RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Information to be tagged for redaction

["Poindexter, Gary W" <gpoindexter@kpmg.com>]

True and I agree without qualification.

With that said, there are applications (i.e. a justice integration engine,
message broker or court public access application) that will be given the
responsibility for eliminating/redacting content dependent upon the inquiry
source (for queries) or destination (a destination dependent
transformation). For this reason a tag or attribute that indicates
information that is to be redacted, with as much detail as to the conditions
under which it should be redacted, is important. This makes the business
rules more generic and more easily understood by receiving systems.

I would like to see a list of content classes of potentially redacted
information (I believe this could be extracted from this thread) and an
attribute/tag for these classes that indicates the content class such as
"protected juvenile", "protected witness", "witness family", "SSN", etc. The
fewer the classes, the fewer the variations in the business rules; the
greater the number of classes the finer the granularity of the business
rules.

gary

-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Jensen [mailto:AJENSEN@occourts.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 1:54 PM
To: pkasselman@baltimore.com; john@greacen.net; ben.wilson@xcera.net
Cc: moira.rowley@acs-inc.com; wjohnsto@adobe.com;
arnoldg@aoc.courts.state.ga.us; abdulaziz@APLTWO.CT.STATE.AZ.US;
ssansom@austin.rr.com; bruce.gitlin@contentguard.com;
charles.gilliam@contentguard.com; steven.taylor@courts.sa.gov.au;
rory@COURTS.STATE.WV.US; mary.mcqueen@courts.wa.gov;
tom.clarke@courts.wa.gov; jeromeb@email.utcourts.gov; rtd@faxfile.com;
gary.pinder@fct-cf.gc.ca; bousquin@greacen.net; jmcclure@hypergrove.com;
manoj@infomosaic.com; jruegg@isab.co.la.ca.us; Ron.Beach@isd-corp.com;
tjsmith@itdecision.com; jik@jkeane.com; Mark.Yuan@jud.ca.gov;
steve.spohn@jud.ca.gov; rlchambers@justice.com; drdaniels@kpmg.com;
gpoindexter@kpmg.com; aerts@lasd.org; jmessing@LAW-ON-LINE.COM;
Donald.Bergeron@LEXIS-NEXIS.COM;
legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org; dagoodwi@mail.maricopa.gov;
Catherine.Krause@METROKC.GOV; Roger.Winters@METROKC.GOV;
kthotti@notes.state.ne.us; rbowmast@notes.state.ne.us;
roger@number7.demon.co.uk; tbrown@o2exchange.com;
Robin_Gibson@osca.state.mo.us; swood@perfectprobate.com;
eddie@ringtailsolutions.com; Larry.Webster@SEARCH.ORG;
dpowell@tybera.com; Diane.Lewis@usdoj.gov; Meng-chun.Lin@usdoj.gov;
D-Leff@wiu.edu
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Information to be tagged for
redaction


Nothing that anyone does not want viewed or hacked should not be sent in
the first place.

Allen Jensen
Internet / E-Filing Development
Orange County Superior Court
(949) 476-4984


>>> Pieter Kasselman <pkasselman@baltimore.com> 07/18/02 02:24AM >>>
With redacting it is my impression that there is a reliance on the
technology displaying the document to not show that information. This
places
a trust requirement on the display technology and leaves the sensitive
infomation effectively unprotected. 

It may be more secure to use encryption to protect sensitive
information.
This way there is more control on who can access the sensitive
information,
even in the presence of malignant display technology.

Just a thought.

Pieter

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Benjamin T. Wilson [SMTP:ben.wilson@xcera.net] 
> Sent:	18 July 2002 00:26
> To:	'John M. Greacen'
> Cc:	'Lewis, Diane'; 'Lin, Meng-chun'; 'Bergeron, Donald L. (LNG)';
> 'jik'; 'Larry Webster'; 'Mary Campbell McQueen'; 'Mohyeddin
Abdulaziz';
> 'Robin Gibson'; 'Rolly Chambers'; 'Terrie Bousquin'; 'Eddie OBrien';
> 'Roger Winters'; 'Gregory W. Arnold'; 'Dr. Laurence Leff'; 'John
Messing';
> 'Allen Jensen'; 'Rory Perry'; 'Ron.Beach'; 'moira.rowley'; 'Dwight R
> Daniels'; 'Ron Bowmaster'; 'Charles Gilliam'; 'aerts'; 'jeromeb';
> 'tbrown'; 'tom.clarke'; 'bruce.gitlin'; 'dagoodwi'; 'roger';
'wjohnsto';
> 'pkasselman'; 'Catherine.Krause'; 'manoj'; 'gary.pinder';
'gpoindexter';
> 'dpowell'; 'ssansom'; 'tjsmith'; 'steve.spohn'; 'steven.taylor';
> 'kthotti'; 'swood'; 'Mark S. Yuan'; 'Robert DeFilippis'; 'John
Ruegg';
> 'John McClure'; legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org 
> Subject:	RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Information to be tagged for
> redaction
> 
> Thanks, John.  Bankruptcy cases aside, I am just concerned that
> attorneys and others may get a false sense of security regarding the
> inclusion of redact-tagged information in a court filing when it is
not
> absolutely necessary--i.e.., there may be work-arounds, for example,
a
> part of the initial court filing to start a case could pass the
> sensitive data via XML into the court's database.  Then, the public
> court documents don't need to have the full info (e.g., the 4-digit
> SSN).  That way, the threat of harm from a breach of security of the
> tagged data is eliminated--if it isn't in the document in the first
> place.  Also, it places the burden/risk back on the
attorney/litigant
> and is also consistent with the way paper documents are handled (in
my
> mind, I can't get over the hurdle of how personal identifiers in
TIFF
> files are redacted after the court clerk scans the document into the
> electronic file retrieval system).   As a former child
support/paternity
> attorney, I filed 1000s of pleadings with children's names, dates of
> birth, social security numbers, etc.  At the time I thought it was
> necessary to include such information, but now I think that there
were
> ways (e.g., child's initials and year of birth) to avoid it (e.g.,
since
> the information was also maintained in the child welfare system).  I
> don't fully understand the criminal case side, however, mentioned in
> Diane Lewis' e-mail, although I clearly recognize the importance of
> protecting the personal identifiers for victims, informants,
undercover
> officers, etc.   However, I don't think these need to be disclosed
in
> pleadings either.  They can be designated as sealed records, filed
and
> stored in encrypted format, aliases can be used, etc.  That's not to
say
> that the task of defining protocols, formats, etc., for tagging
> information for redaction shouldn't be done--that is a very
important
> task that Court Filing XML must address--but in actual
implementation,
> the instances of redact-tagged "opportunities" should be kept at a
> minimum for the reasons stated above.  Thanks again.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John M. Greacen [mailto:john@greacen.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 3:58 PM
> To: ben.wilson@xcera.net 
> Cc: 'Lewis, Diane'; 'Lin, Meng-chun'; 'Bergeron, Donald L. (LNG)';
> 'jik'; 'Larry Webster'; 'Mary Campbell McQueen'; 'Mohyeddin
Abdulaziz';
> 'Robin Gibson'; 'Rolly Chambers'; 'Terrie Bousquin'; 'Eddie OBrien';
> 'Roger Winters'; 'Gregory W. Arnold'; 'Dr. Laurence Leff'; 'John
> Messing'; 'Allen Jensen'; 'Rory Perry'; 'Ron.Beach'; 'moira.rowley';
> 'Dwight R Daniels'; 'Ron Bowmaster'; 'Charles Gilliam'; 'aerts';
> 'jeromeb'; 'tbrown'; 'tom.clarke'; 'bruce.gitlin'; 'dagoodwi';
'roger';
> 'wjohnsto'; 'pkasselman'; 'Catherine.Krause'; 'manoj';
'gary.pinder';
> 'gpoindexter'; 'dpowell'; 'ssansom'; 'tjsmith'; 'steve.spohn';
> 'steven.taylor'; 'kthotti'; 'swood'; 'Mark S. Yuan'; 'Robert
> DeFilippis'; 'John Ruegg'; 'John McClure';
> legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org 
> Subject: Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] Information to be tagged for
> redaction
> 
> 
> Ben -- Good comment.  I think the federal courts see their approach
as a
> short term solution.  It really doesn't do anyone any good to have
only
> the last four numbers of an account number if you are trying to
figure
> out what sort of claim to file in a bankruptcy.  Using tagged
documents,
> you get to have your cake and eat it, too.  For those who need the
full
> information (and are entitled to see it) it will be there.  For
others,
> nothing will be there - no numbers, no initials.  I know that is how
the
> state court folk are approaching it.
> 
> "Benjamin T. Wilson" wrote:
> 
> > FYI and for what it's worth -
> > I did  a little googling, and New Mexico's federal court 
> > (http://www.nmcourt.fed.us/bkdocs/lackpriv.pdf), consistent with
the 
> > Report of the Judicial Conference of the United States
> > (http://www.privacy.uscourts.gov/Policy.htm) (that certain
"personal 
> > data identifiers" - Social Security numbers, dates of birth,
financial
> 
> > account numbers and names of minor children- be modified or
partially 
> > redacted by litigants), says the following regarding redaction: 
> > Redacting means the careful editing of a document to remove 
> > confidential material; on paper, the material is usually "blacked
out"
> 
> > with a marker. Personal identifiers: a. Social Security numbers. If
an
> 
> > individual's social security number must be included in a pleading,

