Jason Atchley: Sales Team, We’re All Headed in the Same Direction, Right?

Jason Atchley: Sales Team, We’re All Headed in the Same Direction, Right?

Sales Team, We’re All Headed in the Same Direction, Right?
 
 
 
 
 
 
July 3, 2016
|
Jason Atchley
Proper alignment within the sales and marketing team is often overlooked but is absolutely critical to mission success.  In any company, it’s a given that the marketing team knows exactly how and what the sales team is selling and it’s readily assumed that the sales team knows precisely what marketing is trying to convey with its messaging. And everyone knows what the SDRs (Sales Development Representatives or inside sales team) are doing, right?
In my experience, the above is often not true. The teams are very rarely aligned and have fundamental misunderstandings of how the other team goes about its business. Marketing creates great messaging without truly understanding how the sales team sell and to whom they are selling. The sales team sells without understanding the finer points of the new messaging instead choosing to go with what has worked in the past. The SDRs, lost somewhere between marketing and sales, do not understand either but continue on with their drone like “dialing for dollars” causing conflict and mayhem wherever they go. The importance of getting everyone on the same page seems so reasonable and easy to understand but is rarely emphasized within an organization.
Before messaging is created, the sales team must communicate to marketing how they sell and to whom they sell. Once formed, marketing must be able to convey its message to the sales team effectively. If the sales team doesn’t understand the message, neither will the customers. The sales team must continue to provide feedback to marketing on the effectiveness of the messaging.  Essentially, what works and what doesn’t. Together they must revise and adjust the message and sales approach moving forward. And while getting marketing and sales headed in the same direction is important, it is equally so for the sales team itself. Perhaps the best system I have seen for doing this is the sales pod. A pod can consist of 1 member from each of the SDR, SMB and Enterprise Sales teams. The pod can be focused on the same territory or vertical with the same effectiveness. The pod approach ensures every member of the team conveys a consistent message and allows them to work the territory or vertical in a concerted and unified approach. It removes conflicts and allows the group to work through issues together. Solution architects and marketing reps should also sit in with each pod to assist and adjust. While not often a point of emphasis within an organization, the structure and alignment of sales and marketing teams can effectively be as important to a company’s overall success as the message they convey or the product they sell.
Jason Atchley
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Jason is an accomplished executive with more than 17 years of proven experience in executive leadership, technical sales, operations and sales support. He has a diverse blend of sales, operations, management, and leadership skills focused on helping technology companies expand operations, revenue, profits and market share at the regional and national level. Possessing rare persuasive, communication and inspirational skills, Jason has consistently driven double-digit growth while developing top teams and talent. Jason has a deep passion for technical sales and business development and is frequently asked to speak at industry conferences, has authored numerous articles on SAAS technology services and has been featured as a key participant in data management conference series.

Jason Atchley: Sales Approach: One Size Does Not Fit All

Jason Atchley: Sales Approach: One Size Does Not Fit All

Sales Approach: One Size Does Not Fit All
May 12, 2016  |  Jason Atchley
 Jason Atchley
We have all seen them. Sales people trudging around the airport with the latest sales training book of the month being forced on them by their sales manager. I know I have not only seen them but I have been them. I have read more than a dozen such books and have attended half a dozen training seminars. Which one is the best in my learned experience? Is it the consultative approach? Or is it the challenger? Maybe the instant buddy one? The hard seller? Soft sell? Customer personality? Oh wait, I’ve got it: the latest is solution selling, right? Do I need to close this door first or hold that one open? What if it closes or opens automatically? Do I bring power into the conversation now or later? What is a champion versus an influencer and why is that important? And when do I tell the customer they are doing everything wrong again? To say it all can get confusing and be counter-productive is n understatement.
To put it simply, I don’t believe there is a “one size fits all” sales approach. You must find what works for you and employ those techniques to the best of your ability. If a salesperson is not comfortable with challenging a potential new client then forcing the challenger technique on them will not work. If you are an easy-going, friendly person, you will probably not get the desired results by forcing the hard sell approach. On the other hand, if you can align your personality and approach, you will most likely see the results play out before you. I have seen all different personality types succeed in sales. The one common characteristic for every successful sales person I have known is they have figured out what works best for their personality, their market, their offering and their client base. They don’t try to be something or someone they are not. They don’t force being the nice guy or networker if that is not who they are. The most successful salespeople are those who are able to be themselves, to be genuine, and to speak from their core within the context of the sales process. If you can find yourself in there and employ your strengths and abilities, you will be the best salesperson you can be.
Read the books, go through the training, learn everything you can about every sales approach out there, and then find what works best for you. Once you find your approach, you will be able to hone and perfect your technique. While one size does not fit all when it comes to sales approaches, there is certainly a sales approach out there for you. Find it, learn it, perfect it.
Jason Atchley
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Jason is an accomplished executive with more than 17 years of proven experience in executive leadership, technical sales, operations and sales support. He has a diverse blend of sales, operations, management, and leadership skills focused on helping technology companies expand operations, revenue, profits and market share at the regional and national level. Possessing rare persuasive, communication and inspirational skills, Jason has consistently driven double-digit growth while developing top teams and talent. Jason has a deep passion for technical sales and business development and is frequently asked to speak at industry conferences, has authored numerous articles on SAAS technology services and has been featured as a key participant in data management conference series.

