarify while ensuring testimony is not obliterated by overlapping dialogue. When millions of dollars or someone's freedom is on the line, the services of real-time reporters using sophisticated computer-aided transcription software can be the difference between winning and losing, incarceration or freedom, life or death. PROBLEM: The biggest challenge I see facing courts revolves around the “change management” that is needed to move court staff from outdated systems to newer, more efficient processes. The human side
Kendall Smith, Business Development Manager, Thomson Reuters CTrack
of changing the way people have always done something can be scary and overwhelming to staff. Preparing for, as well as the ongoing management of the various responses to the change, can either
help or hinder the adoption of technology. SOLUTION: I see two areas of focus for court IT staff. The first is purchasing and building technology systems that are configurable and easily adapt to the unique process of their court and that are built on modern platforms that will evolve and scale as the court user community changes. The second focus is to incorporate “change management” strategies into your rollout of new technologies to your team. If proper energy is devoted to “change management,” new technologies will be adopted with excitement and ease, versus resistance and headaches. PROBLEM: Today courts use a broad variety of disparate technology tools to manage a diverse range of clients
James Newman, Vice President of Sales and Marketing, cFive Solutions
and court requirements. Just as there is not a “one size fits all” path to community supervision, there is not a single technology that handles all of a court’s pretrial, parole and probation supervision needs.
“Smartphones can support and empower community.” SOLUTION: Smartphones are the X factor. As technology continues to develop, so does the ability for smartphones to support and empower community. Emerging smartphone-enabled technology,
August/September 2017 16
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
like cFive Catalyst, allows courts to elevate remote supervision to true client management. Catalyst integrates instantaneous client communication, personalized client contact and electronic monitoring services into a single mobile app. Smartphone technology can provide enhanced levels of communication and supervision that combine 24/7 secure biometric client access with supervision services including interactive appointment notification and acknowledgement, distribution of contact questionnaires, secure messaging between client and case manager, virtual check-ins and location monitoring with inclusion/exclusion zone reporting. Michael Kleiman, Director of Marketing, Tyler Technologies Courts & Justice Division
PROBLEM: Courts will continue to be challenged by responding to changes in public policy and the public’s ever-increasing appetite for digital convenience, all while also reducing costs. Technology is rapidly changing how routine transactions are handled in other industries and courts have the opportunity to leverage those successes toward enhancing services for citizens and increasing access to justice.
SOLUTION: To further advance court automation, new solutions for mediation and online dispute resolution will make justice available to a wider audience with lower cost. Tyler’s Modria combines the social science of alternative dispute resolution practices with rules-based technology and case management. As bail bond reforms occur, Tyler Technologies’ Odyssey Pretrial Services module provides an auto-
mated tool for handling all aspects of the pretrial release process while defendants await trial either supervised or unsupervised. PROBLEM: Courts have embraced technology to facilitate their internal processes—whether entering data more efficiently or triggering actions Software that enables a seamless flow of data throughout the court can achieve a leap in transparency and efficiency.
Sue Humphreys, Director of Industry Relations, equivant
through workflow or assembling and reporting information to help decision making. Now, they need to work toward making those same processes more manageable and accessible externally—for their customers. SOLUTION: Court websites do a decent job of letting people look up cases or make payments electronically, but they aren’t ideal for someone who is trying to figure out whether the issue is appropriate for court or how to gather the right materials filing a case. There are a few steps that courts can take to help people; for instance, they can ensure that websites use plain language and include translation technology for limited English. An automated interview, along the lines of the A2J Author, can narrow down issues and suggest appropriate forms and next actions. Scott Bade, President, ImageSoft, Inc.
PROBLEM: The biggest challenge that we see is that courts lack the ability to achieve an electronic workflow because most court systems do not exchange data well with other systems. Courts have solved these integration gaps by manually keying in redundant data or printing documents to route or share. This creates huge inefficiencies in the court and makes public access and
transparency a challenge. SOLUTION: The JusticeTech Solution Suite integrates with any existing court system that can exchange data and even some that can’t. This enables the seamless flow of data and documents throughout the court and eliminates much of the redundant keying, printing and scanning of documents. By using JusticeTech to capture data and documents and route them through configurable electronic workflows, courts can achieve a leap in efficiency and transparency. PROBLEM: Challenges are: Disparate judicial systems lack information transparency between one another; lack of policies and laws that foster the use of technology; funding required to upgrade and procure new technology while retaining skilled AV and IT staff. SOLUTION: The Connected Justice consortium finds answers to judicial challenges mapping technology to Terry Burdett, Vertical Solution Architect (VSA), Cisco, Public Sector, Office of the Chief Technology Officer, Connected Justice
Continues on page 42
August/September 2017 18
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
BY G. F. G U ERC I O, C O N T R I B U T I N G E D IT O R
Revolutionary Technology $+7- 83/686+78.467168.4/2-+7183(8 /,5-54.8*03,/-685223 465321&8)42% 638"78328,51*.4%8(3086+78(5016865)784686+78$3/068 7-+23.3'% $32(7072-78"752'8+7.,8(03)8 7*67)"708 8528 4.68 4 78$56%!8
August/September 2017 20
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
Hartlage, president of adventfs.com. “We believe we’ve created a clean, efficient and impactful experience for all stakeholders in our online programs.” www.adventfs.com/advent-elearning, J. Joshua Hartlage, president, 1.866.494.8556, jjhartlage@adventfs.com
PRODUCT HOTSPOT ONLINE BEHAVIOR EDUCATION eLearning is the alternative for first-time as well as low- and midlevel offenders. Advent eLearning is a cloud-based platform with access anywhere, any time, on any device, for both those viewing the programs and administrative personnel monitoring enrollees. eLearning‘s main objective is to deliver convenient, self-directed education to correct behavior with a wide variety of evidence-based, online education programs that identify the root causes of problems and map techniques that can help correct behavior.
