1E9Ct5D

that an attorney should undertake when considering use of a particular form oftechnology." 20The Committee stated that "transmission of information through a third party reasonablynecessary for purposes of the representation should not be deemed to have destroyedthe confidentiality of the information," but that the "manner in which an attorney acts tosafeguard confidential information is governed by the duty of competence." 21On theissue of competence, the Committee declared: "the duty of competence includes takingappropriate steps to ensure both that secrets and privileged information of a clientremain confidential and that the attorney's handling of such information does not resultin a waiver of any privileges or protections." 22Before using a given type of technology, the Committee suggested that an attorneyshould consider the following factors:1. The nature of the technology in relation to more traditional counterparts(i.e. e-mail versus mail);2. Reasonable precautions possible to improve the security of a giventechnology;3. Limitations on who can monitor the use of technology and discloseactivity;4. The lawyer's own level of technological competence, and whether it'snecessary to consult with an expert;5. Legal ramifications to third parties for intercepting or otherwise interferingwith electronic information;20 State Bar of California's Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct, FormalOpinion No. 2010-179.21 Id.22 Id.12