Identifying data before collections has big gains for law firms, clients

LDM Global:

Identifying data before collections has big gains for law firms, clients

Without proper knowledge of how to identify Electronically Stored Information (ESI) at the outset of a case, lawyers step into risky territory. Improper collection methods can potentially cause sanctions and loss of a case. Today the courts have no tolerance for eDiscovery impropriety, which is leading to unfavorable rulings unrelated to the actual merit of the case.
The 2014 case “Small v. University Medical Center of Southern Nevada, Dist. Court, D. Nevada” highlights these risks: UMC performed a collection using an IT employee. Although custodians’ emails were collected, some personal directory files were missing. The judge ruled that “UMC failed to establish a documented process collection or collect in a uniform, defensible, and documented manner.”
UMC made a number of electronic discovery errors during the court case, which caused the case to drag on. Ultimately, the judge appointed an electronic discovery special master in the case, which led to five in-person, all-day hearings with the special master, 14 telephone hearings, more than 20 declarations or amended declarations from UMC agents and employees and written testimonials by ESI experts. Delays in this case wasted not only time but also money.
In the U.K. case of “Smailes v. McNally,” a claim for £50 million was thrown out, without consideration of the merits, due to poor disclosure. Numerous missteps occurred, including the claimants failing to make a reasonable search for documents and unresolved issues using Optical Character Recognition on scanned documents, which left documents unable to be searched for keywords.
However, by using a consultant early on in your case, you can avoid the risks faced by UMC, Smailes, and many others. An experienced consultant understands the legal requirements, the technological landscape and what types of information could be potentially relevant to a matter.

Consultancy offers creative solutions to clients

For consultation to be effective, adding value while reducing the potential risk for clients, the consultation timing at the onset of a matter is key. Understanding clients’ objectives early on allows for consultation with the big picture in mind, eliminating inefficient or duplicative efforts throughout the matter while also ensuring clients’ ESI obligations are met. Every matter doesn’t need to go to eDiscovery, or even to collection. Through consultation, companies may find that simply the identification of data is enough for their specific case needs and legal strategy.
That was the case when LDM Global was contacted by Darwin Gray, representing a large public health organization that had large volumes of data stored, including medical records. A potentially complex, multi-party litigation was in sight, and it was crucial that the firm understand which documents were available, what they contained and where they were located on the servers. However, because of the confidential nature of the documents, a standard collection process was not possible. It was decided that only appropriate data could be imaged and that no data could be removed until and if disclosure was required.
After a thorough consultation, the solution to the confidentiality and data protection challenges was for LDM Global to do a pseudo-collection; this did not remove any data but ensured that the servers were “mapped” to provide a searchable database of the types of documents available while also imaging the servers for the client to ensure a defensible preservation strategy.
“LDM Global’s advice was very useful in portraying the client’s position and helped in settling the case,” said Herc Ashworth of Darwin Gray.Read full details of the case here.

