Name Title, Enterprise Vault

Name Title, Enterprise Vault
Archiving for E-Discovery: Optimize Storage and Enforce Retention Archiving for E-Discovery: Optimize Storage and Enforce Retention IT departments in all industries are being asked to prepare for strict requirements around the preservation of and files as a result of the New Federal Rules on E-Discovery effective December 1st. Without the proper tools and systems, one discovery request can divert your limited human resources and IT dollars trying to respond in a short period of time. Learn how companies have implemented Symantec Enterprise Vault and Discovery Accelerator - archiving solutions to optimize management and proactively take control of e-discovery. You'll also learn the legal perspective on ; how it impacts IT; and why proactive retention policies are critical for any company today to reduce business risks and lower costs. Topics Discussed: IT and Legal Challenges of Messaging Today Impact of New Federal Rules on E-Discovery What is Archiving and Enterprise Messaging Management Enforcing Consistent retention and preservation Securing Historical Data (Backups and PSTs) Customer Case Studies Name Title, Enterprise Vault

A G E N D A Messaging Headaches & Challenges What is Email Archiving
1 Messaging Headaches & Challenges What is Archiving Proven in the Real World 2 3

Key Trends and Challenges
E-Discovery is Complex CIOs Report as #1 Driver of Storage Growth in 2006 Massive Volumes of Information to Manage Users generate ~17MB of per day ~30% annual growth of Discovery costs rise correlated to amount of data Time for production and search can be burdensome 40GB = 20 million pages of information 80% of companies use for closing orders, accepting contracts, etc Storage Cost Reduction Controlled Preservation & Disposition Search Efficiency & Faster Review 3

Fact: Messaging is Mission Critical
75% Of A Typical Company’s Intellectual Property Is Contained Within 75% Fortune 500 Litigation Involves Discovery Of Communication Messaging CRM Supply Chain ERP General Ledger 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Digital Communications
More Than Just … Digital Communications Messaging Collaboration Yahoo!, AOL, MSN, LCS, Lotus, … Exchange, Domino, SMTP, … Digital Voice Mail, Digital Fax, VoIP, … Files, Web, SharePoint, …

Our Strategy: Five Steps To Messaging Management
1 2 3 4 5 Keep Bad Things Out Keep Important Things In Keep Things As Long As Needed Find Things And Mine Them Keep Systems Up, Costs Down

This Is Not Just An IT Issue…
Coleman v. Morgan Stanley "The storage folks found an additional 1,600 backup tapes in a closet,“ explained a Morgan Stanley executive. $1.45 billion awarded Thomson v. US HUD “…precluded from introducing into evidence in their case any of the 80,000 records that were "discovered" during last minute.” Anti-Monopoly, Inc. v. Hasbro, “The law is clear that data in computerized form is discoverable even if paper ‘hard copies’ of the information have been produced.” Zubulake v. UBS Warburg “Documents stored on backup tapes can be likened to paper records locked inside a sophisticated safe to which no one has the key or combination.”

Messaging Challenges for Legal and Investigations
Collect Cost / delay to restore legacy info (backups) Lack of proactive defense strategy Risk that everything wasn’t captured Retain Risk of accidental/intentional deletion Risk of inconsistent policy Risk of non-compliance Traditional document retention policies relate to hard copy documents and are ineffective in managing retention of electronic documents Document retention policies usually rely on compliance by individual employees rather than systematic means of retaining records across the enterprise Companies that manage by routine deletion of documents risk inadvertent deletion of responsive documents Most companies have to search multiple locations to determine whether responsive documents exist (servers, home directories, individual hard drives, lap tops, back up tapes, PDAs, instant messaging, floppy disks, etc.) Documents maintained by individual users on individual lap tops and hard drives results in lack of information control In order to review this data, requires identification and collection of individual hard drives/lap tops Productivity loss while collecting individual lap tops Operationally difficult to collect laptops and hard drives Significant costs associated with traditional review of e-documents Law firms outsource data management because of complexity of searching data gathered from multiple sources Formatting and consolidation of data in order to create searchable data base is costly Creates additional layer of complexity, cost and delay in responding to discovery requests Traditional approach promotes delay in responding to discovery requests, which is particularly problematic when dealing with matters involving regulatory agencies Review Delays in finding responsive information Cost in “scrubbing” and reviewing Finding issues early (HR, IP, profanity, …)

New Federal Rules Codify E-Discovery Requirements
Codifies requirements E-Discovery process (Rule 26, 34) Defines “Electronically Stored Information” Requires early conference between parties in E-Discovery process Codifies standards around “legal holds” (Rule 37) Prevent loss of information involved in litigation Begins “when a party is under a duty to preserve information because of a pending or reasonably anticipated litigation.” Codifies requirements around production formats (Rule 34) Requesting party specifies form of production Default production format is “native” files

Common Misconception: Deletion Is Our Solution
Joe’s Mailbox Jack (external) Exchange Server X Backup System Offsite Tapes Sally’s Mailbox Sally’s gmail Acct. Sally’s PST File

Common Misconception: Backup = Archive
Exchange Server Export from Exchange mailboxes Restore from local backup tapes Restore from offsite backup tapes Image laptop to retrieve PSTs (+ take from server) Review and production by outside counsel(s) Hand off to third-party data restoration service providers De-duplication Culling Indexing / search Filtering Password cracking All $ per item Backup System Offsite Tapes Sally’s PST Files

Archiving Improves Regulatory Compliance & E-Discovery
Capture Capture and index all automatically Capture and migrate client-side archives Capture files, IM, SharePoint, … Retain Retain based upon flexible policies Classify/filter items to archive and retain Enforce legal hold orders automatically Traditional document retention policies relate to hard copy documents and are ineffective in managing retention of electronic documents Document retention policies usually rely on compliance by individual employees rather than systematic means of retaining records across the enterprise Companies that manage by routine deletion of documents risk inadvertent deletion of responsive documents Most companies have to search multiple locations to determine whether responsive documents exist (servers, home directories, individual hard drives, lap tops, back up tapes, PDAs, instant messaging, floppy disks, etc.) Documents maintained by individual users on individual lap tops and hard drives results in lack of information control In order to review this data, requires identification and collection of individual hard drives/lap tops Productivity loss while collecting individual lap tops Operationally difficult to collect laptops and hard drives Significant costs associated with traditional review of e-documents Law firms outsource data management because of complexity of searching data gathered from multiple sources Formatting and consolidation of data in order to create searchable data base is costly Creates additional layer of complexity, cost and delay in responding to discovery requests Traditional approach promotes delay in responding to discovery requests, which is particularly problematic when dealing with matters involving regulatory agencies Review User-friendly, scalable supervisory review Fast and flexible search for legal discovery Audit logs to prove it

Automated Retention & Deletion
How Archiving Works Server, File Server, Etc. Proactive Collection Transfer Search Analyze Retrieve Disclose Secure De-duplicate Compress Retain Expire Future Proof Index Categorize Links This is the main architecture slide. We start with a typical that an end user receives when they hit their quota. We then discuss the key value proposition of enterprise vault, the product which is a form of HSM (hierarchical storage management) moves information from primary storage (in this case and exchange server) to less expensive secondary storage. Typically the exchange system would be on direct attached disk or a san (which are costly to run) and we migrate that data to NAS or lower cost disk. As we are moving the data from point a to point b we take the following steps. We move the data in a secure fashion, which means that the permissions on the original data source will be identical to the permissions on the archive source (so no need ot reassign permissions). We also ensure that all data that is archived is backed up before we remove the original data from the storage device. The second step is to rationalize the data, where the data is compressed (if possible) as well as de duplicated or single instanced. Single instancing occurs on the document or message level so that we remove duplicate copies of s and files as they are ingested into the vault. This is a key point to make, often the competition will be claiming that we don’t have SIS or spreading other inaccuracies about the product. It is important to combat this. The third step is to retain the data, which in reality is to determine when a piece of content expires and can be deleted. When expiration occurs the data is moved off of the system and it is deleted from the index. This is important as the regulatory value of information is higher if the information could be deleted. Future proofing is the step where the attachments or documents are converted to HTML (we understand 300+ file types) so that if you need to ship the documents to another organization or if you change software you can see the original data. This is a key differentiator for us, if they are involved in litigation or have upgrade their infrastructure they can see the documents. We also index the content as well, creating a key word index down to the word or phrase level. This index allows for instant retrieval of content from the vault as well as giving the user a unified view into their . Categorization is the process of using content in the mail to determine retention category and expiration occurs in two ways, the first is with some simple XML filters that we provide. For more intensive categorization there a third party tools that do very detailed and exhaustive categorization based on complex content filtering. Archive Store Automated Retention & Deletion

E-Discovery: Where We Help
Billions Millions Hundreds of Thousands Thousands EV Capture Retain Categorize Manage IT DA Case Custodians Investigate Search Legal DA Preview Review Export Legal DA Produce Export Legal DA Legal Hold Protect in Place Legal DA Legal Hold Protect in Place Already Collected Legal

Enterprise Vault: Open, Intelligent Archiving Platform
End-User Search Compliance Accelerator Discovery Accelerator API’s Exchange PSTs Domino, SMTP SharePoint File Shares IM Archive Store Databases SAP Bloomberg Encrypted Mail Analytics / Disc. ECM / RM Classification

Our Solution: Flexible, Comprehensive Email Capture
Real-time capture Journal Archiving Typically for key custodians or regulated employees Scheduled capture Mailbox Archiving Typically all users Provides storage savings Archive Store Tape ingestion Historical Vault Typically for legacy data on backup tapes PC ingestion PST Migration Typically for on PCs Locate, migrate and disable

Our Solution: Flexible Classification And Retention
Don’t archive spam X Tag: ‘External’ Retain 3 years s to outside Tag: ‘Legal’ Retain 7 years s from legal Enterprise Vault Metadata-Driven Rules: Built-in custom filters (XML) E.g., date, time, subject, size, from, to, cc, bcc, … OR Content-Driven Rules: Via partner plug-in (Orchestria, MessageGate) E.g., message, attachment, content analysis, machine learning, …

Discovery Accelerator: Litigation Response
Search , files, attachments, IM, … From, to, subject, message, attachment, … De-duplicate redundant items Manage Define and divide up cases (by role) Mark (e.g., privileged, non-responsive) Apply holds for pending / open litigation Traditional document retention policies relate to hard copy documents and are ineffective in managing retention of electronic documents Document retention policies usually rely on compliance by individual employees rather than systematic means of retaining records across the enterprise Companies that manage by routine deletion of documents risk inadvertent deletion of responsive documents Most companies have to search multiple locations to determine whether responsive documents exist (servers, home directories, individual hard drives, lap tops, back up tapes, PDAs, instant messaging, floppy disks, etc.) Documents maintained by individual users on individual lap tops and hard drives results in lack of information control In order to review this data, requires identification and collection of individual hard drives/lap tops Productivity loss while collecting individual lap tops Operationally difficult to collect laptops and hard drives Significant costs associated with traditional review of e-documents Law firms outsource data management because of complexity of searching data gathered from multiple sources Formatting and consolidation of data in order to create searchable data base is costly Creates additional layer of complexity, cost and delay in responding to discovery requests Traditional approach promotes delay in responding to discovery requests, which is particularly problematic when dealing with matters involving regulatory agencies Produce Export to PST, MSG, HTML, CD ROM Bates numbering and de-duplication Fully audited

Discovery Accelerator: Roles-Based Administration
Click the Roles link on the far right column. Here is an example list of roles that you might find in a legal department. Each customer can define their own role names and permissions, to fit their company structure and workflow method. Not every company will have Associates, Coding, Paralegals, etc. that get involved with Discovery Accelerator. Again, these are just examples of a large internal legal department who involves many people in the process.