The Advent eLearning launch in July makes the conversion of existing Diversion Manager and Divert Direct platform clients seamless to users. In addition to the new platform, adventfs.com will continue to expand its portfolio of evidencebased programs to address additional misdemeanor offenses and agency treatment needs. “We’re excited to bring together all of our education programs into one, powerful platform,” says Josh
DIGITAL SIGNAGE Mvix USA’s solutions are 100% digital. The company notes that adding digital signage to a courthouse project provides a qualitative return on investment. While this may not translate directly to the budget, digital signage indirectly provides ROI. Displaying daily dockets, building directories, wayfinding maps and personalized messages keeps employees informed from a scheduling
August/September 2017x WWW . C OU R T ST OD AY . CO M
21
cials with assessments and collections, and the ESB for integration with other systems. www.justicesystems.com, Ernie Sego, president, 505.883.3987,
NATURAL-LANGUAGE SEARCH ARCHITECTURE prospective, optimizing operations. Likewise, keeping the public informed, engaged and knowing where to go can keep the court running more smoothly and thus saves operational funding. The system is also cloud-based so authorized personnel can make changes from anywhere, from any device. Selected from among 600 competitors, Mvix won the 2017 Digi Award presented by Digital Signage Magazine for best content management software (CMS); the award cited the software for ease of use, streamlining user processes and content automation. www.mvixdigitalsignage.com, 1.866.310.4923
FLEXIBLE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM FullCourt Enterprise from Justice Systems, Inc. deploys on Windows or Linux commodity servers and works with any major relational database engines. The Enterprise
Service Bus (ESB), Public Access module, Integrated Imaging module, fully-integrated e-payment system (CitePayUSA), and FullCourt EFiling offer the public secure access to court information includes scheduling capabilities, in-court processing features, fully-integrated finan-
Tybera’s Alpine is a browserbased case management system that manages parties, events and calendaring through the complete lifecycle of a case and adds natural language search features that people expect from web applications. Client benefits include data integrity, security and search-ability, along with the ability for Alpine to know what is taking place within the system at all times. Alpine provides a customizable workflow and event triggers capability that can be configured to a court’s specific needs. www.tybera.com, 801.226.2746
SECURE DIGITAL DEVICES Cell phones create unprecedented issues for courts: the risk of surreptitiously-recorded photos and videos leaking from within the courtroom, often used to intimidate witnesses and, in the worst cases, leading to murder of witnesses, jurors, undercover agents, and others. Yondr secures patrons’ phones
STREAMLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION Matterhorn, by Court Innovations Inc., has been used by various courts to streamline everything from the most common traffic and parking cases to more procedurally complex violations and civil cases. Applications include warrants, pleas, family court compliance, small claims, and ability-to-
pay cases. Matterhorn helps save staff time, collect fines and fees faster, clear backlog, close cases faster, decrease defaults, increase citizen satisfaction and access. www.GetMatterhorn.com, 734.506.0620,
VIRTUAL REPORTERS RevolutionaryText eliminates geographic barriers so that remote reporters provide service from anywhere in the world. The remote reporter captures the proceedings and sends a real-time text stream to the court. A production team may simultaneously edit, proofread and prepare transcripts. The court has a rough draft immediately, a clean rough draft within 48 hours, and a
in lockable pouches so that patrons maintain possession while devices are completely inaccessible until pouches are unlocked at designated unlocking stations. www.overyondr.com, Jesse Hunt, jesse@overyondr.com, 415.531.0487
August/September 2017 22
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
final, certified transcript within 10 days. The rough draft tool aids the court in rendering rulings swiftly. www.revotext.com, Melissa Spivey, president, U.S. Sales, 817.919.7191, ms@revotext.com
INSTANT COURT DISBURSEMENTS CourtFunds is a prepaid debit card that simplifies court disbursements such as Jury Payments, Bond Reimbursements, Child Support Payments, Poll Workers and more. CourtFunds eliminates paper check writing/cash disbursements, improves payee experience with instant payment, provides immediate reconciliation to the court, allows card loading in office, works like any credit/debit card, allows any ATM to pull funds, provides 24/7 online card access and a US-based
help line, integrates right into many major CMS systems or can be tailored for any court’s management system. Justin Norton, chief sales officer, 435.535.3454, justin.norton@courtfunds.com
INDEX AND REDACT The intelligent automated indexing and data redaction platform can recognize and categorize various incoming documents by content. Extract’s platform automates the extraction of relevant index data and guarantees 99.5 percent or greater post-verification accuracy on data redactions. Greater data entry speed
August/September 2017x WWW . C OU R T ST OD AY . CO M
23
inclusive payment platform accepts credit/debit card, and e-Check payments anytime, anywhere with realtime notifications. 1.888.891.6064, info@pointandpay.com
and predictability reduces the need to add staff during workflow peaks, ultimately allowing employees to focus on other priorities. www.extractsystems.com, Troy Burke, 608.821.6534, troy_burke@extractsystems.com
CONFIGURABLE & BROWSER-BASED
BUNDLE NOTIFICATION SOLUTIONS Response Technologies’ Centurion Elite Emergency Notification Solution houses multiple capabilities under a single solu-
tomers design evidence presentation solutions, starting with one of the standard audio-visual system models that include the basic technology required to present evidence. An extensive list of pre-tested options allows the customization to meet specific needs with components that work with the rest of that system. Usability is further enhanced by Nomad’s revolutionary online training that allows users to learn what the systems can do, as well as stepby-step instructions. www.nomadAVsystems.com, 888.622.6565
Journal Technologies supplies case management software and products to courts, prosecutors, public defenders, probation and other justice agencies serving over 500 courts and agencies in 42 states and 3 countries. The configurable, browser-based solutions don’t require clients to change processes to fit the product. Instead, Journal works with them to configure the system to the needs. This includes
