|
Circular Letter 01-01-ST: UETA Guidance
Records
Management Guidance for Agencies Implementing Electronic Signature Technologies
EFFECTIVE
DATE: 12 October
2001
ATTENTION: Heads of State and Local Government Agencies
SUBJECT: UETA Guidance
EXPIRATION DATE: Indefinite
INFORMATION: Albin Wagner, Deputy Director for Records Management, 609.530.3204
For
Printer Friendly Versions Click Here: [PDF]
[MSWord]
Cover Letter
1.0
Summary
2.0
Introduction
2.1
UETA modifies federal E-Sign legislation
2.2 Applicability of UETA to electronic
records, signatures; exceptions
2.3 Guidance on implementation of
UETA
3.0
Background
3.1
Records life cycle vs. system development life cycle
4.1
Characteristics of trustworthy records
4.2 Preserving trustworthy records
4.3 What approaches are available
to agencies to ensure the trustworthiness of electronically-
signed records over time?
4.4 What steps should agencies follow
to ensure that electronically-signed records are trustworthy?
5.0
Other Records Management Issues
5.1
What new records may be created by electronic signature
technology?
5.2 How do agencies determine which
of these electronic signature records should be retained?
5.3 Transferring electronic signature
record material from contractors to agencies
5.4 When must an agency modify its
records schedule to cover electronic signature records?
5.5 Special considerations relating
to long-term, electronically-signed records that preserve legal rights
5.6 Requirements for permanent,
electronically-signed records
Appendix
A - Key Terms and Definitions
Appendix
B - For Further Information and Assistance
| Cover
Letter: |
|
1. What is the purpose of this bulletin?
This
bulletin transmits Records Management Guidance for Agencies Implementing
Electronic Signature Technologies (Circular Letter 01-01-ST), which
was developed by the Department of State, Division of Archives and
Records Management (DARM) as mandated by Section 19 of the New Jersey
Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (commonly known as UETA).
2. What is
the background to this guidance?
UETA
(P. L. 2001, c. 116 [PDF
Format or HTML
Format]), authorizes state and local government agencies in
New Jersey, as of 26 June 2001, to use electronic forms, electronic
filing, and electronic signatures to conduct
official business with the public. In doing this, agencies will
create records with business, legal, and in
some cases, historical value. This guidance focuses on records management
issues involving records that have been created
using electronic signature technology.
Circular
Letter 01-01-ST supplements other Division of Archives and Records
Management (DARM) records management guidance, including, but not
limited to:
3. How is
DARM disseminating this guidance to state and local government agencies?
In
addition to this Circular Letter, DARM will distribute copies of
the guidance to agency records officers and chief information officers.
Records management and information technology staff will need to
work together to ensure that records requirements are addressed
when implementing electronic signature technologies.
DARM
staff members will summarize the guidance at several Records and
Information Management Forums. The schedule for these meetings will
be published on the DARM web site http://www.state.nj.us/state/darm
These meetings will afford an opportunity for interested agency
personnel to ask questions and discuss the records management implications
of UETA with DARM officials. To facilitate the discussion, participants
may submit questions in advance via email to albin.wagner@sos.state.nj.us
Based on this discussion, DARM may develop additional guidance and
training. Both records officers and information technology managers
are invited to these meetings.
The
guidance will also be available on the DARM web site at http://www.state.nj.us/state/darm/
4. Is Further
Information Available?
For
further records management information and assistance, State and
local agencies may contact the Bureau of Records Management, Division
of Archives and Records Management by mail at P.O. Box 307, Trenton,
NJ 08625-0307, e-mail at albin.wagner@sos.state.nj.us,
telephone at 609-530-3200, or fax at 609-530-6121.
__________________________
__________________________
DEFOREST B.
SOARIES, JR. KARL J. NIEDERER
Secretary of State Director, Division of Archives and Records Management
Attachment:
Circular 01-01-ST
Posted on Division
of Archives and Records Management home page
URL: http://www.state.nj.us/state/darm
[top
of page] [top of section] |
| |
| 1.0
SUMMARY: |
|
The New Jersey Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA), P. L.2001,
c. 116, authorizes, with certain exceptions, state and local government
agencies to use electronic forms, electronic filing, and electronic
signatures to conduct official business with the public after
26 June 2001. An agency's decisions concerning how to adequately
document program functions, its records management practices, and
its risk assessment methodologies are essential and interrelated
aspects of any electronic signature initiative.
The following key points are discussed more fully in this guidance:
Agencies
must consider records management requirements when implementing
the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA), P. L. 2001, c. 116,
as mandated by Sections 17 of the law (C. 12A:12-17). (See: Section
2.0)
Section
19 of UETA (C.12A:12-19) mandates the adoption of standards for
electronic forms, electronic filing, and electronic
signatures for governmental agencies by the Secretary of State.