> > only the last four digits of that number should be used.
> > b. Names of minor children. If the involvement of a minor child
must
> be
> > mentioned, only the initials of that child should be used.
> > c. Dates of birth. If an individual's date of birth must be
included
> in
> > a pleading, only the year should be used.
> > d. Financial account numbers. If financial account numbers are
> relevant,
> > only the last four digits of these numbers should
> > be used.
> >
> > However, as the web site for the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern 
> > District of California 
> >
(http://www.caeb.uscourts.gov/data/pubnotices/not_re_privacy_elec_Avai 
> > l.
> > pdf) notes, until bankruptcy law/rules are amended, the full
social
> > security number / employer identification number is required in
the
> > title of the case (caption).
> >
> > I take this to mean that it is the responsibility of the attorney
and 
> > litigants (and not the technology/XML) to redact personal data 
> > identifiers.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lewis, Diane [mailto:Diane.Lewis@usdoj.gov] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 8:18 PM
> > To: Lin, Meng-chun; 'John M. Greacen'; 'Bergeron, Donald L. (LNG)';

> > 'jik'; 'Larry Webster'; 'Mary Campbell McQueen'; 'Mohyeddin 
> > Abdulaziz'; 'Robin Gibson'; 'Rolly Chambers'; 'Terrie Bousquin'; 
> > 'Eddie OBrien'; 'Roger Winters'; 'Gregory W. Arnold'; 'Dr. Laurence

> > Leff'; 'John Messing'; 'Allen Jensen'; 'Rory Perry'; 'Ron.Beach'; 
> > 'moira.rowley'; 'Dwight R Daniels'; 'Ron Bowmaster'; 'Karl F.
Best'; 
> > 'Benjamin T. Wilson'; 'Charles Gilliam'; 'aerts'; 'jeromeb';
'tbrown';
> 
> > 'tom.clarke'; 'bruce.gitlin'; 'dagoodwi'; 'roger'; 'wjohnsto'; 
> > 'pkasselman'; 'Catherine.Krause'; 'manoj'; 'gary.pinder'; 
> > 'gpoindexter'; 'dpowell'; 'ssansom'; 'tjsmith'; 'steve.spohn'; 
> > 'steven.taylor'; 'kthotti'; 'swood'; 'Mark S. Yuan'; 'Robert 
> > DeFilippis'; 'John Ruegg'; 'John McClure'; 
> > legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org 
> > Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Information to be tagged for
> > redaction
> >
> > John,
> > i owe you a list of data elements that we have identified... don't

> > think i was in Las Vegas when the list you provide was discussed...
i 
> > know in Salt Lake City i promised a list that was identified
initially
> 
> > from discussions with our DOJ/USAO ECF workgroup attorneys...  
> > tomorrow 7/18 i will have our project legal advisor look over the
list
> 
> > below and provide comment from Assistant US attorney
(AUSA)perspective
> as well as
> > our draft list of elements.   note that some US courts have
already
> > implemented redaction procedures both for paper and electronic data
..
> 
> > the wording is unclear as to what specific elements are not
> > releasable...      as you can imagine the AUSAs have many concerns
> > more tomorrow 7/18 on this topic... dl
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John M. Greacen [mailto:john@greacen.net] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 7:33 PM
> > To: Lewis, Diane; Lin, Meng-chun; Bergeron, Donald L. (LNG); jik; 
> > Larry Webster; Mary Campbell McQueen; Mohyeddin Abdulaziz; Robin 
> > Gibson; Rolly Chambers; Terrie Bousquin; Eddie OBrien; Roger
Winters; 
> > Gregory W. Arnold; Dr. Laurence Leff; John Messing; Allen Jensen;
Rory
> 
> > Perry; Ron.Beach; moira.rowley; Dwight R Daniels; john; Ron
Bowmaster;
> 
> > Karl F. Best; Benjamin T. Wilson; Charles Gilliam; aerts; jeromeb;

> > tbrown; tom.clarke; bruce.gitlin; dagoodwi; roger; wjohnsto; 
> > pkasselman; Catherine.Krause; manoj; gary.pinder; gpoindexter; 
> > dpowell; ssansom; tjsmith; steve.spohn; steven.taylor; kthotti;
swood;
> 
> > Mark S. Yuan; Robert DeFilippis; John Ruegg; John McClure; Court 
> > Filing List
> > Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] Information to be tagged for
redaction
> >
> > In Las Vegas, Diane Lewis and I agreed to post a list of candidate

> > data elements that could be included in the Court Document 1.1 
> > specification for use in redacting information from court documents

> > when they are made available to the public.
> >
> > The following is a list drawn from a work product developed by a 
> > committee of the Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of
State 
> > Court Administrators on Public Access to Court Records.  The data 
> > elements are examples from the document of data that appears in
court 
> > records that should not, in particular situations, be released to
the 
> > public.  Hence, this would be an ideal application for XML tagging.

> > Data could be present for some uses and suppressed for others, with
an
> 
> > application looking for the particular tags associated with the 
> > information to be suppressed.  The data elements are:
> >
> > ? Name, address, telephone number, e-mail address, or place of 
> > employment and other contact information for victims (not
including
> > defendants) in domestic violence, stalking, sexual assault, and
civil 
> > protection order proceedings; ? Name, address, telephone number and

> > other contact information for victims in criminal cases; ? Name, 
> > address, telephone number and other contact information for
witnesses 
> > (other than law enforcement witnesses) in criminal, domestic
violence,
> 
> > sexual assault, stalking, and civil protection order cases; ? Name,

> > address or telephone number of informants in criminal cases; ?
Name, 
> > address or telephone number of potential or sworn jurors in a
criminal
> 
> > case; ? Social security number; ? Account number of specific
assets, 
> > liabilities, accounts, credit cards, and PINs; ? Medical or mental

> > health records, including examination, diagnosis, evaluation, or 
> > treatment records; ? Name and address of a minor child; ? 
> > Psychological evaluations of a party, for example regarding
competency
> 
> > to stand trial; ? Child custody evaluations in family law or
juvenile 
> > dependency (abuse and neglect) actions; ? Description or analysis
of a
> 
> > person?s DNA or genetic material, or biometric identifiers; ? 
> > Proprietary business information such as trade secrets, customer 
> > lists, etc. ? Statements of disability (such as in applications for

> > accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act); ?
Address 
> > and telephone number of litigants in cases
> >
> > The CCJ/COSCA document also identifies document types that should
be 
> > suppressible and photographs and physical evidence that should be 
> > suppressible.  In my view, the document types are handled by the 
> > Electronic Court Filing 1.1 specification which provides a 
> > confidentiality option for any document or data element.  I believe

> > that photographs and physical evidence fall outside our purview, as
do
> 
> > official court reporter notes.
> >
> > Diane, I invite your additional contributions.
> >
> > Mo, Rolly and John, I hope this proves helpful in following up on
this
> 
> > issue from the Salt Lake meeting.  Of all the specific data element

> > tagging that could be useful, this list of items to be tagged for 
> > possible redaction is -- in my personal view --of the highest
current 
> > importance.
> >
> > --
> > John M. Greacen
> > Greacen Associates, LLC.
> > 18 Fairly Road
> > Santa Fe, NM  87507
> > 505-471-0203
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> 
> --
> John M. Greacen
> Greacen Associates, LLC.
> 18 Fairly Road
> Santa Fe, NM  87507
> 505-471-0203
> 
> 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
The information contained in this message is confidential and is
intended
for the addressee(s) only.  If you have received this message in error
or
there are any problems please notify the originator immediately.  The 
unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is

strictly forbidden. Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for
direct, special, indirect or consequential damages arising from
alteration
of the contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any

virus being passed on.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept for
Content
Security threats, including computer viruses.
http://www.baltimore.com 
*****************************************************************************
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else
is unauthorized. 

If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution
or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited
and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice
contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in
the governing KPMG client engagement letter.         
*****************************************************************************