Upfront consultancy saves huge costs via reduction in data at every stage

In a recent U.S./U.K. cross-border intellectual property matter, the client benefited from upfront consultancy and saved on collection and processing costs while avoiding the risk of sanctions or delays in court.
The U.S. law firm was confronted with a client involved in an American litigation. A U.S. company engaged a law firm to litigate against any potential competitors, driving up costs to force anyone else to simply roll over, settle and sign a commercial waiver not to use similar materials in their business. The client believed it had a strong case and needed a proportionate way to combat the claim.
As part of the claimant’s strategy, the client had received an extremely broad production request, and company officials thought that the material could be spread anywhere – in the total 15 TB of data. At one point, they considered only collecting emails. However, during the consultation process, LDM Global’s Director Sean Theron, acting as the lead forensics consultant, noted that the judge had a reputation for being very eDiscovery savvy and would not accept an incomplete eDiscovery exercise.
LDM Global’s solution for the client was to offer fixed fee consultancy to scope and identify data across their infrastructure. Sean Theron reviewed the case documents for a thorough understanding of the matter, then directed LDM Global staff to go on site and map the client’s ESI. Nothing was actually imaged. Screenshots, including directory listings, were taken to get a snapshot of the data. Through the data mapping, LDM Global then helped to identify what information was actually needed to comply with the production request, identifying only 1.8 TB of data out of the original 15 TB.
After the 1.8 TB of data was collected, it was then culled using forensic tools and following the ESI protocol agreed to between the two parties. This further reduced the data by about two-thirds, to only 615 GB needed to be processed.
LDM Global’s team then assisted outside counsel in applying search terms. Modified terms were tested for the purpose of preventing overly broad results per the guidelines outlined in the ESI protocol while at the same time ensuring the discovery deadline was met. The final result was 53 GB promoted to review.
The client was able to significantly reduce its data – and thus costs – and was able to achieve a tight deadline through LDM Global’s consultancy. This would have been nearly impossible had the client collected all of the original 15 TB of data.
The process was defensible in court, and although the plaintiff challenged LDM Global’s client on whether it adhered to the discovery protocol – including the identification of data and chosen custodians – the judge sided with the client. The ruling proved that the consultation with LDM Global went a long way in ensuring a positive outcome for the client.

Up-front costs vs. risk

Ultimately, when deciding whether to hire a consultant at the outset, it comes down to the risk of making a mistake that could lead to sanctions or cost orders, case delays, missing important documents or not realizing the creative solutions that can get you the necessary information quickly to make an informed decision on your case strategy. Spending a proportionately small amount on consultancy up front can save drastically down the road.
Given client and court pressure for increased proportionality and reduced costs, it is not acceptable to unnecessarily process and review data that should have been removed through the identification phase for a repeatable and robust discovery process.
jason atchley

Jason Atchley : Legal Tech News : The Pre-LTNY Innovation Roundup: Legal Tech Company News to Know (Part 1)

Jason Atchley : Legal Tech News : The Pre-LTNY Innovation Roundup: Legal Tech Company News to Know (Part 1)

jason atchley

The Pre-LTNY Innovation Roundup: Legal Tech Company News to Know (Part 1)

Eight companies attending Legaltech New York preview their latest new releases, upgrades, coming attractions and more