If
the electronically signed record needs to
be preserved, whether for a finite period of time or permanently,
then the agency needs to ensure its trustworthiness over time. (See:
Section 4.0)
There
are various approaches to ensure the trustworthiness of electronically-signed
records. (See: Section 4.3)
Information
systems that agencies use to implement the electronic
signature requirements of UETA will produce new records
or augment existing records. (See: Section
5.1)
Agencies
determine which electronic signature records
to retain based on their operational needs and perceptions of risk.
(See: Section 5.2)
Agencies
are not authorized to dispose of records without
an approved records disposition authorization from the State Records
Committee. (See: Section 2.0)
Agencies
should develop records schedules with
proposed retention periods for new electronic
records or records including electronic
signatures with the assistance of DARM. The State Records Committee
must review and approve retention and disposition schedules for
any new records. Records retention and disposition
schedules for existing records may need to
be modified if electronic signatures are utilized.
(See: Sections 5.1 and 5.4)
Electronically-signed
records documenting legal rights and electronically-signed
records that must be retained permanently
have special considerations. (See: Sections 5.5
and 5.6)
When
agencies use third party contractors they must include specific
contract language to help ensure that records management requirements
are met. (See: Section 5.3)
This
guidance does not deal with issues associated with development and
implementation of technologies used to generate electronic
signatures. Development and implementation of such technologies
are under the purview of the Office
of Information Technology (OIT).
[top
of page] [top of section] |
| |
| 2.0
INTRODUCTION: |
|
2.1 UETA modifies federal E-Sign legislation.
The
federal Electronic Signatures in Global and
National Commerce Act, Pub. L. 106-229, 114 Stat. 464 (2000),
popularly known as the " E-Sign Act," adopted by the
U.S. Congress, encourages states to enact the Uniform Electronic
Transactions Act (UETA) proposed for adoption by the National
Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. The adoption
of the UETA invokes the provisions of Section 102 of Pub. L. 106-229,
which states that federal law will not preempt the laws of an
enacting state relating to electronic transactions
and electronic signatures. Section 102 of
Pub. L. 106-229 provides that a state, in enacting UETA, may "modify,
limit or supersede" the provisions of the federal law. The
New Jersey Legislature declared in their adoption of UETA, per
Section 22 (C.12A:12-22), that it was their intention that the
legislation would modify, limit and supersede the provisions of
Pub. L. 106-229 to the fullest possible extent permitted under
the federal law. [top of page]
[top of section]
2.2 Applicability of guidance to electronic
records, signatures; exceptions
This
guidance does not deal with issues associated with development
and implementation of technologies used to generate electronic
signatures. Development and implementation of such technologies
are under the purview of the Office
of Information Technology (OIT).
Circular
Letter 01-01-ST supplements other Division of Archives and Records
Management (DARM) guidance on records management, including, but
not limited to:
a.
Guidance for agencies implementing image processing systems,
as mandated by P. L. 1994, c. 140, promulgated by the Secretary
of State in the Administrative Code as NJAC
15:3-4, Image Processing of Public Records, and NJAC
15:3-5, Certification of Image Processing Systems;
b.
N.J.A.C.
15:3-1 to 3, Records Retention;
c.
N.J.A.C.
15:3-6, Storage of Public Records;
d.
New
Jersey State Records Manual (Trenton: Department of State,
Division of Archives and Records Management, 1994); and
e.
New
Jersey Local Records Manual (Trenton: Department of State,
Division of Archives and Records Management, 1986).
This
guidance applies to any electronic record
or electronic signature to the extent it
is governed by a law other than those specified in Section 6 of
UETA (C.12A:12-6).
Per
Section 6 of UETA (C.12A:12-6), this guidance does not apply to
a transaction to the extent it is governed
by:
a.
a law governing the creation and execution of wills, codicils
or testamentary trusts;
b.
the Uniform Commercial Code other than sections 1-107 and 1-206,
Article 2 and Article 2A;
c. a statute, regulation or other rule of law governing adoption,
divorce or other matters of family law.
Per
Section 7 of UETA (C.12A:12-7), Legal effect and enforceability,
a.
if a law requires a record to be in writing,
an electronic record satisfies the law;
and
b. if a
law requires a signature, an electronic signature
satisfies the law.
If
a law requires a signature or record to
be notarized, acknowledged, verified, or made under oath,
a.
Per Section 11 of UETA (C.12A:12-11), the requirement is satisfied
if the electronic signature of the person
authorized to perform those acts, together with all other information
required to be included by other applicable law, is attached
to or logically associated with the signature or record.
b.
Section 18 and 19 of UETA (C.12A:12-18 and 19) requires the
application of an equivalent electronic signature
technology, such as PKI (public-private key)
technology.
Per
Section 5 of UETA (C.12A:12-5), Electronic
record, signature not required
a.
UETA does not require a record or signature
to be created, generated, stored, sent, communicated, received,
stored or otherwise processed or used by electronic means or
in electronic form.
b.
UETA applies only to transactions
between parties, each of which has agreed to conduct
transactions by electronic means.