EFFICIENT PAYMENTS tion whether duress, access alerting, intrusion, temperature monitoring, or mass notification. Using wireless and network-based sensors, Centurion Elite monitors all facets and when an issue arises triggers within seconds and sends notification to the predetermined Elite Audiences via two way radio, email, phone, text, PC software, signage and more. The Elite Audiences allow different notifications to be sent to different groups based on criteria such as time, dates, alarm types and more. www.Response-Technologies.com, 800.537.0102,
EVIDENCE PRESENTATION SOLUTIONS Nomad AV Systems helps cus-
Point & Pay offers reduced processing time, increased cost savings, and PCI-DSS compliance. Responsive payment products deliver flexible and convenient options for civil, criminal, probate, or traffic cases, and other needs. It guarantees compatible, seamless, secure integration with any software or case management system. Highvolume, Never Down processing technology allows accurate and prompt posting of payments into courts’ back-end systems. The all-
courtroom processing, judicial dashboards, dynamic searches, public portals, and more. www.journaltech.com, 435.713.2100, sales@journaltech.com
ADVANCED DIGITAL RECORDING BIS Digital has the ability to integrate advanced computer technology and digital recording software with the latest equipment—microphones, monitors, mixers, public address systems, and more. With over 2,000 courtrooms up and down the East Coast and beyond, plus multiple governmental agencies, law firms, law enforcement departments, BIS can deliver customized solutions that provide communications control and capture the record. www.bisdigital.com, 1.800.834.7674
August/September 2017 24
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
Interpretation Services Case Study: Ninth Judicial Circuit Court, Florida 3-467,8 528 -72604.8 .305,4&8 6+78 526+8 /,5-54.8 $50-/568 $3/06 -3)*05171817 728-4)*/17181*074,84-03118 1-73.4842, 042'78 $3/26571&8 52-./,52'8 6#38 -3/26%8 -3/06+3/171&8 6+7 +3)418 !8 50 8 / 725.78 /165-78 $72670&8 6+78 042'7 $3/26%8 33 52'842,8 7.74178$72670&842,8)/.65*.78"042-+ -3/06+3/171!8 308)30786+42848,7-4,7&86+78-3/068+418+4, 48 54)*8 13./65328 52164..7,8 328 4..8 15 8 -4)*/171 8 6+7 /,54 8,7 5-718170 52'84186+782/-.7/18(3086+7807)367 52670*0764653281%167)!8 3#7 70&84186+78 /,5-54.8-4178,3- 7618 -32652/78 638 '03#&8 6+78 -3/06 18 8 ,7*406)7268 13/'+6 638/*'04,78/152'8 54)* 18 715048*.46(30)83(8*03,/-61!8 4-+8 -4)*/18 +418 48 ,5((707268 %768 /25(57,8 -/163)5 7, 4/,538 13./65328 042'52'8 (03)8 48 15)*.78 152'.78 "3 8 1%167) /*8 638 48 (3/0 "3 8 1%167)8 (308 6+78 )3078 -3)*.7 8 4**.5-4 65321!8 +78 526+8 /,5-54.8$50-/568$3/0687)*.3%1815 863875'+6 -7065(57,8 52670*0767018 #+38 4078 "417,8 468 5618 ,3#263#2 +74, /4067018 42,8 4.138 1+4078 0713/0-718 #56+8 52670*076701 7)*.3%7,8"%8275'+"3052'8 1-73.48$3/26%!8 186+784074 1 *3*/.465328 '03#18 42,8 ,5 7015(571&8 ,7)42,8 (308 456542 $073.7&8 57624)717&842,8 /11542852670*076465328518*4065-/ .40.%8+5'+!8 56+8*4- 7,8,45.%81-+7,/.71832874-+8-4)*/1& 42%8/*'04,718+4,8638"78174).711&8#56+8.566.78638238,510/* 653283(8-3/068*03-77,52'1! 284807.465 7.%8/25 /78 852,/160%81-724053&86+78 526+851 2368 32.%8 6+78 72,8 /170&8 "/68 4.138 6+78 5267'04630!8 526+ /,5-54.8 $50-/568 8 164((8 *70(30)8 4..8 ,715'2&8 52164..46532& -3))51153252'&8)45267242-7&842,83*70465324.81/**306832 4..852 +3/178*03 7-61&8#+5-+87 /4671863815'25(5-426814 52'1 (308 .3-4.8 64 *4%701!8 /,53 51/4.8 7*406)7268 72530 2'52770&8 4)%8 $0/)&8 17.7-67,8 48 715048 13./65328 (03) 54)*8"417,832817 704.8(4-6301&852-./,52'86+783*72840-+5 67-6/078 &8 6+78 4"5.56%8 638 /178 715048 8 7 *42,701& 42,8 6+78 3**306/256%8 638 7164".51+8 48 )3078 /25(57,8 ,5'564. 4/,538 *.46(30)!8 +78 8 7 *42,7018 4.3278 #5..8 7.5)52467 6+0778 4,,565324.8 *57-718 3(8 7 /5*)7268 (308 74-+8 52670*07670 +74,1768-3227-65328*3526!8 +787((5-5726852(04160/-6/078-32 27-652'86+5184/ 5.540%87 /5*)726860421.467186384807,/-653283( *3672654.8(45./078*35261&84..8#+5.78*03 5,52'848-72604.8)325630 52'842,8-32603.8*35268#56+86+78 71504813(6#407!8
Orange County, Florida, employs audiovisual technology that streamlines the interpretation process. August/September 2017x WWW . C OU R T ST OD AY . CO M
25
JURY PROCESS MANAGEMENT Courthouse Technologies develop software/technologies specifically for the management of the jury process. Options to purchase/subscribe to the suite of tightly-integrated peripheral technologies pro-
vide costs savings opportunities while increasing customer service. They include Courthouse eResponse interactive Web response system; Courthouse IVR; Courthouse IDS, the solution for optical mark recognition used in processing returned questionnaires and summons; Courthouse SMS; Courthouse Kiosk for check in and printing; and Courthouse SummonsDirect, summons/questionnaire printing, mailing and address verification service. www.betterjurymanagement.com
JUDICIAL DASHBOARD The in-court, judicial dashboard and eBench connects to any case management system. aiSmartBench from Mentis Technology allows judges to perform high-speed, fulltext searches within a particular docket or across all dockets in a case. The newest addition, Workspaces, zeroes in on subsets of cases, executes performance monitoring reports, performs eDiscovery
case-specific data, customize at-aglance views such as: all related cases (open and/or closed), up-todate financial data for the parties on a case and shortcuts to “favorite” documents. www.aiSmartBench.com, 303.756.4564
AUDIO MIXER A new launch, the JAVS P412 audio mixer provides audio for video conferencing, phone conferencing, public address, and assistive listening systems with up to 12 discrete channels of recorded audio over a single USB cable which eliminates
COURT DOCUMENT AUTOMATION
concerns about talk-over or paper shuffling. With 12 JAVS FlexMic inputs and 12 fully-configurable analog outputs, the P412 allows courts to use existing, traditional microphones and audio systems. When the P412 is used with JAVS Notewise digital recording software the operator can mute/unmute microphones from the computer and microphones illuminate to indicate on the record. www.javs.com, 502.489.5168
PRE-TRIAL INTERVENTION MANAGEMENT searches, batch generates and eSigns orders. aiSmartBench is designed so judges/support teams can keep pace with in-court processes, gain real-time access to
can be sent to user if the defendant fails to complete by deadline. The Diversion module can be paired with any Shadowtrack modules for a Diversion management platform. The Shadowtrack biometric platform is a community supervision package and internal management solution including a suite of compliance services implemented individually or as a complete solution with no geographical boundaries. www.shadowTrack.com, 877.396.0385, support@shadowtrack.com
Shadowtrack’s Diversion module allows set-up of program conditions based on defendant case requirements, improving accountability. Shadowtrack can notify the defendant of upcoming deadlines, meetings, classes, or tests. Notifications
Intellidact LBX software transforms processing of court documents, eliminating up to 90 percent of human labor spent on review, data validation, data entry and redaction for both e-filed and scanned documents. It features user-trainable document separation, classification, data extraction, redac-
tion and robotic process automation by simply pointing/clicking on example documents and data items to extract/redact. Once trained, Intellidact processes new documents, extracting data to automatically validate e-filings and perform additional docketing data entry. Intellidact LBX transforms unstructured document data to structured court data and adapts automatically as documents change over time. www.csisoft.com
August/September 2017 26
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
REDUCE CHRONIC FTA RATES The eCourtMessenger program is designed to reduce chronic FTA rates in all lines of court business e.g. criminal, juvenile, civil, probate, and family cases where a defendant is required to appear. The program sends texts and emails to remind defendants of hearings and supplement paper notices. In addition, the Send Now feature immediately notifies all parties associated with a case if their hearing is cancelled, a courthouse has been closed or the hearing has been relocated. The feature also allows court staff to add non-case parties to the reminder. www.integrationarchitects.com, 612.791.4000
MANAGE JURY GROUP REPORTING In September the launch of CourtConcierge by Sonant introduces an inexpensive cloud service to manage group movements for the flow and appearance of people for juries and trials. Managing groups
means communicating what’s expected: callback later, report, a change of time or location, or that they are no longer needed, via web or telephone check-in or by e-mail, text, or voice. Messaging can operate from a schedule or be updated on an as-needed basis from desktop or smartphone. It allows use of existing infrastructure without a
costly integration project. “Your court’s website can easily connect to CourtConcierge for web check-in and notification opt-in,” says Dean Goddette, Ph.D., product manager. “Telephone callers can also be transferred to your agents during working hours if desired.” Dean Goddette, Ph.D., product manager, direct 858.864.1455
TOUCHSCREEN COURT DISPLAY SYSTEM The Infax SmartScreen solution allows court patrons to view court information with the touch of a finger. Instead of asking staff for assistance, patrons now have instant access to court directories, real-time case and juror information, maps with step-by-step directions, frequently asked questions, and other facility resources. Patrons can also check in for court appointments or
jury duty with SmartScreen. www.infax.com, 1.770.209.9925
AUTOMATED REVENUE RECOVERY Ontario Systems partners with courts, state and local governments across the country to dramatically increase their revenue recovery success. Their RevQ software and consulting services enable you to organize and automate most collection
activities while tracking and managing accounts with follow-up at predetermined intensity. They will show court staff how to improve their compliance and collection results, and manage and collect outstanding fines, fees and revenue. www.ontariosystems.com, 1.765.751.7471
PAYMENT INTEGRATION Regardless of case management or financial software, nCourt provides flexible payment solutions that integrate seamlessly making reporting, reconciliation, and collecting payments easy and secure. nCourt interfaces to configure a variety of setups, including web and cloudbased, hosted, on-premises, mainframe, and client-server integrations. No matter the complexity of the system, nCourt can provide details, such as “payment restrictions” for “must appear in court” citations, to minimize the need for staff support. www.ncourt.com, 1.888.912.1540
August/September 2017x WWW . C OU R T ST OD AY . CO M
27
BY MI C H A E L G R O H S , CO N T R I B U T I N G E D IT O R
The Evolution Solution Evolved gradually or innovated in a sudden burst, case management systems help most courts do their jobs significantly better.
THE THEORY of punctuated equilibrium states that evolution is not a smooth and continuous transition but rather short and sudden bursts of speciation followed by long periods of stasis. A species of sea bird might remain unchanged for thousands of years, but then sea levels rise, and the species must adapt to reach higher ground. Phyletic gradualism is the theory that evolution is gradual and continuous. Over time, those birds born with stronger wings slowly take over the species. Technology seems to do both. TV repair shops, once a hallmark in
strip malls, can rarely be found anymore. In 2016, the last VCR ever came off the line, likely to become a part of the technological fossil record. It had already been 10 years since the last VHS movie (A History of Violence) had been released. Kendall Smith, business development manager at Thomson Reuters, notes that historically, Court Management Systems (CMSs) had a shelf life. Before the technology explosion, courts traditionally came up with a wish list and had a vendor build them something that they would use for 10 or 20 years and then move on. The technology was created from punctuated bursts of change. Back then, the strings of
technology didn’t weave a web around the world. Now they do, and since everything is Internet based, courts’ attention, she says, is focused on innovation. William Kilmer, CEO of cFive Solutions, a Laguna Hills, California-based provider of software that connects “community supervision agencies with the information they need to reduce recidivism, improve lives, and keep communities safe” notes, “Technology changes so quickly, it alters people’s perspective.” In a survey of Chiefs and Deputy Chiefs cFive recently conducted, 85% responded that technology “significantly” or “greatly” increased the ability to do their job.
August/September 2017 28
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
Longevity is key Among the concerns potential customers have about adopting a CMS is longevity. Kilmer says that cFive just finished a survey and found that most agencies kept their systems for around 20 years. Sue Humphreys is the director of Industry Relations at equivant, which serves state and local courts, public attorneys, community supervision, and correctional agencies. Their products are used to manage cases and participants through the processes that drive cases to completion. “We handle all aspects of that from automated intake to setting calendars and events to tracking the flow of documents, activities, financial transactions, and so on.” They also offer “pluggable” components for functions such as public inquiry, payment processing, efiling, text notifications and reminders, compliance tracking, judicial tools, and integration with other system providers such as online dispute resolution, virtual hearings, courtroom recording, and others. Humphreys notes longevity depends on the court, taking into consideration their volume of work, their level of IT expertise, and other operational needs. She furthers that traditionally a system lasted about 10 to 12 years, but there are plenty of courts using systems they had implemented in the ‘90s, and in many cases, those systems are still fully functional. “It has more to do with the technology backbone of the specific CMS.” Another factor is vendor support, says Jim Mortensen, Chief Technical Officer, Justice Systems, Inc..