Zach Warren, Legaltech News

January 29, 2016    | 0 Comments
Photo by Margarita Corporan
The exhibit hall at Legaltech New York promises to be filled to the brim with legal technology companies providing the latest new innovations and amazing upgrades to each of their new systems. Afraid that you may miss something in the commotion? Legaltech News will be covering the latest legal technology company news during and after the show… but in case you want to get a jump on what technologies and innovations some of the biggest names in legal tech will be offering, here is a preview. The first part of this preview, with eight companies listed in alphabetical order, will run Friday, with the second eight companies being featured the day before the conference on Monday.
BQE Software
BQE Software, which provides time, billing, accounting and project management software for a number of industries, has announced upgrades to its BillQuick Legal 2016 product with an eye towards accelerating the efficiency, effectiveness and convenience of legal time tracking and billing. The new features in BillQuick Legal 2016 focus on automation (such as the ability to automatically import transactions, auto-update matter information from the client screen, and create a back-up SQL database), efficiency (with a matter-level retainer, time and expense by class, and a detailed view of unpaid expenses), and technical excellence.
According to the company BillQuick Legal will work with the latest version of operating systems such as Windows 10 and provide significant performance improvements.
“Simply put, BillQuick Legal 2016 allows you to do more in less time,” said Shafat Qazi, CEO and founder of BQE Software, in a release accompanying the news. “With this release, we focused on minimizing the time spent to complete day-to-day tasks. BillQuick Legal 2016 helps legal professionals get things done accurately, intelligently, automatically and ahead of schedule.”
Catalyst
Catalyst has announced that it will be delivering forensic investigation and collection services on a global basis. The new service, which has been rolled out over the past several months, will now provide remote or on-location services backed by testifying experts with a wide range of certifications and forensic credentials. These experts will be called upon to investigate and analyze computer data for purposes of identification, preservation, extraction, interpretation and documentation of electronic evidence, all with an eye towards future admissibility. A variety of hardware and software systems are eligible to be analyzed, including desktop and laptop computers, smartphones and older-model cell phones, and cloud services including Google Drive and Office 365.
At the show, Catalyst will also demonstrate Insight Predict, Legaltech’s 2015 new product of the year honoree, and discuss the launch of its new global forensic investigation and collection services, and how to lower the total cost of review. The company is also releasing the second edition of “TAR for Smart People” with new chapters focused on learning about TAR and CAL, along with new case studies that reinforce the power of TAR 2.0 systems, and updates on TAR case law with the latest decisions.
FTI Technology
FTI Technology has announced the launch of Radiance, a new visual analytics software platform that enables organizations to dynamically investigate and understand their enterprise data. Available as a cloud-based service or as a rapid deployment mobile option, Radiance is intended to provide visuals and data analytics similar to the company’s flagship Ringtail products, but with an eye towards pre-discovery and early case assessment analytics. As a result, Radiance is intended to be an “an easy-to-use, scalable platform” that works quickly, visualizing millions of documents from these disparate sources in a single, elegantly designed user interface. More on Radiance will be on Legaltech News in the coming days.
Separately, FTI’s business segment has launched version 8.6 of its Ringtail e-discovery software. Ringtail 8.6 offers a number of feature and performance enhancements, including new timeline analytics and faster rendering, to improve Ringtail’s usability and help legal teams efficiently find important data for legal, regulatory and investigative matters. The company said the focus of the upgrade is “speed, greater ease of use, and continuing our innovation around visual.”
Ipro
Ipro’s workflow platform, ADD Automated Digital Discovery, seeks to provide a simple and automated way for organizations to manage e-discovery. And with its latest ADD release, Ipro looks to take the automation to another level, introducing Media Manager as a web-based solution to “completely automate and optimize identifying and tracking electronic files across the eDiscovery workflow.” Media Manager, the company added, can also add key delivery and metadata information to source media (hard drives, thumb drives, DVDs, etc.) and electronic files for document management and tracking. The addition also allows users to auto-generate barcodes, copy media content to the network to create and track discovery jobs, and map media paths to existing clients and custodians.
The ADD platform also touts a number of other upgrades in its latest release, including increased integration between Ipro processing and Relativity review on the ADD platform (dubbed “Ipro-Q”), continuous streaming, first-pass filtering, and on-demand license consumption. At Legaltech New York, the company will also be showcasing processing speed and functionality upgrades to early case assessment tool Allegro, analytic web-based review Eclipse and the high-speed processing tool eCapture.
Inventus
International legal process outsourcing services provider Inventus is looking to shine a light on data analytics with the launching of its new platform Spotlight. Inventus Spotlight is a business data analytics platform that provides clients with insights into their litigation portfolio, which the company said will enable comprehensive outsourcing visibility, predictability and cost management. The tool will aggregate data from various sources, including Relativity, LAW and other third party applications, as well as integrate directly into the Luminosity system.
This tool, the company said, gives clients real-time insight into their data and litigation portfolio, as well as allow them to quantify the ROI on e-discovery spend and better manage and predict the capital that goes into their e-discovery budget. The company will showcase the new platform at Legaltech New York, including its functionality on mobile devices.

Read more: http://www.legaltechnews.com/id=1202748328688/The-PreLTNY-Innovation-Roundup-Legal-Tech-Company-News-to-Know-Part-1#ixzz3yqzxWH1K

Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley
Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley

Jason Atchley : Legal Tech News : The Rise of the Tech-Savvy Lawyer

Jason Atchley : Legal Tech News : The Rise of the Tech-Savvy Lawyer

jason atchley

The Rise of the Tech-Savvy Lawyer

The benefits can be roughly divided into two primary categories: those related to client outcomes and those related to the business of law

