The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
House Hearing about Cyberattacks on Judiciary
"We are vulnerable."
Last week, I speculated that the Politico leak may have come from a cyberattack. Yesterday, the House Appropriations Subcommittee held a hearing on cyberattacks. Two judges warned that the judiciary is "vulnerable."
Judge Amy St. Eve (CA7) stated in her testimony:
In recent months we have discussed at length with the Subcommittee our need for additional resources to address the sharp increase in the number of cyber-attacks on Judiciary IT systems, and our need to modernize aging legacy applications critical to court operations and public access to court records. These cyber-attacks on the branch are increasing in both frequency and sophistication. Because of the sensitivity of the information, I am constrained in what I can say in this setting about vulnerabilities and cyber-attacks on the Judicial Branch, and we have shared some of that information with this Subcommittee's leadership. The Judiciary is clearly a high-value target for nation-state bad actors and cyber-criminals seeking to disrupt the administration of justice in the United States.
I cannot overstate the gravity of the broad impacts across our society of cyber-attacks on the Judicial Branch. These attacks pose risks to our entire justice system, including civil and criminal court proceedings, law enforcement and national security investigations planned or underway, and trade secrets for businesses involved in bankruptcy proceedings or patent and trademark litigation. But more broadly, cyber-attacks on the branch are an attack on our democracy itself, seeking to sow distrust in the institutions of American government at home and abroad.
My post from last week made many of these similar points--in particular, highlighting how a cyberattack was a (successful) effort to "show distrust." Mission accomplished.
Reuters discussed the hearing.
"We are vulnerable," said St. Eve, a member of the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and chair of the Judicial Conference of the United States' budget committee.
While St. Eve said she would not detail those vulnerabilities in a public setting, U.S. District Judge Roslynn Mauskopf, the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, noted there had been a "sharp increase" in cyberattacks targeting the judiciary.
"I cannot overstate the gravity of the broad impacts across our society of cyber attacks on the judicial branch," she said. "These attacks pose risks to our entire justice system and more broadly are an attack on our democracy itself."
Mauskopf said that while the judiciary is not alone in needing to modernize its systems, it is a repository "for some of our nation's most sensitive law enforcement and national security information," which needs protection.
Judge Mauskopf addressed, indirectly, risks facing draft opinions:
She emphasized that point after Republican Representative Steve Womack of Arkansas asked about the judiciary's ability to guard against leaks like that of the U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion showing the court is poised to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that protected abortion rights nationwide.
"Our systems house draft opinions," Mauskopf said. "That's another category of very sensitive, pre-decisional information that we house within our systems, which is yet another reason why we need to take steps to modernize our systems."
If the leak came from a cyberattack, the Supreme Court Marshal is out of her league. Her resources are insufficient. Only DOJ has the expertise to investigate such a sophisticated breach.
I still do not think a law clerk leaked this document. At this point, any law clerk willing to take on this burden would have confessed to his or her Justice, noisily resigned, and agreed to an interview on MSNBC to blow the whistle on our theocratic Supreme Court. Staying quiet now will simply put other clerks and staff through an unjustified inquisition. My thinking remains that this document likely came from some non-clerk who had access to the document, or some cyberattack.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Why? Is it really so implausible that someone could think they could avoid getting caught (you yourself won't shut up about how you don't think the investigation will be able to catch the leaker), or is otherwise too frightened to own up yet?
Yeah. In fact, due to the follow up reveals, I think that at this point there have been several 'leaks' by different people.
Not to mention: A report saying a government agency is vulnerable to cyberattacks is like a report saying that the government agency uses computers.
ALL government agencies are vulnerable to cyberattacks. OPM? VA? DoD? All have had problems, and all will always have problems. It's a byproduct of using networks - no matter how hard you try to be secure, bad software and bad users will make you vulnerable.
Maybe whoever did it is trying to secure a book deal or spot on CNN or MSNBC before coming clean.
What prevents a hacker from issuing a court order releasing a convicted murderer during his appeal?
" Maybe whoever did it is trying to secure a book deal or spot on CNN or MSNBC before coming clean. "
You and Prof. Blackman think alike.
Maybe a spot ont a bottom-scraping law school faculty awaits you!
Do you have a 322-page resume ready?
(Did you know that one was Smokey's?)
"Smokeys"??
as in "The Bandit"??? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smokey_and_the_Bandit
Well "Reverend", think I misjudged you, inside that "Reverend" Veneer is a Bitter Klinger, yearning to eat for free....
Frank "all that trouble for Coors??"
How would a person who obtained the draft opinion by cyberattack know what the vote was (another piece of information leaked to Politico)? Or that there was no other opinion circulating?
Still relying on a conclusion a leaking clerk would have been a liberal (rather than, for example, a conservative trying to disincline any wavering clingers in the majority -- perhaps under the demonic influence of Chief Justice Roberts -- from defecting, which clerk might be responding to a direct request from eight-pound, six-ounce sweet infant Talladega Nights baby Jesus)?
This white, male, right-wing blog has become a flaming shitstorm.
Congratulations, Conspirators, for doing your part to make it easier for better Americans to continue to win the culture war and for the better (mostly liberal-libertarian) ideas to prevail at the American marketplace of ideas.
Jeez-us(whatever age you want your made up Saviour to be) Reverend,
"Talladega Nights"?? even a Klinger like moi' hasn't seen that waste of Celluloid (Yes, I've seen "Triumph des Willens" (and "Birth of a Nation", "Plan 9 from Outerspace", and Schindler's List, what can I say, I'm a movie nut)
So looked it up on AlGores's You Tube, it's funny, thanks.
More proof you're putting up a False Front, behind that Foghorn Leghorn persona is a regular Ricky Booby. Let your (Confederate) Freak Flag fly high Rev!!!!!!!!!
Frank "draw the line at "Citizen Kane", I get it, Rosebud was his wagon"
Dear Lord Baby Jesus . . .
enjoy that Mystic Mountain Blueberry, believers!
A New Yorker article by Jane Mayer quoted Bob Woodward saying a Supreme Court leak, "is not that unusual." The original Roe v. Wade decision got leaked, maybe by Justice Douglas, according to the article.
re: "If the leak came from a cyberattack, the Supreme Court Marshal is out of her league."
Maybe. But the claim that "Only DOJ has the expertise to investigate such a sophisticated breach" is just silly. Lots of entities have the necessary expertise. In fact, of all the agencies out there, the DoJ is one that I would be most skeptical of.