Automated Legal Hold & eDiscovery Preservation at Global Scale

1. Document Purpose & Scope

This document defines the strategic implementation of Automated Legal Hold within a globally distributed Hexnode UEM deployment. The framework is designed to:

• Preserve enterprise data with cryptographic integrity
• Eliminate spoliation risks during litigation or investigation
• Maintain continuous compliance with the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM)
• Operate seamlessly across a fleet of 500,000 managed devices spanning 50 sub-companies

The strategy transitions legal discovery from a manual, error prone workflow to a real time, policy driven preservation system embedded directly into endpoint orchestration.

2. Executive Summary

In environments operating at enterprise scale, manual legal hold procedures introduce unavoidable latency, human error, and irreversible data loss. This framework leverages Hexnode’s real time device orchestration to enable instantaneous and immutable data preservation.

By combining forensic artifact harvesting, jurisdiction aware storage enforcement, and cryptographically verifiable audit trails, the organization achieves a Sub Second Legal Hold capability across all managed endpoints.

Key outcomes include:

• Near zero hold activation latency
• Elimination of destructive actions during legal events
• Automated chain of custody without physical intervention
• Continuous compliance across regional data sovereignty boundaries

3. Logical Architecture

The Forensic Vault Model

The Automated Legal Hold architecture operates as a high-priority policy overlay that supersedes all standard device lifecycle actions, including retirement, unenrollment, or remote wipe.

3.1 Trigger Ingress Layer

• Legal Hold activation is initiated via compliance-driven triggers defined within the Legal Hold Module, activating automatically when a device is flagged as non-compliant or “misfit.”
• Access to this module is restricted using Atomic RBAC.
• Only explicitly authorized Legal Auditor roles can configure these compliance parameters or manually release holds.

3.2 Compliance Lock-Down

• A restrictive compliance protocol with a lost mode is applied.
• Once Lost Mode is enabled, the device enters a detained state, effectively locking it down to prevent further usage.
• This lockdown freezes the device, suspending standard lifecycle operations, such as unenrollment or retirement, to preserve the current state for forensic investigation and resolution workflows.
• This lock remains enforced until an explicit release workflow is completed.

3.3 Background Forensic Harvester

• Executed by the Hexnode Agent across platforms:
  • HWA for Windows
  • HMA for macOS
  • HLA for Linux
• Operates as a non-persistent, low CPU routine
• Performs forensic collection without interrupting user productivity

3.4 Sovereign Evidence Repository

• To support the investigation, Hexnode fetches detailed system logs directly from the detained devices for troubleshooting and forensic analysis.
• This evidence is securely stored within Amazon AWS S3, which acts as the centralized data storage reserve for all operations, ensuring that critical data remains available and intact throughout the resolution workflow.

4. Forensic Artifact Coverage

The Hexnode Agent helps construct a comprehensive Discovery Package by targeting low level system artifacts relevant to legal and regulatory investigations.

5. Execution Model

The Four Phase Discovery Loop

Phase 1: Policy-Driven Immobilization

SENSE

• Trigger: The workflow is initiated when the Compliance Engine detects a policy violation or “misfit” status (e.g., geofencing breach, unauthorized profile removal).
• Orchestration: A Legal Hold state is immediately triggered via the RBAC-monitored module.
• Detention: The device undergoes immediate asset immobilization. A restrictive policy overlay (such as Kiosk Mode or Lost Mode) is applied to “freeze” the device environment. This mitigates spoliation risks by technically detaining the user from accessing the OS or altering data while the device remains online for management.

Phase 2: Forensic Telemetry Extraction

ACT

• Acquisition: Upon immobilization, the system executes a high-priority Fetch Logs command to capture the device’s current operational state.
• Scope: The agent retrieves diagnostic system logs, application statuses, and relevant telemetry.
• Preservation: This process transitions the data from the endpoint to the management console, ensuring that critical evidence is captured “in-state” before any potential device failure or battery drain.

Phase 3: Secure Cloud Custody

ACT

• Transmission: Extracted evidence is securely transmitted from the endpoint to the Hexnode cloud infrastructure.
• Retention: Data is committed to Amazon AWS S3, acting as the centralized, resilient storage reserve for all forensic operations.
• Governance: Access to this vaulted data is strictly controlled via Atomic RBAC, ensuring that only the designated Legal Auditor or authorized IT administrators can review the materials, maintaining the integrity of the investigation.

Phase 4: Verification & Resolution Workflow

VERIFY

• Validation: The Unified Audit Trail records every step of the orchestration, from the moment the device was flagged as non-compliant to the successful detention and log retrieval.
• Review: Administrators utilize the console to verify the captured logs against the compliance violation timestamp.
• Disposition: The workflow concludes with a decision gate where the Legal Auditor authorizes the final action: releasing the device back to standard compliance (un-flagging) or proceeding with a device wipe to finalize the lifecycle retirement.

6. Governance Controls

Anti Spoliation Enforcement Matrix

7. Scale Impact & ROI Analysis

500,000 Device Deployment

• Legal hold activation latency reduced from 24 to 72 hours to less than one second
• Discovery costs reduced from physical imaging and logistics to automated, over-the-air collection
• Compliance posture elevated to continuously verifiable preservation, significantly reducing exposure to adverse inference rulings