Jeff Kerr, Legaltech News

January 27, 2016    | 0 Comments
©iStock.com/LEXX
As a profession, we’re haunted by the specter of our incompetence with technology. We should be. For too long, we’ve clung to our Dictaphones, been duped by elementary phishing attacks, and failed to understand the meaning of “reply‑all.”
These “goofs” of the technically inept are becoming increasingly dangerous in both our businesses and our client representations. You hardly need to mention the threat of data breaches or e‑discovery sanctions to send chills down most lawyers’ spines. And the problem won’t be solved by an influx of younger attorneys who exchanged their pacifiers for iPads. In my personal experience, I’ve found many tech dunces actually to be in the ranks of the younger lawyers.
What are we do to? Who is going to save us from our troubles with technology? The answer is simple: Hire lawyers with technical smarts and reward them for their contributions. The tech-savvy lawyer need not have the ability to write programs in assembly language or understand x86 chip architecture. The main components of tech savviness are curiosity and accrued knowledge on how to get the most out of computers.
But I emphasize that these tech saviors must be lawyers; part of our technology problem stems from pervasively outsourcing solutions to vendors and consultants rather than developing skills ourselves. Even partners must grasp the importance of tech issues and understand the methods by which we’ll achieve the best results.
Another suggestion: Be careful about lawyers who proclaim “e-discovery” expertise. Often times, such lawyers know less than they realize about the “e” part of e-discovery, and instead focus almost exclusively on case law, buzzwords and hiring their favorite vendors. Rather than running to a vendor for help, e-discovery counsel should have the skills to perform 95 percent of the e-discovery process in ordinary cases themselves. The remaining 5 percent includes tricky things that counsel generally shouldn’t perform, such as forensic analysis.
What are some characteristics of the truly tech-savvy lawyer? To begin with, this lawyer is fascinated with and passionate about technology and the role it plays in our profession—both as an instrument of greater efficiency and a paradigm shift in the ways we litigate cases and think about evidence. She has no fear of tech, enjoys experimenting with new tools and technologies, and solves computer problems with a Google search rather than a call to the help desk. (In fact, this lawyer probably isthe help desk already.) She is a magician in Word and Excel. (If a lawyer can’t get the most out of these tools, then good luck with more complicated ones!) She has written some code. She has a strong tech vocabulary and probably knows about things like metadata, encryption and relational databases. Nevertheless, we should recall that there are many different colored belts on the pathway from novice to ninja, and in a year or two, the dedicated beginners may be more valuable than the fading masters.
Let’s now consider the benefits that the tech savvy lawyer – consultus technologicus – can bring to her firm and clients. These benefits can be roughly divided into two primary categories: those related to client outcomes and those related to the business of law. Let’s start with the first: how the techno lawyer gets better results for clients.
It’s not an exaggeration that we live in a very different world than the one that existed just two decades ago. In the 1990s, we used stamps and made calls from landlines! Today—unless we forcefully unplug ourselves from the all-encompassing internet to camp on a salt flat in Utah—we’re generating and consuming massive quantities of digital information with every step down the sidewalk.
Aside from the interesting sociological questions raised by these developments, lawyers can’t help but notice that the new world, properly understood, entails a fundamental shift in the way that litigation should work. The day is coming when witness testimony—that stew of faulty memory and over-preparation—will be irrelevant, or nearly so. Already, Florida-based attorney Ralph Losey writesthat he would choose e-discovery over depositions if he had to make a choice, and I agree with him. After learning how to dig for electronic evidence and how to force the other side to give it to me, witness testimony became almost irrelevant because emails, texts, images, metadata and databases revealed the truth of events with photographic precision.
The tech-savvy lawyer knows how to get the good evidence, both from an adversary and from her own client. The stakes couldn’t be higher, and both bar associations and judges are cracking down on lawyers who fail to take account of the evidentiary implications of the Information Age.
The stakes are just as high in the business of law. Tech-savvy lawyers can realize tremendous gains in law firm efficiency. While the cost of inefficiencies can temporarily be passed on to clients (and perhaps even capitalized, to a degree), this doesn’t last long. Clients eventually ask why a secretary spent twelve hours printing documents and manually redacting them with a Sharpie when she could have been redacted them in one hour using Adobe Acrobat.
And then there’s security. Law firms are the perennial dupes of hackers. According to security experts and the FBI, “law firms remain a weak link when it comes to online security.” There’s usually a lot of low-hanging fruit when it comes to improving security—installing operating system (OS) upgrades, utilizing two-factor authentication and training users to spot phishing attacks. Techie lawyers ensure that this fruit gets harvested, and they’re always on hand to train other lawyers and staff in best practices.
All things considered, no amount of preaching by tech converts (or resistance from Luddites) will stop the inevitable rise of the tech savvy lawyer. Some firms will move faster than others, and some lawyers will invest more time in enhancing their tech expertise. Those who catch the wave of rising tech will be the beneficiaries of their own skills, and they’ll bestow wonders on their clients, firms, and colleagues alike.
Jeff Kerr, a former litigator, is the CEO and co-founder of CaseFleet. Contact him atjeff@casefleet.com.

Read more: http://www.legaltechnews.com/id=1202748016008/The-Rise-of-the-TechSavvy-Lawyer#ixzz3yVY3aUrU

Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley
Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley

Jason Atchley : Legal Tech News : Spy Stories for Lawyers: Former FBI Counterintelligence Officer on Combating Cyber Espionage

Jason Atchley : Legal Tech News : Spy Stories for Lawyers: Former FBI Counterintelligence Officer on Combating Cyber Espionage

jason atchley

Spy Stories for Lawyers: Former FBI Counterintelligence Officer on Combating Cyber Espionage

At Legaltech New York, former FBI counterintelligence officer Eric O’Neill shares insights on how lawyers can help avoid breaches.

Ian Lopez, Legaltech News

January 25, 2016    | 0 Comments
Words like ‘spies’, ‘thieves’ and ‘international espionage’ invoke images of fast-paced thrillers for most of us, but for how many does the word ‘lawyer’ come to mind? In a sense, Eric O’Neill has acted as a lawyer, spy and star.
Formerly an FBI counterterrorism and counterintelligence operative, O’Neill solved the cybercrimes that took down Robert Hanssen, the former FBI agent who exploited security weaknesses in U.S. computer systems to sell confidential information to Russia during the Cold War, inspiring the movieBreach.
In Feb. 3’s keynote at Legaltech New York, titled “Cybersecurity and Data Espionage: Spy Stories for Lawyers,” O’Neill will regale listeners with his stories of espionage to demonstrate to lawyers how they can implement counter-espionage techniques, careful diligence and restraint when using social media to reduce vulnerability to cyber threats.
Legaltech News spoke with O’Neill to get the scoop on his upcoming LTNY presentation and how his tales of international espionage can help lawyers keep abreast in the cyber landscape. O’Neill, founding partner of the Georgetown group and now a national security strategist at Bit9 + Carbon Black, described his speaking style as that of “a storyteller,” noting that rather than “scaring a crowd” into believing that they’ll “all be hacked and be doomed,” he aspires to provide useful information that lawyers can implement in the fight against cyber crime.
“What I like to do is give some very good examples of past penetrations and hacks that were successful and why they were successful, with a cheat sheet of rational, reasonable things that any person or company can do in order to protect themselves,” O’Neill explained. “I leverage my background in counterintelligence to promote a theory that we need to each think of ourselves as spy hunters if we want to stop cyber attacks.”
O’Neill said that his keynote will commence with his takedown of Hanssen, which he described as one of his “biggest hits.”
“The Hanssen investigation sits extraordinarily well in a cybersecurity framework, because Hanssen was our first hacker spy,” he said. “He exploited our FBI computer systems, he used our automated case systems to … make sure he wasn’t under investigation, and also to steal information. He was also one of the first spies to drop his stolen information to the Soviet Union … in a data form. He was so early, he had to explain to the Soviets how to decrypt what he dropped, because they didn’t even have any idea what to do with the floppy disks he gave them.”
In this tale, O’Neill finds his lead-in to discuss “cyber spies” and “what we need to worry about.” Among the most “frightening” and “dangerous” types of spies, he noted those within the organization, as they are already inside of the network and “generally trusted.” Besides Hanssen, his examples of spies within “the firewall” include Edward Snowden and corporate actors.
Another group of cyber spies that O’Neill will discuss is government actors. In past presentations, O’Neill tended to discuss a wide range of nation-state threat actors, though now he said he likes to focus on China, due to the interest in it, timeliness and “the percentage of the threat.” Particularly, he will discuss the Anthem and Office of Personnel Management (OPM) hacks, in the latter of which his own information was stolen.
He added that he wants to explain why the OPM hack “will be seen as the worst attack in our history, at least to date, and maybe even into the future, because I don’t think we’ve seen the end of it. Especially because OPM has no clue how long the malware was collecting information and sending it over.”
Also on the table for discussion are hacktivists, the Ashley Madison hack, and how social media poses potential harm to individuals and organizations. In addition to illustrating the problem of cyberattacks, O’Neill will also devote time to discussing what can be done. Of particular importance, he said that there’s a need to compartmentalize information, which he considers “the most important first step.”
“If you don’t know what you want to protect, then how can you ever protect it?” he asked. “Especially when you have a very large organization with many endpoints … all of the many IT devices that access information.”
Social media will be addressed as well, a terrain that he described as “the best place to start” for hackers and spies.
“If you want to learn about an organization through their people … find the weakest point of attack in any system, which is the least security-conscience person in that system,” he said. “And because we’ve got this epidemic of social media, where everyone feels the need to regurgitate everything that’s happening with their lives into the public, it makes it very easy to find someone to exploit or manipulate, or trick, or attack, or hack.”

Read more: http://www.legaltechnews.com/id=1202747832090/Spy-Stories-for-Lawyers-Former-FBI-Counterintelligence-Officer-on-Combating-Cyber-Espionage#ixzz3yPJmsZyU

Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley
Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley Jason Atchley

Jason Atchley : Legal Tech News : Would eDiscovery Have Identified the Correct Murderer in “Making a Murderer”?

Jason Atchley : Legal Tech News : Would eDiscovery Have Identified the Correct Murderer in “Making a Murderer”?

jason atchley

Would eDiscovery Have Identified the Correct Murderer in “Making a Murderer”?: eDiscovery Best Practices

By: Doug Austin
The recently released Netflix documentary Making a Murderer has made a huge splash with hundreds of thousands of viewers (including me) having watched the 10 part documentary that was released last month. Debate has raged over whether Steven Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey, were wrongly convicted of murdering photographer Teresa Halbach.  Interestingly enough, some possibly deleted electronic evidence might have helped answer that question.
In an article on ACEDS (Making a Murderer: The Missing Computer Forensics Evidence), the author (Jason Krause) discusses the fact that there voicemail messages on Halbach’s phone that allegedly disappeared.  Krause discusses the information presented in the documentary regarding the voicemail messages, as follows:
“Halbach’s family reported her missing in early November 2005 after finding that they called her cellphone and received a recorded message saying the voicemail box was full. According to her family, it was not like Halbach to not check her messages and decided to alert the police that she may be missing.
However, Teresa’s ex-boyfriend Ryan Hillegas testified that he listened to her voicemails after breaking into her inbox in an attempt to learn more about where she had last been. “I had a feeling that I might know her voicemail password,” he said in the episode, in order to explain how he retrieved the voice mails. However, he claimed that he did not delete any messages.  [It was actually her brother, Mike Halbach, who stated that he had listened to her messages, though Hillegas indicated that he had accessed her phone records after also guessing Teresa’s password.]
However, the only expert called to testify in this matter was Tony Zimmerman, a network engineer with Cingular Wireless, Halbach’s phone provider. He testified that calls and messages that the phone had received, should not have filled up the full capacity of the mailbox. Avery’s lawyers speculated that someone had erased potentially incriminating messages before Halbach was reported missing.
Unfortunately, Zimmerman was not a trained computer forensic examiner and his testimony did not reflect that any investigation more rigorous than looking at Halbach’s call log.”
Krause’s article quotes David Greetham, Vice President of eDiscovery Operations with Ricoh Americas Corporation, who recalled that “as long ago as 2001 we were recovering deleted text messages from a defendant accused of drug dealing”, but also noted that “law enforcement often has budget restrictions on training and resources”, which could limit the ability to investigate such leads (back in 2005 especially).  Of course, if you’re like many viewers who believe that the Manitowoc sheriff’s department had a vested interest in seeing Avery arrested for the crime (particularly since he had filed a $36 million lawsuit against the department for his wrongful conviction in a 1985 rape case), you may think that they were less than highly motivated to pursue this lead.
Regardless of whether or not you believe that Avery and Dassey were wrongfully convicted (and, apparently, several instances of incriminating evidence regarding their potential involvement were not covered in the documentary), the question remains: Were there voicemail messages that were deleted and could they have affected the outcome of the case?  If there had been a trained computer forensic examiner on the case back then, perhaps there would have been some additional information uncovered that either pointed to a different suspect or added to the evidence that implicated Avery.  Over ten years have passed since the murder took place, so we will probably never know.
So, what do you think?  Do you find the lack of investigation of the voice mail messages disconcerting?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.
Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNineeDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.
%d bloggers like this: