First Online Bar Exam Targeted in Cyberattack
Bar exam takers in Michigan couldn't log onto the second module when a cyberattack blocked access. Florida's first online test venture is set Aug. 19.
July 28, 2020 at 12:28 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The first-ever online bar exam got off to a rocky start when some people taking Michigan's test were unable to log into a portion of the test in an apparent cyberattack.
Nici Sandberg, a spokeswoman for ExamSoft, the site technology vendor, told Bloomberg Law it was the victim of a "sophisticated attack specifically aimed at the login process for the ExamSoft Portal."
Panicked and frustrated test takers took to Twitter during the testing time Tuesday to say they couldn't log into the second of five test modules.
"The online #MichiganBarExam is currently malfunctioning," tweeted recent University of Michigan law graduate Kerry Martin. "The website where they post passwords for each of the modules has crashed. Only finished 1 module. I'm taking the test near 3 other people having the exact same problem. IT hotline won't answer."
John Nevin, a spokesman for the Michigan Supreme Court, said the state and vendor came up with quick email and online workarounds.
"The vendor support line and Board of Law Examiners office were giving out the password, and around 200 people were testing within 10 minutes," he said. "ExamSoft pushed out an email with the password, and everyone was able to get in to the second module and start testing shortly thereafter."
Test takers were notified via email that the testing day would be extended to compensate for the tech outage.
ExamSoft also agreed to email passwords to test takers for the remaining modules, Nevin added. Within the hour, ExamSoft also posted a universal password on its website to allow candidates to access the second test module.
In a statement Tuesday, ExamSoft said individual delays lasted up to 30 minutes, but it rattled some candidates.
"Really frustrating," a test taker wrote on Twitter. "Especially after we expressed concerns about whether examsoft could handle the #mibarexam and were repeatedly told there was nothing to worry about. Phones are busy. Still nothing."
Many jurisdictions, Florida among them, have decided to give the bar exam online due to COVID-19, and many are watching to see how early adopters fare. The Florida Board of Bar Examiners set its test for Aug, 19 using Missouri-based ILG Technologies as its test vendor.
Michele A. Gavagni, the Florida board's executive director, said by email that she couldn't comment on exam security measures but added, "We are working with our vendor to address the security of the exam portal."
In case of any exam-day disruptions, Gavagni said, "We continue to evaluate and refine our procedures for outreach to the examinees on exam day. Examinees will receive those instructions in advance of the examination."
Michigan, Indiana and Nevada were to be the online test pioneers Tuesday, but Indiana and Nevada both postponed their online exams July 24 after their software vendor, ILG Technologies, ran an update that caused glitches in the exam. That left Michigan as the only jurisdiction with an exam this week.
Many other states plan to give an abbreviated online bar exam in October, including New York, California, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Illinois and Ohio.
Michigan's software vendor has years of experience administering the bar exam — albeit with in-person tests. It's also no stranger to problems.
Many people in numerous states ran into problems uploading their answers in 2014 in what the internet dubbed "Barmageddon." The company eventually agreed to pay $2.1 million to bar takers under a class action settlement and said it would improve its technology.
Michigan in May announced it would forgo its traditional two-day in-person bar exam in favor of a one-day online version —making it the second jurisdiction in the country to commit to a remote exam.
The tests consists of five modules of Michigan essay questions. It does not include the Multistate Bar Exam, the multiple-choice question portion of the exam.
Nevin said 733 people are taking the Michigan exam Tuesday.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSecond DCA Greenlights USF Class Certification on COVID-19 College Tuition Refunds
3 minute readHow Uncertainty in College Athletics Compensation Could Drive Lawsuits in 2025
St. Thomas University Settles With Fired Professor Who Had Alleged Academic Freedom Violations and Discrimination
9 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gunderson Dettmer Opens Atlanta Office With 3 Partners From Morris Manning
- 2Decision of the Day: Court Holds Accident with Post Driver Was 'Bizarre Occurrence,' Dismisses Action Brought Under Labor Law §240
- 3Judge Recommends Disbarment for Attorney Who Plotted to Hack Judge's Email, Phone
- 4Two Wilkinson Stekloff Associates Among Victims of DC Plane Crash
- 5Two More Victims Alleged in New Sean Combs Sex Trafficking Indictment
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250