“Effective longevity of a CMS can range from 10 to 20 years depending on whether the CMS vendor remains available to actively support and enhance the product. If a vendor is not actively supporting or enhancing the system, the longevity is dramatically shortened.” He recommends doing due diligence in assessing the future lifespan of a new vendor the court may be considering. He details that Justice Systems’ CMS, FullCourt Enterprise, is integrated with a Document Management System, E-Filing Module, Public Access Module, Online/POS payment system (i.e., CitePayUSA). Justice Systems provides these solutions via both on-premise and cloud offerings.
cFive Solutions Catalyst’s main dashboard connects community supervision agencies with the information they need to reduce recidivism.
Mortensen furthers options they offer include a Jury Management System and a Prosecutor and Public Defender System. Additionally, Justice Systems offers related services for deploying these solutions, including project management, installation/configuration, data conversion, integration, data exchange interfaces, training, custom programming, help desk, etc. When the time comes, there are questions that push a court to replace their CMS. Does it let them adapt for new laws and rules? Can they add in components to digitize paper or move cases forward? Does it perform well? Does it run on hardware that’s still supported? Is the user interface easily navigated? Does it streamline their processes? Says Humphreys, “The big leaps in technology over the last decade or so have created opportunities for system developers to completely rethink their CMS products, which is what we’ve done at equivant in deciding to build our JWorks CMS from the ground up. At the same time, it’s important that courts using any of our CMSs can grow their operations and stay on top of changing requirements so we make sure that new components we build will work with those systems, too.” Tyler Technologies offers the Odyssey, a comprehensive solution that can handle the complete criminal justice system, which they term “dispatch to disposition.” These new systems offer all components for the judge, the clerk, the public, etc. In fact, the system’s longevity could now be eternal. Michael Kleiman, director of Marketing at Tyler Tech says, “We have never had a client leave Odyssey.” Among the reasons for the longevity is that they are continuously improving the product. It evolves.
August/September 2017 30
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
equivant’s JWorks CMS interacts with a variety of independent components such as this Judicial Tools application.
Now that systems are not necessarily purchased with a shelf-life in mind, potential customers are considering the system’s future beyond the expiration date. The term “custom,” says Smith, has been replaced with “configure.” Most courts who contact Thomson Reuters are because a court’s legacy system is at end of life, and all courts, she says, have the same goal. “They want to serve the public.” Now courts are asking how they can enhance their processes. The trend now is no longer writing laundry lists of functions they desire. The focus is on addressing innovation, and vendors offer an ecosystem in the form of a healthy CMS. There is much to consider when planning the implementation of a CMS. For one, says Kleiman, hundreds of people will be affected, and their input should be solicited. There is, he says, “much more than the product to consider.” What he recommends is speaking with references and discussing successes, track records, and what kind of support is provided. “We provide August/September 2017x WWW . C OU R T ST OD AY . CO M
31
When planning the implementation of a CMS hundreds of people will be affected, and their input should be solicited. There is “much more than the product to consider.” —Michael Kleiman proactive support. We are constantly innovating in small easy steps instead of big, painful steps.” There is the matter of turnover to consider. New employees will need training and classes. Tyler has offered over 1,000 on-line classes. They have a social media site called Tyler Community, a sort of Facebook for courts.
a process. Understanding the time commitment the project will take is important. “The courts’ internal team will be focused on implementation and won’t be able to perform their usual tasks at the same level, so having a plan to fill those gaps is essential, and being open-minded to new ways of doing things without an expectation that the new system will
A case view of Thomson Reuters C-Track CMS, which is fully “configurable,” not “custom.”
Humphreys says there are steps to consider when starting the selection process. The first is having a realistic budget with some flexibility that includes staff from all areas of the court as well as other justice partners, especially to document existing processes and identify needed improvements. The setup is
work exactly like the old one.” These all require proactive planning and open communication across the enterprise, and they are things that a court should be working on well ahead of an actual purchase decision. Kilmer notes, “The trend of data use is all around us.” Courts are looking for data that help their out-
comes. When clients were asked about future considerations about the courts’ primary needs regarding a CMS, the top three responses were: ease of use, strong reporting, and data analytics. Before a court makes a decision, they should undergo an internal analysis and address questions such as how do they change the way they work to meet the clients’ needs, and then how can technology help? If the goal is to reduce recidivism, how can technology support this? Efforts should be made to make it user friendly. For example, the cFive Catalyst Application allows agencies to get information on a client remotely, thus giving the officer more time to focus on the needs of the client rather than data entry. On the analytic side, the ability to analyze how effective they are at the agency level is critical when discussing implementation. The first step, Kilmer says, is to evaluate through the vendor regarding what needs to change. This is a four-step process in which they conduct an internal analysis. They then modify the system to meet the court’s needs. The data are then migrated to the new system, and then users are trained. One aspect Kilmer stresses is where to focus attention. What he has noticed is that often clients focus 80% on the product and 20% on implementation, and then in retrospect discover
August/September 2017 32
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
that they should have focused 20% on the product and 80% on implementation.
Collaborative Mindset
While systems traditionally lasted about 10-12 years, the longevity of some of today’s systems could now be eternal.
