Fri. Dec 2nd, 2022
    en flag
    nl flag
    et flag
    fi flag
    fr flag
    de flag
    he flag
    ja flag
    lv flag
    pl flag
    pt flag
    ru flag
    es flag

    Content Assessment: Drunks, DNA and Data Transfer Risk in eDiscovery

    Information - 90%
    Insight - 100%
    Relevance - 95%
    Objectivity - 95%
    Authority - 90%

    94%

    Excellent

    A short percentage-based assessment of the qualitative benefit of the post highlighting data transfer risk in eDiscovery.

    Editor’s Note: From time to time, ComplexDiscovery highlights publicly available or privately purchasable announcements, content updates, and research from cyber, data, and legal discovery providers, research organizations, and ComplexDiscovery community members. While ComplexDiscovery regularly highlights this information, it does not assume any responsibility for content assertions.

    To submit recommendations for consideration and inclusion in ComplexDiscovery’s cyber, data, and legal discovery-centric service, product, or research announcements, contact us today.


    Originally published in 2013, the following article contains concepts regarding data transfer risk that continue to be important to cyber, data, and legal discovery professionals today.

    Drunks, DNA, and Data Transfer Risk in eDiscovery

    Article

    “In law as in other realms, the understanding of randomness can reveal hidden layers of truth, but only to those who possess the tools to uncover them.”  Leonard Mlodinow [1]

    Recently I had an opportunity to revisit a fascinating book, The Drunkard’s Walk – How Randomness Rules Our Lives, by Leonard Mlodinow. Mr. Mlodinow received his doctorate in physics from the University of California, Berkeley, was an Alexander von Humboldt fellow at the Max Planck Institute, and at the time of the book’s publication in 2009, was teaching about randomness to future scientists at Caltech.

    In his book, Mr. Mlodinow shared an intriguing overview of the presentation of DNA evidence in criminal trials. In his discussion, Mr. Mlodinow noted that DNA experts today [2008] regularly testified that the odds of a random person’s DNA matching a crime sample were less than one in one million or one in one billion.[2] With those odds, Mr. Mlodinow noted, it is reasonable to think such a matching – if it occurs – may be beyond a reasonable doubt.

    However, the interesting part of his overview of DNA centers around a discussion on probability and specifically on what is not usually shared with the jury as part of such evidence.

    The probability being omitted as part of DNA evidence presentations is the probability of human-based error arising from labs making errors in both the collecting and handling of DNA samples and in the accidental mixing and swapping of samples. These human-based DNA sample transfer errors – which many experts put at 1% – significantly affect the probability of matching DNA – and thus can interject potential doubt in the minds of jurors where previously there may have been no reason for doubt based on the “half presentation” of the probability of a DNA match.[3]

    After reading this DNA evidence overview, I began to wonder about the potential probability of human-based error in the transfer of data between the technologies and platforms available to conduct the complex tasks involved in electronic discovery.

    In considering one potential risk factor and its probabilistic impact of interjecting error into the discovery process, I hope the following short overview provides legal professionals – both consumers and vendors alike – a new appreciation and consideration of the importance of integrated technologies and platforms in the conduct of electronic discovery.

    Considering Data Transfer Risk

    Electronic Discovery is a process that contains many complex tasks – tasks that in order to be accomplished accurately are reliant on the integrity of the data that they are acting on.

    Just as there are many tasks in electronic discovery, many times in there are multiple technologies and platforms involved in the complete electronic discovery process. When there are multiple technologies and platforms involved, data must be transferred from disparate technologies and platforms to other disparate technologies and platforms. This data transfer can be considered a risk factor that impacts the overall electronic discovery process.

    Data transfer risk may be minimized by automation and standards or increased by the requirement of human intervention. As automation and standards are still slowly maturing in the realm of electronic discovery technology, it seems important that legal professionals understand and properly consider the impact of potential data transfer risk as they plan, source, and conduct their electronic discovery activities.

    To Err is Human, to Really Foul Things Up Requires a Computer [4]

    Since the error rate of data transfer between disparate electronic discovery platforms due to human-based error is difficult to measure, it appears realistic that courts would be extremely cautious in allowing human-based error arguments on this topic – unless such an error is one that is totally visible and documentable. However, many times human-based error may not be so readily visible or documentable. Because of this fact, seeking an understanding of the probability of risk in this area seems a reasonable exercise any time disparate technologies and platforms are involved in the electronic discovery process.

    Hypothesizing to Allow for Risk Comparison

    Human-based error in transferring data between disparate electronic discovery platforms is difficult to estimate, but it seems reasonable to assert that it does occur. With that assertion in mind and to highlight the specific risk factor of non-automated and integrated data transfer (otherwise referred to as human-based data transfer), a reasonable hypothesis [5] of this type of data transfer error might be to consider that at least one in every hundred – or 1% – of such data transfers interject human-based error into the electronic discovery process. The exact percentage could be adjusted up or down depending on one’s view of what constitutes a reasonable estimate for human-based error in data transfer, but as one hopefully will see in this exercise, human-based data transfer errors potentially can be a major determinant and multiplier to the overall risk inherent in the execution of core electronic discovery tasks such as collection, analytics [6], processing, and review.

    The Rule for Compounding Probabilities

    If two possible events, A and B, are independent, then the probability that both A and B will occur is equal to the product of their individual probabilities.[7]

    To evaluate the probability of human-based error in data transfer, we first need to determine where these data transfer points might occur in the electronic discovery process. In taking a high-level look at the electronic discovery process, and to simplify this risk assessment exercise, let us consider the following scenarios.


    Scenario 1:  Traditional Electronic Discovery Approach (Marketing Level Integration)

    While many times represented as “integrated” in marketing materials, the Traditional Electronic Discovery Approach consists of the use of different technologies and platforms for the electronic discovery tasks of collection, analytics, processing, and review. In the Traditional Electronic Discovery Approach, data is collected and then transferred – with human intervention – at least three times prior to the preparation of data for production. (Figure 1)

    Each of the transfer points in this approach may increase the potential for human-based error by a factor of 1%.  When viewed in light of the Rule for Compounding Probabilities, the apparent human-based risk factor for this type of approach would be 3% or three in one hundred chances for human-based error.

    Potential Human-Based Data Transfer Risk Error
    1/100 + 1/100 + 1/100 = 3/100 = 3%

     

    Figure 1 – Traditional Electronic Discovery Approach – Marketing Level Integration


    Scenario 2:  Quasi Advanced Electronic Discovery Approach (Platform Level Integration)

    While many time represented as “integrated” in marketing materials also, the Quasi Advanced Electronic Discovery Approach consists of the use of different technologies and platforms for electronic discovery tasks, however this approach may combine two of the high-level electronic discovery tasks into one technology or platform (example – the combining of analytics and processing in a single application). In the Quasi Advanced Electronic Discovery Approach, data is collected and then transferred – with human intervention – at least two times prior to the preparation of data for production. (Figure 2) Within this approach there, in fact, might be some integration between two electronic discovery technologies and platforms, however, there are still multiple points of human intervention required for data transfer.

    As in scenario 1, each of these transfer points may increase the potential for human-based error by a factor of 1%. When viewed in light of the Rule for Compounding Probabilities, the apparent human-based risk factor for this type of approach would be 2% or two in one hundred chances of human-based error.

    Potential Human-Based Data Transfer Risk Error
    1/100 + 1/100 = 2/100 = 2%

    Figure 2 – Quasi Advanced Electronic Discovery Approach – Platform Level Integration


    Scenario 3:  Advanced Electronic Discovery Approach (Application Level Integration)

    A truly integrated approach – meaning “integrated” at the application level  – the Advanced Electronic Discovery Approach consists of the use of a single technology or platform to conduct the core electronic discovery tasks of analytics, processing, and review.  The Advanced Electronic Discovery Approach requires no human intervention after the initial transfer of collected data.

    As in previous scenarios, each transfer point may still increase the potential for human-based error by a factor of 1%. However, as there is only one apparent human intervention required prior to preparation of data for production, the human-based risk factor for this type of approach would be 1% or one in one hundred chances of human-based error.  (Figure 3)

    Potential Human-Based Data Transfer Risk Error
    1/100 = 1%

    Figure 3 – Advanced Electronic Discovery Approach – Application Level Integration


    The Risk Factor of Non-Integration

    Comparing the potential for human-based data transfer risk – using the hypothesis that at least 1% of such data transfers interject human-based error into the electronic discovery process – it seems reasonable to assert that less human intervention during data transfer between technologies and platforms results in less potential overall risk for electronic discovery error.

