Thursday, May 30, 2024

I wonder if this is used in a certain courtroom in New York?

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/05/supply-chain-attack-against-courtroom-software.html

Supply Chain Attack against Courtroom Software

No word on how this backdoor was installed:

A software maker serving more than 10,000 courtrooms throughout the world hosted an application update containing a hidden backdoor that maintained persistent communication with a malicious website, researchers reported Thursday, in the latest episode of a supply-chain attack.
The software, known as the JAVS Viewer 8, is a component of the JAVS Suite 8, an application package courtrooms use to record, play back, and manage audio and video from proceedings. Its maker, Louisville, Kentucky-based Justice AV Solutions, says its products are used in more than 10,000 courtrooms throughout the US and 11 other countries. The company has been in business for 35 years.

It’s software used by courts; we can imagine all sort of actors who want to backdoor it.





Why didn’t I think of this? (Still many other areas where I could build similar tools.)

https://www.bespacific.com/evaluating-generative-ai-for-legal-research-a-benchmarking-project/

Evaluating Generative AI for Legal Research: A Benchmarking Project

Via LLRX Evaluating Generative AI for Legal Research: A Benchmarking Project It is difficult to test Large-Language Models (LLMs) without back-end access to run evaluations. So to test the abilities of these products, librarians can use prompt engineering to figure out how to get desired results (controlling statutes, key cases, drafts of a memo, etc.). Some models are more successful than others at achieving specific results. However, as these models update and change, evaluations of their efficacy can change as well. Law Librarians and tech experts par excellence, Rebecca Fordon, Sean Harrington and Christine Park plan to propose a typology of legal research tasks based on existing computer and information science scholarship and draft corresponding questions using the typology, with rubrics others can use to score the tools they use.



No comments: