Print Version - Arizona Judicial Department

solution. Discussions were held about taking the next step of dropping “/s/” for
signers logged into trusted, court-operated automation systems.
Eventual revisions to Supreme Court Rule 124 will clarify the allowable
indications for signature associated with electronic filings of pro per se litigants,
legal counsel, and judicial officers. The rule language pre-supposes no
statewide signature solution to be forthcoming and that “/s/” notation is
unnecessary where two-factor authentication takes place on a court-operated
automation system.
SNAPSHOT
CLASS STATUS RISK
Utility New High
Enhancement On-going Medium
Frontier Replace/Upgrade Low
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
As courts extend their networks, interacting with law enforcement and other agencies, it
becomes necessary to assure that information sources can be validated. Further,
courts must include some mechanism on electronic documents to provide for the
function performed by signatures in the paper world. Key concepts are the same in
both paradigms: document integrity, authenticity, and non-repudiation.
Passwords, tokens, and encryption are designed to secure access to networks,
systems, and information. Electronic signatures on an electronic document, on the
other hand, are designed to indicate that a document has been signed by the person
who purported to have signed it. Digital signatures, which are a type of electronic
signature, may also have a feature that can detect whether the original content of a
message or document has been altered. Digital signatures based on PKI can serve
both functions. The State of Arizona is embracing PKI (public key infrastructure)
technology for digitally signing documents submitted to or by the state, using VeriSign,
Inc. or Chosen Security, Inc as its approved certificate authority. This technology can
be used by access control systems to verify identity and affix an electronic signature to
an electronic document. It also provides for encryption of that document. The price per
certificate remains high, however, even for non-proprietary solutions other than the
Secretary of State’s approved certificate authorities.
The traditional ID and password can now be supplemented by biometric authentication
methods like fingerprints, voiceprints, and retinal scans. For access, experts often note
that authentication should consist of both something you have (a fingerprint, a secure ID
token) and something you know (a password). Biometrics takes that approach one step
farther by requiring something you are.
ARIZONA JUDICIAL BRANCH | INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN: 2013-2015 157