Blog

Debunking the Myth: Full Imaging of a Cell Phone for Collections Isn't Always Necessary

By: Steve Davis, Purpose Legal’s VP of Forensics & Investigations and Matthew Rasmussen, Founder & CEO at ModeOne

A prevailing myth exists that you must have a full image (or full physical extraction) of a cell phone to collect defensible data. While full imaging can be a viable method, it isn’t always necessary, efficient, or cost-effective. Let’s explore some alternative ways to collect defensible data from a cell phone, without resorting to full imaging.

What is Full Imaging?

Full imaging refers to the process of making an exact copy of a device’s storage, including all system files, applications, and user data. While this can provide a complete snapshot of a device, it’s often an overkill approach that may introduce unnecessary complexity and costs.

Alternative Methods to Full Imaging

  • Logical Extraction: Collect only specific files and data structures, such as text messages, call logs, and contacts. It’s more efficient and faster than full imaging, and it’s a perfect fit when only specific data is relevant to a case.
  • Targeted Collections: Selectively capture specific data using keyword searches. It provides a highly focused approach, collecting only what’s necessary, and it’s perfect for compliance investigations where you are looking for specific information.
  • Cloud-Based Collections: Access and collect data from cloud backups, such as iCloud or Google Drive. It reduces the need to physically handle the device, making it a great solution when a device is lost, damaged, or remote collection is needed.
  • Live Data Collection: Capture data directly from the device while it’s in operation and obtain real-time insights and collect volatile data. This is useful in situations where real-time monitoring or immediate analysis is required.

Key Considerations for Alternative Methods

  • Defensibility: Ensure that the method used maintains the integrity of the data and is legally sound.
  • Privacy: Consider both the need for information with privacy considerations, especially when handling personal devices.
  • Cost: Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of different methods based on the scope and requirements of the case.
  • Technology: Utilize specialized software and tools designed to facilitate various collection methods.

In Summary The myth that full imaging is the only viable way to collect defensible data from a cell phone has been debunked by recognizing the value and efficiency of alternative methods. These alternatives provide more focused, cost-effective, and sometimes even more defensible ways to handle the complex task of mobile data collection.

Traditional machine-learning enabled TAR remains the best-practice deployment of AI any many review circumstances. The Purpose Analytics and Review teams are experts in the development, negotiation, execution, and validation of these workflows. Furthermore, we support these workflows utilizing each of the industry-standard technologies in our supported eDiscovery hosting platforms. 

This will close in 0 seconds