Re: [Openefm-development] Authentication and Attorney Registration

[Jim B. <be...@co...>]

On Mar 8, 2005, at 11:43 AM, Jeremiah Jahn wrote:

> On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 12:08 -0600, Jeremiah Jahn wrote:
>> or to phrase it another way, Who do you idenifiy Who, not where, the
>> filing came from?
>
> cause I can type....that should read HOW do you identify who not where
> the filing came from?

Our current model requires the EFSP to identify itself with a name and 
password for authentication.  The identity of the filing party is 
contained with in the XML filing.  We parse the party information from 
the filing.  We leave the authentication of the filing party up to the 
EFSP and the court.  It has been our belief that this is similar to how 
filings work in real life.  If I want to fake my identity, I can walk 
into a court and claim to be someone I am not.  Ultimately it would 
seem to be the courts responsibility to verify that this is true.

In the implementation we built for the Supreme Court of Guam, they 
choose to control account creation at the EFSP.  They required parties 
who wanted to file to fill out a form at the court.  Then the court 
clerk created their account on the EFSP.  This was their way to control 
and authenticate filers.

Jim Beard
counterclaim.com, Inc
http://www.counterclaim.com
http://openefm.sourceforge.net
(800) 264-8145