Whether the parties agree to conduct a transaction
by electronic means is determined from the context
and surrounding circumstances, including the parties' conduct.
Per
Section 6 of UETA (C.12A:12-6), this guidance does not apply to:
a.
court orders or notices or official court documents (including
briefs, pleadings and other writings)
required to be executed in connection with court proceedings;
b.
any notice of:
1.
the cancellation or termination of utility services (including
water, heat and power);
2.
the default, acceleration, repossession, foreclosure or eviction,
or the right to cure, under a credit agreement
secured by, or a rental agreement
for, a primary residence of an individual;
3.
the cancellation or termination of health insurance benefits
or life insurance benefits (excluding annuities); or
4.
the recall of a product, or material failure of a product,
that risks endangering health or safety; or
c.
any document required to accompany any transportation or handling
of hazardous materials,
pesticides or other toxic or dangerous materials.
This
guidance discusses the records management principles that apply
to electronic signature technology generally.
Per Section 18 of UETA (C.12A:12-18), electronic
signatures should be accomplished by the most appropriate
technology. The different available technologies include, but
are not limited to, Personal Identification Number (PIN), digital
signatures, smart cards and biometrics. Per Section 19 of UETA
(C.12A:12-18), if additional records management guidance is necessary,
DARM will provide assistance to agencies in selection of the appropriate
electronic signature technology when developing
a recordkeeping system. [top
of page] [top of section]
2.3 Guidance on implementation of UETA
The
Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA), P. L.2001, c. 116,
authorizes state and local government agencies in New Jersey to
use electronic forms, electronic filing, and electronic
signatures to conduct official business with the public after
26 June 2001. In doing so, agencies will create records
with administrative, legal and, in some cases, historical value.
This guidance focuses on records management issues involving records
that have been created using electronic signature
technology.
A
sound records management program is an integral part of an agency's
standard business operations. Agencies must consider records management
requirements when implementing the provisions of UETA, or whenever
they design or augment an electronic information system. State
and local government agencies are required to make and preserve
records containing adequate and proper documentation
of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures,
and essential transactions of the agency.
This requirement applies to electronic records
as well. Section 19 of UETA (C.12A:12-19) mandates the adoption
of standards for electronic forms, electronic filing, and electronic
signatures for governmental agencies by the Secretary of State.
Agencies that do not consistently adhere to standard records management
practices run the risk of not having records
that can be depended upon in the course of subsequent business
transactions
or activities.
This guidance
is directed both toward agency records management personnel and
information technology specialists who establish electronic
signature systems and who may not be familiar with the records
management implications. Good information technology practices
complement or parallel good records management practices. In systems
implemented as a result of the UETA, records management requirements
will form the core of the IT system requirements. In implementing
electronic signature technologies, IT professionals
need to be aware that signatures are an integral part of a record.
If the record needs to be preserved, whether
for a finite period of time or permanently, then the agency needs
to ensure the trustworthiness of the electronically-signed record
over time.
The State
Records Committee, established pursuant to P. L. 1953, c.410 (N.J.S.A.
47:3-16), must approve the disposition of state and local government
records by means of a DARM-approved Request
and Authorization for Records Disposal, as authorized by an approved
records retention schedule before agencies can destroy them. New
information systems or records series
that have not been scheduled (i.e. do not have a records disposition
authority) need to be appraised by DARM. Agency records management
staff should contact DARM to begin the scheduling process. DARM
will assist agencies with the review and approval of new or revised
retention schedules by the State Records Committee. Further information
on scheduling records and DARM records management
guidance is available on the DARM web site
< http://www.state.nj.us/state/darm
> and in DARM publications. See Appendix B for further information
about DARM's records management programs and services.
[top
of page] [top of section] |
| |
| 3.0
BACKGROUND: |
3.1 Records Life Cycle vs. System Development Life Cycle
The
terms "records life cycle" and "system development
life cycle" are important concepts that are sometimes confused
in information technology and records management discussions.
Records
life cycle: The records life cycle is the life span of a record
from its creation or receipt to its final disposition. It is usually
described in three stages: creation, maintenance and use, and
final disposition. Much of this guidance deals with the creation
stage because the electronic signature record
is created during the first stage of the records life cycle. The
second stage, maintenance and use, is the portion of the records
life cycle in which the record is either
maintained at the agency while in active use, or is maintained
off-line when use is less frequent. The final stage of the records
life cycle is disposition, which describes the ultimate fate of
the record. State and local government records
are categorized as having either a "temporary" or "permanent"
disposition status. Temporary records are held by agencies for
specified time periods before they are destroyed or deleted. Permanent
records are first held by agencies and then legally transferred
to the State Archives. Electronically-signed records may be either
temporary or permanent. The eventual disposition of electronically-signed
records is subject to negotiation between the agency and DARM,
but agencies are not authorized to dispose of records without
approval from DARM per N.J.A.C.
15:3-2.6-2.8 and N.J.A.C.