For a new court, clearly a system will likely need to be new. For courts that already have a CMS, the option might require replacing it, so what are the steps necessary to replace an existing system? “Ideally,” says Humphreys, “the court has decided to move forward with a supplier whose mindset is collaborative because one key to a successful outcome is going to be how well you work together, communicate, and remain upfront and honest with one another over the weeks, months, or sometimes years that you’ll be
implementing the new system.” It is crucial to get on the same page at the same time. A realistic project plan, change management program, training objectives, status reporting, and issue resolution are mutual responsibilities that affect the ultimate success of the project. Even though the court should have their processes documented ahead of the implementation, it’s important that the court/vendor team observe operations firsthand to uncover process nuances or exceptions, paying special attention to instances where a decision must be made or information from some other source is needed, and to identify differences in how court staff will use the system. The appropriate people can then be trained on configuring roles with system workflows, settings, Continues on page 41
August/September 2017x WWW . C OU R T ST OD AY . CO M
33
BY DO N N A R O G E R S, E D IT O R
THE REAL IMPACT OF CYBER ATTACKS ON COURT NETWORKS
August/September 2017 34
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
CYBER
attacks can be thought of as new form of terrorism—and they can rain down as much destruction. They can instigate data breeches and immense financial loss. They can bring operations to a grinding halt or expose any number of personal information—causing personal peril to those in sensitive positions. Hackers—both foreign and domestic—constantly attempt to break into banks, law firms, various forms of commerce, and government agencies—and courts are not exempt. Cyber attacks on our court system are a reality in today’s interconnected world. In 2014, for example, unidentified hackers took aim at the federal court system, blocking access to its public website while preventing lawyers and litigants from filing legal documents online. And a June 2016 cyber attack on the Minnesota Judicial Branch's website underscored a growing threat that state officials warn will become more difficult to combat without additional resources. Cybercrime comes in different varieties—from phishing to ransomware—and Courts Today examines what the latest dangers are and what courts need to be aware of to mitigate a breech.
Minnesota Breach "Every day, hackers try to find and exploit gaps in Minnesota's networks, hoping to steal sensitive information or bring websites down," said Minnesota IT (MNIT) Services, the agency that administers Minnesota's network, in an article by the Star Tribune on June 25, 2016. The state web site had just been attacked and shut down. Earlier in the year, Gov. Mark Dayton sought nearly $46 million to upgrade state government computer systems, to better ward off any potential cybersecurity attacks or
data breaches. Some of the funding would have also gone toward improving the state's response to a potential data breach. But the funding was never allocated. The Tribune article pointed out the fact that governments didn’t believe they were targets. “Headline-grabbing data breaches have typically focused on instances where hackers steal millions of consumers' financial information from retailers like Target and Home Depot,” it noted. “But experts say that state government systems also are vulnerable targets that hold sensitive information, including bank account information, Social Security numbers and addresses.” The 2016 attack on the Minnesota judicial web site, the second such attack on this court, is known as a distributed denial-ofservice (DDOS) attack, whereby a website is overwhelmed with network traffic, effectively blocking out legitimate users. On the positive side, Minnesota court officials said there was no evidence that secure data had been improperly accessed during the attack. Nonetheless, the site was closed down and unavailable to the public for 10 days. According to nearly all accounts, the problem is a worsening one. In the Tribune article, a spokesman for the Minnesota state court administration office, Beau Berentson, noted: "Cybercrime is becoming increasingly organized, and cybercriminals are continually modifying their attacks." MNIT acknowledges on its web page that “state government is a target, and in fact Minnesota’s systems are probed for vulnerabilities and attacks are attempted more than 3 million times each day.”
New Levels of Cybercrime A potent picture of the latest threats unleashed by hackers is por-
trayed by Symantec Corporation, a leading global cyber security company, in its annual survey, published in April 2017. Internet Security Threat Report states: “Cyber attackers revealed new levels of ambition in 2016, a year marked by extraordinary attacks, including multi-million dollar virtual bank heists, overt attempts to disrupt the U.S. electoral process by state-sponsored groups, and some of the biggest distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks on record powered by a botnet of Internet of Things (IoT) devices. The Internet of Things is the inter-networking of connected devices or smart devices, buildings, vehicles and other items embedded with electronics, software, sensors, actuators, and network connectivity which enable these objects to collect and exchange data, as defined by Wikipedia. Experts estimate that the IoT will consist of about 30 billion objects by 2020. A consortium of court officials in February 2016 addressed the issue with suggested best practices. The Joint Technology Committee (JTC) established by three premier court organizations—the Conference of State Court Administrators, the National Association for Court Management and the National Center for State Courts—published a document that provides a basic explanation of the preparations necessary for court managers to respond quickly and effectively in the event of a cybersecurity incident. According to the JTC report, titled Responding to a Cyberattack, these are the common the ways a computer intrusion can occur: • Unauthorized access — any access to a system, network, or information without authorization has compromised that system. It may come from within the organization, current and former employees, or hostile individuals and organizations halfway around the world.
August/September 2017 36
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
Cyber attackers revealed new levels of ambition in 2016, a year marked by extraordinary attacks, including overt attempts to disrupt the U.S. electoral process by statesponsored groups and some of the biggest DDoS attacks on record powered by a botnet of Internet of Things devices.
• Malware and Viruses — Malware, short for MALicious softWARE, is software used to disrupt computer operations, gather sensitive information, or gain unauthorized access. Viruses, worms, and Trojan horses are all forms of malware. • Attacks that Disrupt Service — Denial of service (DoS) attacks make system resources unavailable for their intended users by either crashing the system, or by overwhelming it with irrelevant requests. A Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack comes from more than one computer IP address. • Ransomware — A cyber form
of hostage-taking, ransomware is malicious software designed to block data or computer system functionality until a sum of money is paid. • Zero-Day Exploits — Attackers use unintentional flaws or vulnerabilities in a vendor’s hardware or software, exploiting the flaw before the vendor realizes it exists. Often these attacks are not discovered for months or even years. (These vulnerabilities are called “Zero-Day Exploits” because the application author has zero days after the flaw is uncovered in which to create and issue a patch, or warn users of the issue and provide a workaround.)
August/September 2017 38
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
Changing tactics Hackers are finding ways that appear effortless to infiltrate computer systems, Symantec notes. “While cyber attacks managed to cause unprecedented levels of disruption, attackers frequently used very simple tools and tactics to make a big impact,” according to the Internet Security Threat Report. “Zero-day vulnerabilities and sophisticated malware now tend to be used sparingly and attackers are increasingly attempting to hide in plain sight. They rely on straightforward approaches, such as spearphishing emails and ‘living off the land,’ [that is,] by using whatever tools are on hand, such as legitimate network administration software and operating system features.” The report details that when it is executed well, living off the land approaches can result in almost symptomless infections. Attackers, ranging from cyber criminals to state-sponsored groups, have clearly begun to change their tactics, making more use of operating system features, off-the-shelf tools, and cloud services to compromise their victims. Mirai, the botnet behind a wave of major DDoS attacks, was primarily composed of infected routers and security cameras. These low-powered and poorly secured devices, are those considered to be connected by the Internet of Things. Symantec research noted “a twofold increase in attempted attacks against IoT devices over the course of 2016 and, at times of peak activity, the average IoT device was attacked once every two minutes.” Malicious emails disguised as routine correspondence, such as invoices or delivery notifications, were meanwhile the favored means of spreading ransomware, furthers the Internet Security Threat Report. “Ransomware continues to plague
businesses and consumers, with indiscriminate campaigns pushing out massive volumes of malicious emails. Attackers are demanding more and more from victims with the average ransom demand in 2016 rising to $1,077, up from $294 a year earlier.” Symantec emphasizes that cloud attacks have become a reality and are likely to increase in 2017. A growing reliance on cloud services should be an area of concern for enterprises as they present a security blind spot. Many IT staff aren’t aware of the extensive cloud-based apps used within their organizations, the report notes. And finally, says Symantec, although it is a vital communications tool across enterprises, email is one of the prime sources of disruption to the organization. It can come in the form of sometimes harmless spam to more dangerous threats such as the propagation of ransomware or targeted spear-phishing campaigns. The survey found that email malware increased about 70% in 2016, from 1 in 220 emails sent containing malware in 2015, to 1 in 131 emails in 2016.
Past Attacks on Public Administrations In addition to the Minnesota attack, other state and federal governments have experienced major cyber attacks—often with devastating financial impact. Sometime between the fall of 2012 and February 2013, the Washington State Court system was hacked, and up to 160,000 Social Security numbers and 1 million driver's license numbers of residents may have been accessed during the data breach of its public website. Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) reported that no court records were altered and no person-
al financial information, such as bank account numbers or credit card numbers, is maintained on the site. The breach, considered a “zeroday exploit,” happened due to vulnerability in an Adobe Systems Inc. software program, ColdFusion, that has since been patched, court officials said. The hack happened sometime after September but wasn't caught until February, they said. In response, state officials have added a number of additional security measures, including isolating anything that could be sensitive into more protected areas, implementing code to prevent hackers from getting to other parts of a server, and new encryption rules. Washington state's CIO, Michael Cockrill, said the breach hadn't affected the state's executive branch, which is on a separate network. He added the governor’s office and the state’s IT services would be charged with improving the information security of the judicial systems. "The AOC data breach is a sobering reminder for every branch and every level of government, that protection of personal and confidential data entrusted to government is a paramount responsibility." Two additional accounts of breaches illustrate how costly such errors can be. In Utah, hackers broke into a Medicaid server in 2012 that a technician had placed online without changing the factory password and then downloaded the personal information of 780,000 Utahns. While some of those were on Medicaid, others were privately insured, uninsured and retirees on Medicare whose providers had sent their data to Medicaid in the hopes of billing the low-income program. Most at risk were the 280,000 individuals whose Social Security numbers were exposed. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, “the state has spent about $9 million August/September 2017x
WWW . C OU R T ST OD AY . CO M
39
on security audits, upgrades and credit monitoring for victims—and that's just the beginning.” And in Texas, a data breach in 2011 exposed the Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, and the names and addresses of more than 3.5 million Texans. The exposed personal information was included in files sent to the state comptroller's office by the Teacher Retirement System of Texas, the Texas Workforce Commission and the Employees Retirement System of Texas for use in a property verification system. The data was mistakenly sent unencrypted to the comptroller's office—and was inadvertently exposed on a publicly accessible website for nearly a year. The breach has already cost the comptroller's office more than $1.8 million and could end up costing a whole lot more, according to reports. As of only days after the breach, the state had spent $1.2 million on sending out notification letters, close to $300,000 for Gartner's and Deloitte's services, and another $393,000 to set up a call center for handling queries from those affected by the breach, according to the Austin American-Statesman's website. In addition, the site noted that the identity monitoring service being offered by the controller’s office could cost up to $21 million if everyone affected enrolls in it. The controller’s office planned to implement a series of additional measures—including the installation of new data leak prevention software and an enhanced file-transfer system featuring robust encryption capabilities—to mitigate the chances of a similar incident occurring. On January 24, 2014, a DoS attack blocked access to the federal judiciary, leaving lawyers hardpressed to meet deadlines and officials scrambling to restore service, according to the Washington Times.
The attacks affected bankruptcy, district and appeals courts all across the U.S. for several hours, though the Supreme Court’s site remained up. The outages essentially shut down much of the federal judiciary from a little after 3pm to 7pm on a Friday afternoon. It blocked lawyers, judges and clerks from filing and reviewing documents electronically and prevented public access to judiciary records through the PACER system. Public users of the courts’ electronic system for reviewing records were greeted with an error message, “Server not found.” While little harm was done in that case, court officials everywhere are
beginning to acknowledge the event of a cyberattack on the courts is not “if” but “when.” Personal data of court patrons is at risk— compromising their identities and inviting fraud. Intrusion into the court systems could sabotage the workings of the judiciary—even introduce subversive information that could throw the outcome of a case. JTC’s Responding to a Cyberattack is worth a read regarding steps courts can take to keep their records safe. As concerns deepen, safeguarding justice networks will become more vital as court leaders work together to sustain our great system of justice. Gone phishing cannot be an option. CT
An Internet Attack Against a State Agency Is Serious Business • Hackers routinely attack computer systems that are connected to the Internet. On average, state systems that are accessible from the Internet are probed over 3 million times daily from over 150 countries. • Systems with exploitable vulnerabilities are often compromised within minutes. Once compromised, hackers almost always move laterally to exploit other targets within the first 24 hours. Approximately 50% of software vulnerabilities discovered by hackers now become full exploits within 30 days. • Earlier this year, hackers compromised one state system that had outdated and vulnerable software. In two other cases, errors made by an employee exposed sensitive data to hackers. Investigating and recovering from even small security breaches is extremely costly and results in lost worker productivity and damage to reputation. — Minnesota IT Services, https://mn.gov/mnit/cybersecurity/
August/September 2017 40
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M
Continued from page 33 screen layouts, and rules—and then training is extended to end-users and justice partners.” Kleiman notes that “replacing a CMS is a big deal.” The process, he says, can take a year, and there are multiple variables. Some clients are medium-sized counties, and others
are entire states, and depending on the scale of the installation, courts will need a very careful project plan, on which Tyler will work with them by doing a “fit analysis,” which compares what the client’s needs are, such as what is the objective and what are the priorities, and what Tyler can offer. Tyler then identifies gaps and makes recommendations
Steps and Considerations in Selecting a New System Steps • Identify and include stakeholders (i.e., who will be affected). • Identify and document the Courts’ goals/objectives. • Analyze and document the functionality provided by the current system. • Analyze and document the processes used with the current system. • Assess and document data quality issues. • Pinpoint and document major shortfalls of the current system. • Identify and document current and future needs of the Court. • Take the opportunity to improve existing processes to maximize benefit of the new system and current industry best practices. • Implement a procurement process (e.g., RFI, RFP, contract negotiations, etc.) • Create a budget
Considerations • Evaluate the longevity of new vendor • Assess the experience of new vendor (depth and breadth) in deploying a new CMS • Gauge the relationship with vendor’s staff (i.e., will you be able to work with them when project gets difficult?) • Appraise the architecture of new system (i.e., is it modern, is it scalable, adaptable, standards-based, etc.?) • Appraise the architecture of data integration model (i.e., is it standards-based, flexible, etc.?) • Choose: On-premise or cloud solution? Perpetual license vs. subscription? • Estimate the data exchange capability and flexibility of new system. —Jim Mortensen, Justice Systems
for adjustments. A key, says Kleiman, is the client should not attempt to bite off the whole thing and aim for a perfect system. They should establish a baseline and wait to hear from all departments that are affected and listen to their ideas. Other considerations are data conversion, which is moving data from the old system to the new one. Adds Humphreys, “Identifying the data to be migrated and successfully converting that data to the new system is a major undertaking, and may require multiple iterations to get it right.” Kleiman makes a suggestion: once a court has a plan, stick with it. “Continuously improve. Never let it atrophy.” Choosing a system may sound confusing, but using them is not, say those in the industry. Nevertheless, acknowledges Humphreys, “Sometimes even minor change is tough on people. Be cognizant of that and prepare your people for those changes. Get their buy-in, or at least be respectful of their feedback and concerns.” Far too often she has heard court personnel say, “Nobody told me what was happening” or “They didn’t ask how that would affect us.” The court should expect a degree of disruption too and, unfortunately, delays are going to occur. “No matter what, communication is the number one way to keep the transition on track and everybody on board.” Humphreys adds that the Joint Technology Committee that was established through COSCA, NACM, and NCSC has published their Phase 1 documents for nextgeneration court technology standards, which introduces a CMS application component model. The idea behind this approach is to develop consensus among court managers and technology suppliers about what constitutes a state-ofthe-art court system as well as assist both sides in identifying gaps and how to fill them. CT August/September 2017x
WWW . C OU R T ST OD AY . CO M
41
Continued from page 19 judicial challenges. This system offers an end-to-end approach and step-by-step guidance allows short term tactical steps that are tied to longer term strategic planning. The Connected Justice team will be at CTC showcasing a new application designed to generate revenue streams to help offset the funding requirements to implement technology solutions that solve the various challenges found within courts. PROBLEM: I am not sure what the greatest challenge is—but almost every week there is a court that is shut down because they have received suspicious powder and/or a
AD INDEX Page No.
Alkermes/Vivitrol .....................6 Art Signworks .........................12 AUTOCLEAR/Control Screening ...........................21 Computing System Innovations ........................13 Draeger Medical Systems ......23 Equivant..................................35 Extract Systems ......................33 Garrett Metal Detectors.........25 Infax..........................................2 JAVS ........................................15 Justice Systems .......................31 Mvix........................................11 National Center State Courts .......................43
Eric Giroux, CEO, RaySecur Inc.
mail threat of some sort. This is the weakest link in the court’s overall physical security plan. For years courts have relied on X-ray technology to detect powder in the mail, even though it is not recommended by the Department of Homeland Security. SOLUTION: The good news is that a new device, MailSecur, is now able to detect 50 milligrams, or two percent of a teaspoon, of powder and a single drop of liquid in the mail. The technology is millimeter-wave based and is completely safe for the operator. It is a plug-and-use device the size of a small printer. The system can be operated with a minimum of four hours of training and can be deployed overnight. PROBLEM: Courts today are faced with a number of challenges ranging from how best to serve a growing, diverse population to managing the technology that will provide the services. Creating an integrated system that incorporates all the various audio, video, and digital signage needs, while ensuring it is future proof (aka, easily upgradeable) can
Ontario Systems .....................17 ShadowTrack Technologies ......................19 StunCuff Enterprises, Inc. ......21 Thomson Reuters .....................5 Tybera.....................................29 Tyler Technologies .................44 This advertisers index is provided as a service to our readers only. The publisher does not assume liability for errors or omissions.
Michael Frank, Sales Development Director, Eastern NA, Biamp Systems
create an overwhelming and costly situation. SOLUTION: It is crucial to find a partner that understand the needs courts face now, as well as evolving technology and how these affect courts in the future. As population diversity continues, courts need to provide services in multiple languages. An example is the increasing need for access to interpreters. Courts that have access to a highquality audio/video system can easily support the use of remote interpreters throughout their state. Joe Golemo, Principal Marketing Officer, Integration Architects
PROBLEM: One area of the criminal justice system where compliance is particularly lacking is the defendant’s appearance in court for minor offenses such as traffic offenses, misdemeanors, and low-level felonies. Non-custodial criminal defendants often fail to appear for court in various instances: arraignment, pretrial (post-arraignment) hearings, trial, and post-trial. Initial (i.e., arraignment) failure-to-appear (FTA) rates for non-waiverable offenses are particularly problematic, as they involve the greatest volume of defendants. SOLUTION: By sending automated electronic hearing reminders via text and/or email messaging helps reduce failure to appear rates for defendants. Specifically, reducing excessively high FTA rates helps defendants avoid negative consequences of failing to appear, such as job loss, family stress, incarceration, and the resulting emotional trauma; the court improves utilization of important system resources by conducting hearings as scheduled; law enforcement avoids executing warrants on minor criminal or traffic offenses; and the public safety system need not take additional action and expend resources to compel appearance. CT
August/September 2017 42
W W W .C OU R TS TODAY .CO M