The closer any new solution comes to being non-disruptively introduced into existing organizational backup infrastructures, the greater the odds that the solution will succeed and be adopted more broadly. By Dell including FIPS 140-2 compliant 256-bit AES encryption and VTL features as part of its 3.2 OS release for its existing and new DR series of backup appliances at no charge, organizations have new options to introduce the DR Series appliances without disrupting their existing backup processes.
DCIG expects to unveil its DCIG 2012 Early Case Assessment (ECA) Buyer’s Guide in Q2CY12. As prior Buyer’s Guides have done, it puts at the fingertips of organizations a Buyer’s Guide that provides them with a comprehensive list of ECA software that can assist them in this all-important buying decision while removing much of the mystery around how ECA are configured and which ones are suitable for which purposes.
Companies who execute Information Governance plans are looking for eDiscovery products supporting Early Case Assessment (ECA). ECA is a combination of search, workflow management, information processing, and multilingual user interfaces. ECA requires a cohesive set of technology, business and data science stakeholders to select products.
ECA is powerful business process, but identifying ECA products is a beleaguering task. ECA mashes together eDiscovery and technology requirements. The “mashing of requirements” creates a broad matrix of products and functionality. Without question, eDiscovery has significantly evolved within the last few years.
Before storing documents electronically gained acceptance in the enterprise, retrieving documents meant parsing file cabinets and retrieving paper forms. And when it came time to share that information with the public without revealing classified information, it usually meant copying the original document and then pulling out a black marker that was used to cross out sensitive information on the copy, followed by more copying until the underlying text could no longer be seen. So while in the last decade most companies have scrapped file cabinets in favor of document images, more companies keep the black marker handy than they would probably like to admit.
This is delivered by marrying efficient resources, high-speed review applications and proactive project and process management. We also use higher level strategies, such as our Dynamic Data Analysis™ (a blending of statistical, conceptual and legal analysis), to both identify relevant documents as quickly and cost-effectively as possible, and to simultaneously reduce the total amount of data required to be reviewed.
For IT professionals who see no reason to treat evidence any differently than any other data, I practice a simple chain of custody exercise. I have them simply “move” files from on physical disk to another. Many people interpret data movement like they would move a chair; however, when you move Electronically Stored Information (ESI) from one physical device to another, it moves a representation of the original item. Critical things like data ownership, group security, created date and many other pieces of metadata (data about data) are changed when the data is “moved.” This minor issue can become a major legal risk when authenticating chain of custody in court.
When these two groups meet, the language and focus is decidedly different. Fios consultants use skills of communication and collaboration to bridge this gap. This has been the focus of Fios since our inception nearly a decade ago. We pioneered the concept of litigation readiness in 2003, well before the amendments to the Federal Rules were in place, and have built an entire portfolio of discovery planning services to help both IT and legal prepare for discovery challenges. For example, in the data mapping process, we help them focus on eDiscovery as a business process that incorporates:
As CEO I’m happy to say my sales, engineering and operations teams are executing against our shared vision. AXS-One latest functionality includes a very sought after Case Manager module. It is providing our customers with a true self-service discovery and review capability. If I may indulge a bit on my team’s hard work; the Case Manager enables our customers to:
* Conduct initial searches themselves
* Review and modify the results of the searches
* Add dispositions to the searched results
* Package the search for additional review by outside counsel/other 3rd party
Joshua Konkle: One of the most frequently asked questions by CIO’s and others worried about the cost of data management is “how long do I have to keep my data, really?” What do you say when you get asked that question? — Bill Lyons: We can help is the first thing I say. We have been providing record compliance solutions for many years. In all cases, we discuss the need to plan for secure destruction and work with customers on implementing appropriate technology to manage the retention, disposition, preservation and destruction of data.
Prior to 2007 the drivers for archiving were two fold 1) operational efficiencies and 2) SEC 17a4. The latter required financial services companies to maintain a record of every email sent and received from the company. These two issues drove the systems to retain and manage data, largely email initial. The early success of products from KVS, Inc, now Symantec, are clear examples of people buying for specific applications.
I would agree with that 70% of the time reviews require more data from the source, in fact, it is probably higher. The reason the source data needs to be recalled during review is based on a simple fact – “the review phase is the FIRST time a qualified reviewer has looked at the data qualitatively, i.e. custodians, concepts, context etc.” Waiting until the data is in a review system to evaluate it is causing companies thousands if not millions annually. Those dollars would be much better spent as pennies, which is the cost of ECA tools in terms of review budgets. The goal’s are simple 1) reduce data sets going into review 2) improve data review during collection.
Synopsis Part 2: Educating Legal and IT on eDiscovery and policy challengesSynopsis Part 1: Intelligent collection for eDiscovery processing at $4/gigabyte Electronic data discovery Interview – Steve d’Alencon is the VP of Product Marketing at Kazeon, Inc. (Part 1 of 2) (Part 2 of 2) Steve is responsible for leading go-to-market programs for Kazeon, including solution definition, demand generation, public and analyst relations and marketing communications. He is a product management and marketing executive with more than 20 years of experience at top enterprise software and high technology companies, including running his own marketing consultancy in Silicon Valley. Prior to Kazeon, Steve was vice president of product management and marketing at GoRemote Internet Communications, a NASDAQ public company that was acquired by iPass, and vice president of marketing for the Oracle Application Server Division where he launched the Oracle Application Server and attained a top 3 market position while helping to double division revenue. Mr. d’Alencon studied Electrical Engineering and…
Electronic Data Discovery Interview – John Ashley, EVP of Electronic Evidence in First Advantage’s Investigative and Litigation Support Services segment (Part 1 of 2)
Mr. Ashley is a former British Detective who has been investigating computer crime since 1989. Specific case work includes illegal pornography, business accounting fraud, terrorism and murder. More recently John has worked closely with many technologies, including all of the prominent email platforms.
eDiscovery Spotlight: Interview with Johnnie M. Jackson, Jr, former VP and General Counsel for Olin Corporation and currently Lead Director of the Advisory Board for ESI Strategies, New York, NY (Part 2 of 3)