Forensic Update

Reflections on information management within the legal and regulatory arena

Archive for the ‘Computer Forensics’ Category

Privacy + Security Forum…

Posted by Johnny Lee on August 31, 2017

Excited to represent Grant Thornton LLP and join Daniel Solove, Edward R. McNicholas, Jon Neiditz, Mauricio Paez, Liisa Thomas, Amanda Witt and a host of other luminaries and all-stars at the 2017 Privacy+Security Forum in Washington DC…

https://privacyandsecurityforum.com/

Advertisements

Posted in Computer Forensics, CyberSecurity, Data Breach, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Information Security, Privacy | Leave a Comment »

Test your systems to avoid embarrassment…

Posted by Johnny Lee on June 9, 2017

Before advancing undue burden arguments about being unable to find key documents, you may want to test your systems to avoid embarrassment…

Posted in Computer Forensics, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Litigation Hold, Records Retention | Leave a Comment »

What can we learn from the rash of revelations related to sizable hacks in 2012?

Posted by Johnny Lee on September 9, 2016

bitglass_wheres_your_data_thumbnail1Posit the research, which indicates that the average length of an un-detected compromise is in excess of 200 days. Couple that with research from security outfit Bitglass, and you’ve got some shocking correlations that put 2012 into a broader perspective.

That experiment employed data-tracking technology to track the traverse of sensitive data on the dark web post-compromise.
The upshot: In 12 days, these data were access 1,100 times within 22 countries, with two different cyber-crime syndicates sharing data with their peers…imagine how often compromised 2012 data changed hands over 4 years!

Bitglass Research

Posted in Computer Forensics, Data Governance, eDiscovery, Fraud, Information Security, Investigations, Privacy, Records Retention | Leave a Comment »

Enjoyed presenting to SCCE…

Posted by Johnny Lee on May 23, 2014

SCCE_website_banner_[1]

 

Another wonderful time presenting with the good folks at SCCE.  What I appreciate most about this group is their willingness to tailor an audience to the topic (and vice versa).  I’m impressed with their professionalism, and I hope that the attendees gained value from my commentary.

Posted in Computer Forensics, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Information Security, Investigations, Litigation Hold, Privacy, Records Retention | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Looking forward to my keynote @ #AIIM14

Posted by Johnny Lee on March 31, 2014

#AIIM14

Looking forward to some excellent networking and good feedback on my keynote presentation on #InfoGov and #eDiscovery at this year’s AIIM Conference in Orlando.

 

 

 

 

 

 

———-

Please see the disclaimer associated with content published on (and associated with) this site.

 

Posted in Computer Forensics, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Investigations, Litigation Hold, Records Retention | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Information Governance & eDiscovery: Flip Sides of the Same Coin…

Posted by Johnny Lee on January 7, 2014

78be66a8bffe4c4c85edf0b44a1f04e6[1]I’m excited to have been selected to present a keynote address at the upcoming AIIM Conference in April 2014.  As a furtherance to that invitation, I was asked a series of questions about my presentation.  As these were excellent questions, I thought I’d re-post them here, along with my answers to same.  I hope that you find these valuable.

Q: Briefly define information governance

A: I would define Information Governance as an enterprise-wide program that incorporates multiple organizational disciplines and that contemplates policies, procedures, processes, and controls designed and implemented to manage information at an enterprise level. Properly derived, Information Governance supports an organization’s immediate and long-term operational, regulatory, legal, and risk management requirements as they relate to the management of information.

Q: We keep reading about ediscovery and governance, who cares?

A: Organizations with a strategic view of these things recognize that Information Governance and eDiscovery are flip sides of the same coin. Simply put, the only way to diminish the significant risks attendant with eDiscovery is to go “upstream” of that triggering event, working to put in place the very policies, procedures, processes, and controls referenced above. The failure to “care” about this means that an organization will always venture into the eDiscovery game on a reactive (and thereby less effective) footing.

Q: Who SHOULD care? And Why?

A: Historically, the province of eDiscovery has been handled between an organization’s IT department and legal counsel. That said, as missteps in both eDiscovery and general data management practices carry increasingly severe penalties, creating proactive, long-term solutions is becoming the province of numerous groups across the enterprise — from the compliance and legal departments to the operational, financial, and executive branches as well (i.e., those with the best knowledge of the content being sought and analyzed).

Q: You mention an IT and legal disconnect in your description, how do you bridge that gap?

A: For the most part, the legal and IT camps have been separated by a common language. Many of the issues related to Infobesity (or the unnecessary storage of data that carries no operational value — and, worse, that carries significant risk) have arisen from the failure of these groups to communicate effectively about the long-term ramifications of maintaining the status quo. The only way to bridge this gap is for these two groups to meet in the middle, with each understanding the particular challenges the other is facing. This is not easy, but it is the only meaningful way that organizations can hope to reduce the digital haystacks before they are forced to sift through them in search of a few needles.

Q: What’s one key enabling tool for ediscovery and/or governance?

A: While we’re still many years away from any so-called magic bullet, there have been tremendous advances in technologies that can assist in these efforts. One of the most promising technological developments in recent years is the concept of predictive coding (or auto-classification) of large document sets. This technology holds a lot of promise for organizations looking for a cost-effective and defensible means to shrink their digital haystacks.

Q: One key best practice for ediscovery?

A: One of the most game-changing best practices in the eDiscovery space is good, old-fashioned project management. Proactive communication, scope-setting, and right-expertise-at-the-right time can make all the difference between a successful eDiscovery exercise and one that falters. This sounds simplistic, but many organizations still struggle to recognize this fundamental truth.

———-

Please see the disclaimer associated with content published on (and associated with) this site.

 

Posted in Computer Forensics, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Information Security, Investigations, Litigation Hold, Privacy, Records Retention | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

2013 in review

Posted by Johnny Lee on January 1, 2014

The WordPress.com stats team prepared a 2013 annual report for this blog.

Click here to see the complete report.

———-

Please see the disclaimer associated with content published on (and associated with) this site.

 

Posted in Announcement, Computer Forensics, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Fraud, Information Security, Investigations, Litigation Hold, Privacy, Records Retention, Social Networking | Leave a Comment »

Through the Google Glass Darkly…

Posted by Johnny Lee on December 10, 2013

BowtieLaw

It’s always a challenge to summarize the year for a subject matter as volatile and complicated as Electronic Discovery.  One could spend a few hours looking through the lens of a Google search engine, and days digesting the results, or you could simply peruse the superb summary penned by Joshua Gilliland, the blogger for Bow Tie Law, one of the two attorney bloggers for The Legal Geeks, and a Litigation World columnist.

It’s this last forum where we find the year-in-review that neatly summarizes the four most prominent “lessons learned” from the 2013 eDiscovery trenches.  I commend this to all in this space, as it captures the major themes and provides the most cogent excerpts from the key court opinions that shaped this very interesting year for our industry.

Gilliland readily focuses on the four lessons that “rise above all others: (1) the duty to preserve remains a hot button issue, (2) litigators still fight over the form of production, (3) proportionality is alive and well, and (4) taxation of costs is a sleeping giant we need to confront.”  Please do take the time to review this update…you won’t regret it.

———-

Please see the disclaimer associated with content published on (and associated with) this site.

Posted in Computer Forensics, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Fraud, Investigations, Litigation Hold, Privacy, Records Retention | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Panel Discussion on Data Preservation @ 2013 IT-LEX Conference…

Posted by Johnny Lee on October 2, 2013

IT-LEX Logo“Technology is outpacing the law. IT-Lex is a technology law 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization dedicated to narrowing this gap with entertaining educational experiences.  We are pleased to offer our first annual conference, Innovate.”  The Innovate Conference is an active learning experience with a focus on user participation, and ForensicUpdate editor Johnny Lee will participate in a panel discussion on Friday, October 18th on the topic of data preservation and evidence collection.  Please click here for more details.

———-

Please see the disclaimer associated with content published on (and associated with) this site.

Posted in Computer Forensics, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Investigations, Litigation Hold, Privacy, Records Retention | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Regulator Fines Financial Services Company $9 Million for Email Spoliation…

Posted by Johnny Lee on May 28, 2013

FINRAThe Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) announced last week that it had levied fines against LPL Financial LLC (“LPL”) to the tune of $7.5 million for thirty five “separate, significant email system failures, which prevented LPL from accessing hundreds of millions of emails and reviewing tens of millions of other emails.”  FINRA also determined that LPL had made “material misstatements” during FINRA’s inquiry into the email failures, resulting in the establishment of a $1.5 million fund “to compensate brokerage customer claimants potentially affected by its failure to produce email.”

While this is technically not a spoliation sanction, which can only be issued by a court, it is nonetheless what those in the eDiscovery arena recognize as punishment for the failure to preserve relevant evidence.  FINRA’s Chief of Enforcement said that LPL simply failed to “expand its compliance and technology infrastructure” as LPL grew.  This resulted in LPL failing “in its responsibility to provide complete responses to regulatory and other requests for emails.”

To be clear, FINRA felt that these failures were both systemic and severe.  To illustrate just a few of the thirty five enumerated failures, see just a few examples below.

  • LPL failed to supervise 28 million “doing business as” (DBA) emails sent/received by thousands of representatives who were operating as independent contractors over a four-year period.
  • LPL failed to maintain access to hundreds of millions of emails during a transition to a less expensive email archive (with 80 million of those emails becoming corrupted in the process).
  • For seven years, LPL failed to preserve and review 3.5 million Bloomberg messages, as required by regulation.
  • LPL failed to preserve emails sent to customers via third-party email-based advertising platforms.

The Chief of Enforcement sums this up in a rather pithy statement: “This case sends a strong message to firms to make sure your business does not outgrow your compliance systems.”  Indeed…message received.

For more on FINRA’s consent announcement, please click here. To read the actual consent agreement, please click here.

Please see the disclaimer associated with content published on (and associated with) this site.

Posted in Computer Forensics, Data Governance, ECM, eDiscovery, Investigations, Litigation Hold, Records Retention, Social Networking | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: