> Show me a search of a full text index that can positively give you > 100% of the hits on a given topic and I'll let you have this one :)
The regulators will typically give you a list of search terms to be used in a full-text search. Their specifications are what guide the accuracy of the search. Of course, deliberate and deep obfuscation of all nouns and verbs will elude the search. But you _must_ search all communications, including message bodies and attachments. This is the law. You can debate the constitutionality of the law or what-have-you, but the realities of an investigation are that all communications must be searched, and in any volume and with the deadlines one is always under, that mandates full-text indexing. > Manual review is necessary to verify, and chances are you would need > to manually review every E-mail going to and from specific employees > across a range of dates. Wrong. The initial request is a list of search terms run through a compliant archiving system. The search results are vetted by counsel and submitted to the regulator. "Pruned" results may accompany the full results of the search, but the computer-generated results are the first line of compliance. At the regulator's discretion, manual review of all emails to detect anomalies, obfuscation, et al. might then be the next step. > A good law firm would do the review themselves before passing on the > material to the regulators instead of relying on some tech to > identify the subject matter by way of keyword. The keyword search is part of the regulatory framework for electronic communications. Part of being compliant is ensuring that a search must be able to conducted by independent auditors _or the regulators themselves_ at any time. In a proper setup, a tech does not need to be involved in the actual search. > I was involved in a case where I had to produce over 700 E-mails > between myself and employees of another company. That wasn't fun. It > was easy to identify the messages, but very time consuming to do the > review. Yes, it is time-consuming. On that we agree. And shirking statutory obligations that in fact shorten the time to settlement/dismissal, and in turn bringing additional scrutiny, is not a wise tactic. --Sandy ------------------------------------ Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/release/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/download/release/ http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/download/release/ --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