15:3-3.1-3.7, as mandated by N.J.S.A. 47:3-1 to 6.
System
development life cycle: The "system development life cycle"
describes the phases of development of an electronic information
system. These phases typically include initiation, definition,
design, development, deployment, operation, maintenance, enhancement,
and retirement. A significant step in several of the stages is
the definition, development, and refinement of the data model
that includes treatment of the records being
created or managed. Information systems developed according to
system development methodologies, including those that agencies
use to implement the electronic signature
requirements of UETA, will produce new records
or augment existing records.
The
records life cycle often exceeds the system development life cycle.
When it does, the agency needs to retain the record
for a period of time longer than the life of the electronic information
system that generated the electronic signature.
This presents special challenges, such as maintaining the trustworthiness
of the record when migrating from one system
to another.
[top
of page] [top of section] |
| |
| 4.0
TRUSTWORTHY RECORDS: |
|
4.1
Characteristics of Trustworthy Records
Reliability,
authenticity, integrity,
and usability are the characteristics
used to describe trustworthy records from
a records management perspective. An agency needs to consider
these characteristics when planning to implement an electronic
signature technology so that it can meet its internal business
and legal needs, and external regulations or requirements. The
degree of effort an agency expends on ensuring that these characteristics
are attained is dependent on the agency's business needs or perception
of risk. (See: Section 5.2 for a discussion
of risk assessment.) Transactions that
are critical to the agency business needs may need a greater assurance
level that they are reliable, authentic, maintain integrity
and are usable than transactions of
less critical importance. For guidance on whether records
are trustworthy for legal purposes, consult your attorney or legal
counsel.
Reliability:
A reliable record is one whose content
can be trusted as a full and accurate representation of the
transactions, activities, or facts
to which it attests and can be depended upon in the course of
subsequent transactions or activities.
Authenticity:
An authentic record is one that is
proven to be what it purports to be and to have been created
or sent by the person who purports to have created and sent
it.
A
record should be created at the point
in time of the transaction or incident
to which it relates, or soon afterwards, by individuals who
have direct knowledge of the facts or by instruments routinely
used within the business to conduct the transaction.
To
demonstrate the authenticity of
records, agencies should implement and
document policies and procedures which control the creation,
transmission, receipt, and maintenance of records
to ensure that records creators are
authorized and identified and that records
are protected against unauthorized addition, deletion, and
alteration.
Integrity:
The integrity of a record refers to
it being complete and unaltered.
It
is necessary that a record be protected
against alteration without appropriate permission. Records
management policies and procedures should specify what, if
any, additions or annotations may be made to a record
after it is created, under what circumstances additions or
annotations may be authorized, and who is authorized to make
them. Any authorized annotation or addition to a record
made after it is complete should be explicitly indicated as
annotations or additions.
Another
aspect of integrity is the structural
integrity of a record.
The structure of a record,
that is, its physical and logical format and the relationships
between the data elements comprising the record,
should remain physically or logically intact. Failure to maintain
the record's structural integrity
may impair its reliability and
authenticity.
Usability:
A usable record is one which can be located,
retrieved, presented, and interpreted. In any subsequent retrieval
and use, the record should be capable
of being directly connected to the business activity or transaction
which produced it. It should be possible to identify a record
within the context of broader business
activities and functions. The links between records
which document a sequence of activities should be maintained.
These contextual linkages of records should
carry the information needed for an understanding of the transaction
that created and used them. [top
of page] [top of section]
4.2 Preserving Trustworthy Records
For
a record to remain reliable, authentic,
with its integrity maintained, and useable
for as long as the record is needed, it
is necessary to preserve its content, context,
and sometimes its structure. A trustworthy
record preserves the actual content
of the record itself and information about
the record that relates to the context
in which it was created and used. Specific contextual information
will vary depending upon the business, legal, and regulatory requirements
of the business activity (e.g., issuing land use permits). It
also may be necessary to preserve the structure
or arrangement of its parts. Failure to preserve the structure
of the record will impair its structural
integrity. That, in turn, may undermine
the record's reliability
and authenticity.
There
are special considerations when dealing with the preservation
of the content, context,
and structure of records
that are augmented by electronic signatures:
Content:
The electronic signature or signatures
in a record are part of the content.
They indicate who signed a record and
whether that person approved the content
of the record. Multiple signatures can
indicate initial approval and subsequent concurrence. Signatures
are often accompanied by dates and other identifiers such as
organization or title. All of this is part of the content
of the record and needs to be preserved.
Lack of this information seriously affects a document's reliability
and authenticity.
Context:
Some electronic signature technologies
rely on individual identifiers that are not embedded in the
content of the record,
trust paths, and other means to create and verify the validity
of an electronic signature (See: Section
5.1). This information is outside of the content
of the record, but is nevertheless important
to the context of the record
as it provides additional evidence to support the reliability
and authenticity of the record.
Lack of these contextual records seriously
affects one's ability to verify the validity of the signed content.
Structure:
Preserving the structure of a record
means its physical and logical format and the relationships
between the data elements comprising the record
remain physically and logically intact. An agency may determine
that it is necessary to maintain the structure
of the electronic signature. In that case
it is necessary to retain the hardware and software that created
the signature (e.g., chips or encryption algorithms) so that
the complete record could be revalidated
at a later time as needed. [top
of page] [top of section]
4.3 What approaches are available to agencies to ensure the trustworthiness
of electronically-signed records over time?
There
are various approaches agencies can use to ensure the trustworthiness
of electronically-signed records over time. Agencies may choose
an approach that is practical for them and will fit their business
needs and risk assessment per Section 18 of UETA (C.12A:12-18).
Per Section 19 of UETA (C.12A:12-18), DARM will provide agencies
assistance in this process. Below is a discussion of two different
approaches that agencies have used.
One
approach: An agency may choose to maintain adequate documentation
of the records' validity, such as trust
verification records, gathered at or near
the time of record signing. This approach
requires agencies to retain contextual information to adequately
document the processes in place at the time the record
was electronically-signed, along with the electronically-signed
record itself. The additional contextual information must be
retained for as long as the electronically-signed record is
retained. Thus the agency preserves the signature's validity
and meets the adequacy of documentation
requirements by retaining the contextual information that documented
the validity of the electronic signature
at the time the record was signed.
Maintaining
adequate documentation of validity
gathered at or near the time of record
signing may be preferable for records
that have permanent or long-term retention since it is less
dependent on technology and much more easily maintained as technology
evolves over time. However, using this approach, the signature
name may not remain readable over time because of bit-wise deterioration
in the record or as a result of technological
obsolescence. Agencies must ensure that for permanent records
the printed name of the signer and the date when the signature
was executed be included as part of any human readable form
(such as electronic display or printout) of the electronic
record.
Another
approach: An agency may choose to maintain the ability to
re-validate digital signatures. The re-validation
approach requires agencies to retain the capability to revalidate
the digital signature, along with the electronically-signed
record itself. The information necessary for revalidation
(i.e., the public key used to validate the signature, the certificate
related to that key, and the certificate revocation list from
the certificate authority that corresponds
to the time of signing) must be retained for as long as the
digitally-signed record is retained. Both contextual and structural
information of the record must be retained,
as described in Section 4.2.
This
approach is potentially more burdensome, particularly for digitally-signed
records with long retention needs, due to issues of hardware
and software obsolescence. If an agency chooses this approach
for permanent records, it must contact
DARM to discuss what they will need to do to transfer the records
to DARM. As in the first approach, the agency must ensure that
the printed name of the electronic signer and the date when
the signature was executed be included as part of any human
readable form (such as electronic display or printout) of the
electronic record.
Special
considerations for records documenting
legal rights and records that must be
retained permanently are discussed in Sections
5.5 and 5.6, respectively.
Non-repudiation:
Irrespective of the approach an agency takes, some form
of technical non-repudiation services
must be implemented to protect the reliability,
authenticity, integrity,
and usability, as well as the confidentiality,
and legitimate use of electronically-signed information. Non-repudiation
is one of the essential security services in computing environments,
being mainly applied in message handling systems and electronic
commerce. The non-repudiation services
that are being used in e-commerce can also be used in ascertaining
the reliability of electronically-signed
records. Non-repudiation services provide
irrefutable evidence that an action took place. The services
protect one party to a transaction
(e.g., electronically signing a record) against the denial of
the other party that a particular event or action took place.
The services also provide safeguards that protect all parties
from a false claim that a record was tampered
with or not sent or received.
There are
multiple frameworks for non-repudiation
and agencies will choose the framework that matches their needs.
One possible framework is the ISO (International Organization
for Standardization) non-repudiation
model (Non-repudiation - Part 1: General
Model, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC27 N1503, November 1996; Non-repudiation
- Part 2: Using symmetric techniques, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC27 N1505,
November 1996). The essential elements of the ISO model are
listed below:
a.
Evidence of the Origin of the Message & Verification:
This shows that the originator created the message (electronically-signed
record). The sender (person signing the record
electronically) has to create a proof-of-origin certificate
using the non-repudiation service.
The electronically-signed record can be sent to another party
(receiver of the electronically-signed record or another application
for further processing) using the non-repudiation
delivery authority service. The receiver has to store this
evidence using the non-repudiation
storage service. In case of dispute, the sender can later
retrieve this evidence.
b. Evidence of Message Receipt: This proves that the message
(electronically-signed record) was delivered. The recipient
must create and send a proof of receipt certificate using
non-repudiation delivery authority
service. The sender receives this evidence and stores it using
the non-repudiation storage service;
it can later be retrieved if there is a dispute.
c.
Transaction Timestamp: This timestamp
is generated by the non-repudiation
service as part of the evidence that an event or action took
place.
d.
Long-term Storage Facility: This is used to store the certificates
of origin and receipt. If there is a dispute, the adjudicator
uses this storage facility to retrieve the evidence. Depending
on the length of storage, it might be necessary to address
software and hardware migration concerns as part of the design
of this facility.
e.
The Adjudicator: The adjudicator is used to settle disputes
based on stored evidence if either the sender or the receiver
of electronically-signed records makes false claims.
Modified
from: Orfali, Robert, Harkey, Dan, & Jeri Edwards. Client-Server
Survival Guide. John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1999, p.
144. [top of page]
[top of section]
4.4 What steps should agencies follow to ensure that electronically-signed
records are trustworthy?
To
create trustworthy records with electronic
signatures an agency should:
a.
create and maintain documentation
of the systems used to create the records
that contain electronic signatures;
b. ensure that the records that include
electronic signatures are created and maintained
in a secure environment that protects the records
from unauthorized alteration or destruction;
c.
implement standard operating procedures for the creation, use,
and management of records that contain
electronic signatures and maintain adequate
written documentation of those
procedures;
d.
create and maintain records according
to these documented standard operating procedures.
e.
train agency staff in the standard operating procedures.
f.
obtain official disposition authorization from DARM for both
the records that contain electronic
signatures and for the associated records
that are necessary for trustworthy records
(See: Section 4.0). Per N.J.S.A. 47:3-3,
having official disposition authorization will assist the agency
when faced with demands to produce records
that have been destroyed according to these authorities.
[top
of page] [top of section] |
| |
| 5.0
OTHER RECORDS MANAGEMENT ISSUES: |
5.1
What new records may be created by electronic
signature technology?
Agency
decisions to accept or create electronically-signed records will
generate new types of associated records.
Agencies must identify the content, context,
and structure of records
with electronic signatures and determine
what they will need to preserve to have trustworthy records
for the agency's purposes. The following list includes many of
the records that might be associated with
an electronic signature initiative. These
records need to be scheduled (have records
retention and disposition schedules approved by the State Records
Committee) in coordination with the electronically-signed records
to which they relate.
a.
Documentation of individual identities:
Information the agency uses to identify and authenticate a particular
person as the source of an electronically-signed record. Examples
of this would be a pin number or digital certificate assigned
to an individual. This information may be passed to individuals
via written correspondence, and do not necessarily appear in
the electronically-signed record. Depending on method of implementation,
this is either content or context.
b.
Electronic signatures: A method of signing
an electronic document that identifies and authenticates a particular
person as the source of the message and indicates such person's
approval of the information contained in the electronic message.
The electronic signature may be embedded
in the content of the record,
or it may be stored separately. If an electronic
signature technology separates the signature from the rest
of the record, it must be associated in
some way and captured in the recordkeeping
system to preserve the complete content
of the record.
c.
Trust verification records: Records that
the agency deems necessary to document when and how the authenticity
of the signature was verified. An example of this would be an
Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP)
or other response from a Certificate Authority
server. This is context information.
d.
Certificates: The electronic document that binds a verified
identity to the public key that is used to verify the digital
signature in public key infrastructure implementations.
This is context information.
e. Certificate Revocation List: In public key
infrastructure implementations, a list of certificates that
a Certificate Authority has revoked at a particular
time. When a Certificate Authority places
a certificate on a revocation list, an agency application may
reject the digital signature. This is context
information.
f.
Trust paths: In public key infrastructure
implementations, a chain of certificates of trusted third parties
between parties to a transaction
which ends with the issuance of a certificate that the relying
party trusts. The trust path is one of the data necessary for
validation of a received digital signature.
This is context information.
g.
Certificate policy: In public key infrastructure
implementations, a set of rules that defines the applicability
of a certificate to a particular community and/or class of application
with common security requirements. This is context
information.
h.
Certificate practice statements: In public key
infrastructure implementations, a certification authority's
statement of practice for issuing certificates. This is context
information.
i.
Hashing/encryption/signing algorithms: Software for generating
computational calculations used to create or validate digital
signatures. This is structure information.
[top of page] [top
of section]
5.2 How do agencies determine which of these electronic
signature records to retain?
Agencies
establish records management practices based on their operational
needs and perceptions of risks. Operational needs are determined
on the basis of the approach taken to ensuring the trustworthiness
of electronically-signed records over time (See: Section
4.3). Risk assessment and risk mitigation, along with other
methodologies, are used to establish documentation
requirements for agency activities.
A
risk assessment should consider the possible consequences of lost
or unrecoverable records, including the
legal risk and financial costs of potential losses, the likelihood
that a damaging event will occur, and the costs of taking mitigating
actions. Risk is defined here, from a records management perspective,
as:
a.
a risk of challenge to the records (e.g.,
legal challenge) that can be expected over the life of the record,
and
b.
the degree to which the agency or citizens would suffer loss
if the trustworthiness of the electronically-signed records
could not be adequately documented.
Risk
assessment also can be applied to records
of electronic signature programs to determine
the level of documentation required
for signature validation. The concepts
of reliability, authenticity,
integrity, and usability
as discussed in Section 4.1, may help agencies establish criteria
for the types of electronic signature-related
records they need to retain to document
their programs. [top of page]
[top of section]
5.3 Transferring electronic signature record
material from contractors to agencies
As
state and local governments begins to interact with citizens electronically,
agencies may employ third party contractors to integrate electronic
signature technology into their business processes. Use of
a third party contractor does not relieve an agency of its obligation
to provide adequate and proper documentation
of electronic signature record
material. When agencies use third party contractors they must
use specific contract language to help ensure that records management
requirements are met. It may be necessary for agencies to make
special provisions for obtaining electronic signature
record material from third parties or to
ensure that the third parties adhere to the records
schedule retention requirements. [top
of page] [top of section]
5.4 When must an agency modify its records
schedule to cover electronic signature
records?
Records
schedules are the business rules that describe the types of
records an agency produces and the retention
periods for those records. Records
schedules need to be modified when:
a. new records, such as those listed in
Section 5.1, are created;
b. the agency determines that incorporation of an electronic
signature into a record will result
in changes to the retention period for that record;
or
c. incorporation of the electronic signature
and/or resulting parallel changes in the work process significantly
changes the character of the record.
DARM
will provide agency records officers with
specific guidance on scheduling. If an agency is applying electronic
signature technology to records scheduled
for permanent retention, please contact DARM. (See: Appendix
B) [top of page]
[top of section]
5.5 Special considerations relating to long-term, electronically-signed
records that preserve legal rights.
When
implementing electronic signature technology,
agencies should give special consideration to the use of electronic
signatures in electronic records that
preserve legal rights. Because long-term temporary and permanent
electronically signed records have greater longevity than typical
software obsolescence cycles, it is virtually certain that agencies
will have to migrate those records to newer
versions of software to maintain access. The software migration
(as opposed to media migration) process may invalidate the digital
signature embedded in the record. This may
adversely affect an agency's ability to recognize or enforce the
legal rights documented in those records.
[top of page] [top
of section]
5.6 DARM requirements for permanent, electronically-signed records
For
permanent records, agencies must ensure
that the printed name of the electronic signer, as well as the
date when the signature was executed, be included as part of any
human readable form (such as electronic display or printout) of
the electronic record. This is requirement
so that the name of the signer will be preserved as part of the
record.
Note:
Circular Letter 0101-ST was modeled upon NARA Bulletin 2001-02,
Records Management Guidance for Agencies Implementing Electronic
Signature Technologies, which was developed by the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in response to the
federal Government Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 105-277).
[top
of page] [top of section]
|
| |
| APPENDIX
A: |
|
Key Terms and Definitions
Note: Many of these definitions are taken from the Uniform Electronic
Transactions Act (UETA), P. L. 2001, c. 116, and Lewis J. Bellardo
and Lynn Lady Bellardo, comps., A Glossary for Archivists, Manuscript
Curators, and Records Managers, Archival Fundamentals Series (Chicago:
The Society of American Archivists, 1992).
Agreement:
The bargain of the parties in fact, as found in their language
or inferred from other circumstances, and from rules, regulations
and procedures given the effect of agreement under laws otherwise
applicable to a particular transaction.
(UETA)
Appraisal: The process of determining the value and thus
the disposition of records (i.e., designating
them temporary or permanent) based upon their current administrative,
legal, and fiscal use; their evidential and informational value;
their arrangement and condition; their intrinsic value; and their
relationship to other records. (SAA Glossary)
Authenticity: An
authentic record is one that is proven to
be what it purports to be and to have been created or sent by
the person who purports to have created and sent it.
Automated transaction: A transaction
conducted or performed, in whole or in part, by electronic means
or electronic records, in which the acts
or records of one or both parties are not reviewed by an individual
in the ordinary course in forming a contract, performing under
an existing contract or fulfilling an obligation required by the
transaction. (UETA)
Certificate
Authority [CA]: As part of a public key infrastructure,
an authority in a network that issues and manages security credentials
and public keys for message encryption and decryption.
Content:
The information that a document is meant to convey (SAA Glossary).
Words, phrases, numbers, or symbols comprising the actual text
of the record that were produced by the
record creator.
Context:
The organizational, functional, and operational circumstances
in which documents are created and/or received and used (SAA Glossary).
The placement of records within a larger
records classification system providing cross-references to other
related records.
Documentation:
1. In archival usage, the creation or acquisition of documents
to provide evidence of the creator, an event, or an activity.
2. In electronic records, an organized
series of descriptive documents explaining the operating system
and software necessary to use and maintain a file and the arrangement,
content, and coding of the data which it
contains. (SAA Glossary)
Electronic record: A
record created, generated, sent, communicated,
received or stored by electronic means. (UETA) See also: definition
of "Record."
Electronic
signature: A technologically neutral term indicating various
methods of signing an electronic message that (a) identify and
authenticate a particular person as source of the electronic message;
and (b) indicate such person's approval of the information contained
in the electronic message (UETA). Examples of electronic signature
technologies include PINs, user identifications and passwords,
digital signatures, digitized signatures, and hardware and biometric
tokens.
General records schedule:
A records schedule governing specified
series of records common to several or all
agencies or administrative units of a corporate body (SAA Glossary).
The DARM General Records Schedules (GRS) provide disposition authority
by the State Records Committee for administrative records
common to several or all agencies of the state and local government.
Governmental agency:
An executive, legislative or judicial agency, department, board,
commission, authority, institution or instrumentality of the state
government or of a county, municipality, or other political subdivision
of the state. (UETA)
Integrity:
The integrity of a record refers to its
being complete and unaltered.
Non-repudiation:
Steps taken by an agency to provide assurance, via the use of
an audit trail, that a sender cannot deny being the source of
a message, and that a recipient cannot deny receipt of a
message.
Online
Certificate Status Protocol [OCSP]: A draft Internet communications
protocol of the IETF X.509 PKI Working Group
that is useful in determining the current status of a digital
certificate without requiring certificate revocation lists.
Public
Key Infrastructure [PKI]: An IT infrastructure that enables
users of a basically unsecure public network such as the Internet
to securely and privately exchange data through the use of a public
and a private cryptographic key pair that is obtained and shared
through a trusted authority.
Record:
Any paper, written or printed book, document or drawing, map or
plan, photograph, microfilm, data processed or image processed
document, sound-recording or similar device, or any copy thereof
which has been made or is required by law to be received for filing,
indexing, or reproducing by any officer, commission, agency or
authority of the State or of any political subdivision thereof,
including subordinate boards thereof, or that has been received
by any such officer, commission, agency or authority of the State
or of any political subdivision hereof, including subordinate
boards thereof, in connection with the transaction
of public business and has been retained by such recipient or
its successor as evidence of its activities or because of he information
contained therein. (N.J.S.A. 47:3-16)
Recordkeeping System:
A manual or automated system in which records
are collected, organized, and categorized to facilitate their
preservation, retrieval, use, and disposition.
Records Schedule:
A document describing records of an agency,
organization, or administrative unit, establishing a timetable
for their life cycle, and providing authorization for their disposition
(SAA Glossary), i.e., off-site storage followed by destruction
or transfer to the State Archives.
Record
Series: File units or documents arranged in accordance with
a filing system or maintained as a unit because they result from
the same accumulation or filing process, the same function, or
the same activity; have a particular form; or because of some
other relationship arising out of their creation, receipt, or
use. (SAA Glossary)
Reliability:
A reliable record is one whose contents
can be trusted as a full and accurate representation of the transactions,
activities, or facts to which they attest and can be depended
upon in the course of subsequent transactions
or activities
Revalidation:
Re-confirming the validation process
for a previously validated electronic signature.
Structure:
The physical and logical format of a record
and the relationships between the data elements.
Transaction:
An action or set of actions occurring between two or more persons
relating to the conduct of business, commercial or governmental
affairs. (UETA)
Usability:
A useable record is one which can be located,
retrieved, presented and interpreted.
Validation:
The process by which a message/record is
confirmed to have originated from an authenticated network user,
that is, one who has appropriately established his/her identity
on the network
[top
of page] [top of
section] |
| |
| APPENDIX
B: |
|
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE
In
addition to the policy guidance available from the agency's records
officer and legal counsel, records management assistance is available
to state and local government agencies through several DARM offices
and programs. Agencies will find the most current list of DARM records
management contacts and programs posted on the DARM Records Management
web page at: http://www.state.nj.us/state/darm
Records management policy and guidance and links to State and local
government regulations, records management publications, Circular
Letters, and other valuable resources are also available through
the DARM web site.
The
Bureau of Records Management receives and reviews all records disposition
requests submitted to DARM by state and local government agencies
and provides records management training open to all state and local
government employees. The bureau is organized into six workgroups,
each of which is assigned responsibilities for specific state and
local government Agencies. This liaison structure ensures that agencies
will be able to discuss their records issues with someone who is
familiar with their agency and their records.
The list of workgroups and agency assignments is available by contacting
DARM or consulting the DARM web site at:
http://www.state.nj.us/state/darm/links/recman.html
The
schedule of records management training classes is also available
from the Bureau.
Agencies may
write or call for further information about DARM's records services
at:
Bureau of Records
Management
Division of Archives and Records Management
P.O. Box 307
Trenton, NJ 08625-0307
E-mail: albin.wagner@sos.state.nj.us
Telephone: 609-530-3200
Fax: 609-530-6121.
[top
of page] [top of
section] |
| |
| Contact
Information: |
| Albin Wagner, Deputy Director for Records Management
|
2300
Stuyvesant Avenue
P.O. Box 307
Trenton, NJ 08625-0307 |
|
| |
|
|