Discovery Accelerator: Flexible Search Criteria
Boolean Fields Reduce Searches by 75% Federated EV Sites Up to 4 Search Clauses Flag by Multiple Searches Scheduled Searches Enhanced Syntax Attachment Size/Type Type – IM, Fax, Bloomberg Preview Results Stop Searches

Discovery Accelerator: Intuitive Review and Marking
From the home page, click the little icon on the far left side of the screen, next to Acme Corp vs. Yourcorp. This takes you to the review screen for that case. Here you can see a list view (with preview pane) of the messages assigned to you. Since there could be several reviewers working in parallel, the list of messages here in one person’s queue might be a far smaller number compared to the overall total number of messages found in the search results for the case. Note the buttons for the possible “Marks” below the message – Unreviewed, Pending, Responsive, etc. It’s even possible to control which marking buttons a particular user can choose from – for example someone that isn’t an attorney might not be able to mark a message as “Client Attorney Privilege”.

Discovery Accelerator: Automated Legal Hold Enforcement
Multiple Holds Scheduled Searches Easy to Apply & Maintain Documents Hold How It Works Select DA case Place All items on hold No expiry until lifted Track multiple holds

Discovery Accelerator: Flexible Export And Production
Produce FSA Files Recreate Original Folders Produce Lotus, IM, Fax

Compliance Accelerator: Proactive Enforcement
Sample , IM, digital fax, … Random sampling (per-user, per-dept, etc.) Saved search (e.g., hotwords) Review Fast review of items Configurable user interface Hit highlighting Traditional document retention policies relate to hard copy documents and are ineffective in managing retention of electronic documents Document retention policies usually rely on compliance by individual employees rather than systematic means of retaining records across the enterprise Companies that manage by routine deletion of documents risk inadvertent deletion of responsive documents Most companies have to search multiple locations to determine whether responsive documents exist (servers, home directories, individual hard drives, lap tops, back up tapes, PDAs, instant messaging, floppy disks, etc.) Documents maintained by individual users on individual lap tops and hard drives results in lack of information control In order to review this data, requires identification and collection of individual hard drives/lap tops Productivity loss while collecting individual lap tops Operationally difficult to collect laptops and hard drives Significant costs associated with traditional review of e-documents Law firms outsource data management because of complexity of searching data gathered from multiple sources Formatting and consolidation of data in order to create searchable data base is costly Creates additional layer of complexity, cost and delay in responding to discovery requests Traditional approach promotes delay in responding to discovery requests, which is particularly problematic when dealing with matters involving regulatory agencies Audit Full log of all reviews Reporting

Compliance Accelerator: Automated Email Screening

Compliance Accelerator: Regular Review / Escalation

Compliance Accelerator: Proactive Enforcement
Sample , IM, digital fax, … Random sampling (per-user, per-dept, etc.) Saved search (e.g., hotwords) Review Fast review of items Configurable user interface Hit highlighting Traditional document retention policies relate to hard copy documents and are ineffective in managing retention of electronic documents Document retention policies usually rely on compliance by individual employees rather than systematic means of retaining records across the enterprise Companies that manage by routine deletion of documents risk inadvertent deletion of responsive documents Most companies have to search multiple locations to determine whether responsive documents exist (servers, home directories, individual hard drives, lap tops, back up tapes, PDAs, instant messaging, floppy disks, etc.) Documents maintained by individual users on individual lap tops and hard drives results in lack of information control In order to review this data, requires identification and collection of individual hard drives/lap tops Productivity loss while collecting individual lap tops Operationally difficult to collect laptops and hard drives Significant costs associated with traditional review of e-documents Law firms outsource data management because of complexity of searching data gathered from multiple sources Formatting and consolidation of data in order to create searchable data base is costly Creates additional layer of complexity, cost and delay in responding to discovery requests Traditional approach promotes delay in responding to discovery requests, which is particularly problematic when dealing with matters involving regulatory agencies Audit Full log of all reviews Reporting

Our Solution: Putting It All Together
1. Enterprise Vault archives and retains Enterprise Vault Outside Counsel 1 4. Counsel uses DA for further review / marking Exchange Server HR Manager 2. HR uses CA to monitor problem employees Legal Counsel 3. Legal uses DA for small matters or initial searches Compliance Accel. Discovery Accel. Outside Counsel 2 5. Counsels leverage same marks / deduping Outside Counsel 3 6. Alternatively give PST / CD ROM to counsel

Enterprise Vault Benefits
eDiscovery / Compliance Reduce cost of legal discovery requests, demonstrate compliance with regulations around electronic records retention and supervision General Counsel/ Compliance Officer Information Management Retain and expire electronic records based upon business policy, categorize & tag, index & search, integrate with other information mgmt. systems Records Manager Mailbox Management Optimize performance, reduce backup window, reduce platform migration time, eliminate need for quotas Admin Storage Optimization Consolidate file servers, eliminate PST files, compress & single instance storage, implement tiered storage Storage Admin

Webcor Builders Email Management
Industry: Construction Challenge Reduce IT costs associated with searching and retrieving for regulatory compliance and legal subpoenas Support archiving needs for both stationary and mobile users Solution management with archiving, discovery, and retrieval using Enterprise Vault Discovery Accelerator to perform searches based on keywords Benefits 100% ROI within 10 months 25% reduction in TCO—equating to $90K annually—for enterprise management 50% growth in mailboxes without any increase in administrative time and hardware storage 45% reduction in maintenance costs Organization Overview: Webcor Builders is the largest general contractor in the San Francisco Bay Area, with assignments as varied as high-density residential projects, luxury hotels and resorts, health care facilities, and biotech facilities. Challenge: Webcor —for both stationary and mobile users—as a business-critical mode of communication, Webcor is faced with massive amounts of communications over . Even though the firm is privately owned, many of its clients are publicly traded, so Webcor must follow Sarbanes-Oxley guidelines and be able to deliver requested information in the event a client is audited. In addition to significant costs and time requirements associated with manual IT searches for requested , Webcor faced potential risks by having IT staff read through the trails of ; IT staff could be subpoenaed to testify on behalf of or against a client. Solution: Webcor turned to Symantec for an management solution based on VERITAS Enterprise Vault. The construction company added Discovery Accelerator to the solution legal discovery, including the ability to generate detailed reports that show keywords used in each search. The legal staff now performs their own searches, using the list capability as an audit tool, which includes retention of all search queries. For installation and ongoing support, Webcor tapped VERITAS Technical Support. Benefits: Webcor is realizing tangible cost savings—an aggregate of $90,000 annually—via its use of Enterprise Vault. While maintaining the volume of Exchange storage at 70GB and current IT staffing levels, Webcor reduced the number of boxes by 50 percent. This translates into $10,000 on additional servers and storage and $35,000 in IT staff time. In just 10 months, Webcor recovered its investment in Enterprise Vault and reduced its management TCO by 25 percent. Maintenance windows are smaller as well, which have helped reduce maintenance costs by 45 percent. Savings extend to the time spent performing manual searches, which Webcor estimates at $35,000 annually in productivity savings.

Customers Finding Legal and IT Benefits
“Pertaining to an based public record request. Using our new Enterprise Vault system we searched and burnt to CD over s related to the request in under 5 hours total labor hours. Our old methodology if done with the same diligence would have taken an estimated 1000+ labor hours.” “It has saved me about 20 hours a week in administration. We run our tape backups every day, get the tape, and that’s it. I don’t have to baby sit the Enterprise Vault and I sleep well at night knowing that my Exchange Info store won’t crash.”

Questions? Additional Resources Symantec Enterprise Vault
Product Info, White Papers, Case Studies Thank You

Name Title, Enterprise Vault

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Name Title, Enterprise Vault"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Name Title, Enterprise Vault

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Name Title, Enterprise Vault"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback