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
© 2024 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 AllSt. Thomas University Settles With Fired Professor Who Had Alleged Academic Freedom Violations and Discrimination
9 minute readEx-St. Thomas Univ. Law Professor Sues School Over Firing, Alleging Defamation
4 minute read'It's a Great Day to Be a Gator Lawyer': UF Takes Top Spot on Bar Exam
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Attorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
- 2Attracted to Thompson Hine's Fee Flexibility, Morgan Lewis Litigator Switches Firms in Chicago
- 3Phila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
- 4Simpson Thacher Replenishes London Ranks With Latest Linklaters Defection
- 5Holland & Knight, Akin, Crowell, Barnes and Day Pitney Add to DC Practices
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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