Counterpoint: Online court records transition necessary, orderly

Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

In recent months, the Minnesota judicial branch has been forced to discontinue the use of two electronic tools used by prosecutors, public defenders and other justice partners to access court records and information ("Restore justice partners data access," editorial, Dec. 13). This decision was not made lightly. However, given the serious cybersecurity vulnerabilities posed by this aging software, the judicial branch had no responsible choice but to sunset these applications.

Our courts and justice partners have known for years that changes were coming to these access applications. The sunsetting of one of those tools — Odyssey Assistant — has been anticipated for nearly a decade. Tyler Technologies, the owner of the application, warned us for eight years that it was going to discontinue Odyssey Assistant and we, in turn, encouraged our justice partners to prepare for that change. This summer, it happened: Tyler discovered a security vulnerability in Odyssey Assistant that required an immediate shutdown.

When Tyler informed us about this security weakness, we discovered that a sister application (MPA Courthouse View Remote) shared a similar vulnerability, forcing us to terminate that tool, as well.

Thankfully, the Minnesota judicial branch was well prepared for these changes. We had other applications ready to go to fill in the gap, including Minnesota Court Records Online, Minnesota Government Access, and a program we built from scratch called the Minnesota Partner Calendar.

While these programs may not offer the one-stop-shop functionality of Odyssey Assistant, they absolutely provide our partners with the information they need to do their jobs, maintain public safety and ensure access to justice. To suggest otherwise is simply inaccurate.

The judicial branch recognizes that some of our justice partners have struggled to adjust to these newer, less familiar electronic tools. Many others have been successfully using these new tools for quite some time now.

Despite the learning curve associated with adjusting to these new access tools, the Minnesota judicial branch stands by our decision to protect the infrastructure of our court system by discontinuing use of those older applications. One does not need to look far to understand the risks associated with failing to mitigate these types of cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

In October, the judicial branch in a nearby state experienced a foreign cybersecurity attack that took down its entire system. To this day, that state court system remains offline, relegated to paper and pencil. We absolutely do not want that to happen in Minnesota.

The Minnesota judicial branch worked hard to prepare our justice partners for this significant change. We provided new applications, offered ample training opportunities, and communicated with our partners about both. However, given the feedback we have received from some of our partners, it's clear there is more work to be done. In the near future, we will form a statewide justice partner work group to share best practices for using these new electronic tools, and to discuss possible software enhancements that may improve the functionality of these newer applications.

The Minnesota judicial branch looks forward to continuing to work closely with our justice partners on this important issue. Most important, we are committed to ensuring our courts and partners have the technology they need to work effectively and protect the public, while also upholding the highest standards of cybersecurity in our judiciary.

Natalie Hudson is chief justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court. Jeff Shorba is state court administrator, Minnesota judicial branch.