Evidence systems are easiest to question before they become the only record of what happened.
Long retention, bounded cost, tenant isolation, and investigation depth do not always move together.
Who you’d be doing this for
“If we need to explain who saw what later, ‘probably’ isn't going to cut it.”
Nuru Assefa · Deputy General Counsel
Relies on defensible records when reviewing sensitive matter access and legal-work handling across a corporate legal department.
What is at stake
A rehearsal matched only 92.4% of the event chains that matter, and storage runs out in nine weeks. You have to decide what evidence you can guarantee before the cutover makes the design hard to unwind.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- retention capacity vs. evidence completeness
- forensic depth vs. data minimization
- cutover speed vs. irreversible schema choices
- central standardization vs. legal-work traceability
- machine reconciliation vs. human assurance
Why Harvey
At Harvey, this can matter because legal work often requires both careful access boundaries and credible evidence of how material was handled.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 17 more at Harvey, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.