    Human-Based Data Transport Error Risk Factor Comparison

    • Level 3 Risk (3%) – Traditional Electronic Discovery – Marketing Level Integration
    • Level 2 Risk (2%) – Quasi Advanced Electronic Discovery  – Platform Level Integration
    • Level 1 Risk (1%) – Advanced Electronic Discovery – Application Level Integration

    Considering Risk and Ethics

    In all professional functions, a lawyer should be competent, prompt and diligent. [8]

    A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary. [9]

    Understanding the potential risk factors associated with just this one aspect of electronic discovery, might it seem reasonable that one would seek to reduce human-based data transfer risk as much as possible – as it is a risk that can truly be reduced solely on the approach to electronic discovery one takes? Might there also, in fact, be potentially an ethical responsibility for electronic discovery professionals to reduce this type of known risk factor to the lowest level possible congruent with the resources available (time and money) for a specific audit, investigation, or litigation matter?  These are questions that certainly warrant proper attention from legal professionals as they consider the best approach for their specific electronic discovery requirement.

    Is there one single right approach? I might submit that the right approach is the one that properly balances resources available and risk and that also views any choice through the lens of what could be considered reasonable based on those resources and risks. While there may be no absolute only acceptable choice, there may be in fact an absolute best choice for an approach given unconstrained time and resources.

    Beyond Data Transport Error

    Yes, there are additional human-based risks in the electronic discovery process. And yes, each of these specific tasks (collection, analytics, processing, and review) may have multiple human-based risk factors – risk factors that can increase exponentially if data has to move back and forth between disparate technologies and platforms multiple times. But one irreducible fact appears to be that if one agrees that there is risk associated with human-based data transfer and that the percentage of this risk is determinant by the number of times such human intervention in data transfer occurs, then it is imperative for legal professionals to understand the potential implications of such risk at the beginning of the electronic discovery process and reduce it to as low a level as possible.  To do so is congruent with competent and reasonable preparation of data and this competence and reasonableness is critical to ensuring that electronically stored information (ESI) is of the highest quality.

    As a general rule, the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information. Benjamin Disraeli [10)

    References

    1 Mlodinow, Leonard. The Drunkard’s Walk – How Randomness Rules Our Lives. 1st ed., Pantheon Books, 2009, p. 40.

    2 Ibid, p-36.

    3 Keith, Kresenda. The Prejudicial Nation Of DNA Evidence: A Game Of Probability, Not An Apodictic Indicator Or Identity. 2019, p. 7, https://www.academia.edu/2899881/The_Prejudicial_Nature_of_DNA_Evidence_A_Game_of_Probability_Not_an_Apodictic_Indicator_of_Identity. Accessed 22 Jul 2021.

    4 “Farmers’ Almanac Quotes – The Quotations Page”. Quotationspage.Com, 2019, http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Farmers%27_Almanac/.

    5 “Definition Of HYPOTHESIS”. Merriam-Webster.Com, 2021, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypothesis.

    6 Wittenberg, Daniel. “Data Analytics: A New Arrow In Your Legal Quiver”. Americanbar.Org, 2018, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/publications/litigation-news/business-litigation/data-analytics-new-arrow-your-legal-quiver/. Accessed 22 Jul 2021.

    7 Mlodinow, Leonard. The Drunkard’S Walk – How Randomness Rules Our Lives. 1st ed., Pantheon Books, 2009, p. 33.

    8 “Model Rules Of Professional Conduct: Preamble & Scope”. Americanbar.Org, 2021, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_preamble_scope/. Accessed 22 Jul 2021.

    9 “Rule 1.1: Competence”. Americanbar.Org, 2021, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_1_competence/. Accessed 22 Jul 2021.

    10 “The Quotations Page: Quote From Benjamin Disraeli”. The Quotations Page, 2019, http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/29221.html.

    Additional Reading

    Source: ComplexDiscovery

     

    Have a Request?

    If you have information or offering requests that you would like to ask us about, please let us know and we will make our response to you a priority.

    ComplexDiscovery is an online publication that highlights cyber, data, and legal discovery insight and intelligence ranging from original research to aggregated news for use by cybersecurity, information governance, and eDiscovery professionals. The highly targeted publication seeks to increase the collective understanding of readers regarding cyber, data, and legal discovery information and issues and to provide an objective resource for considering trends, technologies, and services related to electronically stored information.

    ComplexDiscovery OÜ is a technology marketing firm providing strategic planning and tactical execution expertise in support of cyber, data, and legal discovery organizations. Focused primarily on supporting the ComplexDiscovery publication, the company is registered as a private limited company in the European Union country of Estonia, one of the most digitally advanced countries in the world. The company operates virtually worldwide to deliver marketing consulting and services.

    Beyond the Perimeter? The DoD Zero Trust Strategy and Roadmap

    Current and future cyber threats and attacks drive the need for...

    Balancing Spend and Standards? Cybersecurity Investments in the European Union

    According to EU Agency for Cybersecurity Executive Director Juhan Lepassaar, “The...

    Stricter Supervisory and Enforcement Measures? European Parliament Adopts New Cybersecurity Law

    According to European Member of Parliament (MEP) Bart Groothuis, “Ransomware and...

    Geopolitical Shakedowns? The Annual ENISA Threat Landscape Report – 10th Edition

    According to EU Agency for Cybersecurity Executive Director Juhan Lepassaar, “Today's...

    A Technology-Driven Solution? Integreon Announces New Chief Executive Officer

    Subroto’s people-first leadership style combined with his passion for leveraging technology...

    A Magnet for Revenue? Magnet Forensics Announces 2022 Third Quarter Results

    According to Adam Belsher, Magnet Forensics' CEO, "Our solutions address the...

    Progress and Opportunity? Cellebrite Announces Third Quarter 2022 Results

    “We are pleased to report a solid third quarter, delivering strong...

    Fueling Continued Growth? Renovus Capital Acquires Advisory Business from HBR Consulting

    "The legal industry remains in the early stages of digital and...

    An eDiscovery Market Size Mashup: 2022-2027 Worldwide Software and Services Overview

    From retraction to resurgence and acceleration, the worldwide market for eDiscovery...

    On the Move? 2022 eDiscovery Market Kinetics: Five Areas of Interest

    Recently ComplexDiscovery was provided an opportunity to share with the eDiscovery...

    Trusting the Process? 2021 eDiscovery Processing Task, Spend, and Cost Data Points

    Based on the complexity of cybersecurity, information governance, and legal discovery,...

    The Year in Review? 2021 eDiscovery Review Task, Spend, and Cost Data Points

    Based on the complexity of cybersecurity, information governance, and legal discovery,...

    Five Great Reads on Cyber, Data, and Legal Discovery for November 2022

    From cyber shakedowns and threats to the total cost of eDiscovery...

    Five Great Reads on Cyber, Data, and Legal Discovery for October 2022

    From cyber claims and data privacy to corporate litigation and the...

    Five Great Reads on Cyber, Data, and Legal Discovery for September 2022

    From privacy legislation and special masters to acquisitions and investigations, the...

    Five Great Reads on Cyber, Data, and Legal Discovery for August 2022

    From AI and Big Data challenges to intriguing financial and investment...

    Onsite or Remote? Document Reviewer Preferences Survey (Winter 2023)

    Today CompexDiscovery expands that survey portfolio by introducing a new business...

    In The House? The Fall 2022 eDiscovery Total Cost of Ownership Survey – Final Results

    Today CompexDiscovery shares the results of a new business survey focused...

    Cold Front Concerns? Eighteen Observations on eDiscovery Business Confidence in the Fall of 2022

    In the fall of 2022, 49.0% of survey respondents felt that...

    Stereotyping Data? Issues Impacting eDiscovery Business Performance: A Fall 2022 Overview

    In the fall of 2022, 28.0% of respondents viewed increasing types...

    The Arrival of General Winter? Ukraine Conflict Assessments in Maps (November 21-27, 2022)

    According to a recent update from the Institute for the Study...

    Digging Out and Digging In? Ukraine Conflict Assessments in Maps (November 14-20, 2022)

    According to a recent update from the Institute for the Study...

    A Liberating Momentum? Ukraine Conflict Assessments in Maps (November 7-13, 2022)

    According to a recent update from the Institute for the Study...

    Rhetoric or Reality? Ukraine Conflict Assessments in Maps (November 1-6, 2022)

    According to a recent update from the Institute for the Study...