markjrouse

Hi, I was wondering if Intella had the capability of including slipsheets with load file productions? The slip sheet is put in place of a duplicated file, for example, so the user knows that the file was de-duplicated from the load set, or if an email was tagged as privilege then is there a way to include a slipsheet to say an email was excluded due to prvilege.

Hi, I have a 1 page word document to which I have applied a redaction to some of the text and have gone through the load file export process. What I have noticed is that the tiff of the word document indeed has the redaction applied, but the native and extracted text file still contain the original full text including the text that I redacted. It seems then that the native and the text file don't have the redacted text removed. I can understand that with the native you can't really apply redactions to the native, but for the extracted text I would have thought that the extracted text file of my word document should only contain unredacted text. In the PDF or Image rendering options of the Load File export wizard, I have the "Use redacted versions when available" option ticked, but there doesn't seem to be an option to have the extracted text process use redacted versions when available. Does anyone have any thoughts as to how I can work around this or how I can solve this issue.

Hi, Having just processed a pst file, in the Exceptions Report I have noticed the following processing error: org.apache.commons.imaging.ImageReadException: Invalid Image Resource Block Signature at org.apache.commons.imaging.formats.jpeg.iptc.IptcParser.parseAllBlocks(IptcParser.java:281) at org.apache.commons.imaging.formats.jpeg.iptc.IptcParser.parsePhotoshopSegment(IptcParser.java:111) at org.apache.commons.imaging.formats.jpeg.iptc.IptcParser.parsePhotoshopSegment(IptcParser.java:103) at org.apache.commons.imaging.formats.jpeg.segments.App13Segment.parsePhotoshopSegment(App13Segment.java:76) at org.apache.commons.imaging.formats.jpeg.JpegImageParser.getPhotoshopMetadata(JpegImageParser.java:585) at org.apache.commons.imaging.formats.jpeg.JpegImageParser.getMetadata(JpegImageParser.java:314) at org.apache.commons.imaging.ImageParser.getMetadata(ImageParser.java:144) at com.forensicsmatter.intella.processor.jpeg.JpegProcessor.process(JpegProcessor.java:43) at com.forensicsmatter.intella.processor.Reactor.processNewItem(Reactor.java:288) at com.forensicsmatter.intella.processor.Reactor.processJob(Reactor.java:210) at com.forensicsmatter.intella.processor.Reactor.access$600(Reactor.java:32) at com.forensicsmatter.intella.processor.Reactor$Job.run(Reactor.java:415) at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145) at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) Not sure what the issue is? Any thoughts?

Is there a speciifc reason as to why 1.7.3 cases can't be extended? I have a large case and can't recreate it from scratch due to time and also there are loads of tags, flagged items, comments, saved searches etc.

Is there a way of reading the audit.log?

Hi, Not sure if this has been covered before, but I've got a case file that seems to be a 1.7.3 case, and when I open it in 1.8 I can't add new sources. Any reason why this would be? The Add New option is greyed out. Regards Mark

Hi All, Have noticed that this doesn't just apply to privilege items I've excluded this also applies to duplicates. I've just discovered an email with 8 attachments, 4 gif files, 4 MS office files. Looking in the load file the 4 MS office attachments are not referenced, nor have they been tiff'ed, and they haven't been extracted as separate natives. The reason for this is the 4 MS Office files are infact duplicates. So naturally when I click to dedup the population for export, these 4 MS Office attachments disappear as expected. Unfortunately, these 4 duplicate MS Office files are still being exported in the parent eml file when I do my load file export. It seems that any attachment I want to exclude from the load file export process doesn't get totally excluded because my excluded items, i.e. privilege, duplicates etc. are still being exported within their parent emails. I really hope this issue with the load file export can be address, because if I've got hundreds of thousands of duplicates, I can't go through each .eml parent file to remove them manually. If we had Internet Explorer 10 then redacting privilege documents would solve privilege exports, but it doesn't resolve duplicate attachments that are still being exported in their parent emails, even though I've clicked deduplicate

Hi Lukasz, As an example, Nuix uses Ruby I believe as a scripting language.

Hi all, Intella has identified in my NSF files that there are some attachments in emails that have a fileextension of "notesbitmaps". Does anyone know what these are? Are they reviewable content, or are they some kind of image file? Thanks.

Thanks guys for your response.

Thanks JP. Very useful. To me this seems to represent a serious issue with the load file process because yes the load file does not make reference to the 4th attachment, but as the 4th attachment is still there in the parent native, then surely the load file is not accurate in terms of what it says is the production! I would have thought that if something is to be excluded, then it should be excluded. What should be included in eDiscovery is responsive documents, privilege items should not be!!! Unfortunately, I now have to go through large productions to remove these items. I'm affraid the regulator has requested natives, so leaving them out is not an option.

-- Email --- attachment 1 --- attachment 2 --- attachment 3 --- attachment 4 Attachment 4 gets tagged as privilege. So when I export email as part of a concordance load file, it not only exports the Email and attachment 1-3, but also 4. Even if I say, Privilege Tag exclude, obviously the parent email is still present so when it's exported it exports all 4 attachments. In my case we have IE9 through out our coporation and Redaction doesn't work in IE9. The lawyers have flagged attachment 4 as privileged so I must be able to exclude it as the need to disclose the email and attachments 1-3, but not 4. If it's manual, then I've got to identifiy the privilege item in the load file, delete the native, text and tiffs, and some how update the .dat file.

Are there any plans to change this functionality? Or allow the user to choose?

If I have an email with 4 attachments, but only 1 is privilege, even if I exclude privilege items, when I export the parent email it will still export the privilege item. Is there a way of stopping this? I only want to export the email and the 3 non privilege items. I can't make the parent email privilege as it's not and I can't excluded it. As it stands at the moment, I would have to manually remove that 4th privilege attachment from the exported eml file. There must be a way of stopping privilege emails from being exported without having to tag the parent email privilege as well!! I would say this is a fundamental option for an eDiscovery tool. Does anyone have any suggestions, or workflows that I can adopt so that I can ensure only the parent email and the 3 attachments are exported. Really need some help with this. Thanks.

Thanks guys.

When are the next official releases of PRO and Connect coming out?

Ok thanks.

Yes I did.

Hi there, Here is the download link I was given: (admin: link edited) if I go into Intella Connect and About it just says 1.7.4. Is there a quick way to fix it so that I can continue with urgent productions to a regulator. Regards

I've got a case that was shared through Intella Connect. The review is now completed and I've unshared the case and opened it in Pro. I'm now experiencing an error when I either try and run a search terms or view an item in the Previewer. It comes up with an: Cannot evaulate query: Format version is not supported (resource: MMapIndexInput(path="C\<redacted>\<redacted>\<redacted>\index\modifableText\segments.gen")): -3 (needs to be between -2 and -2) Program info: Intella Professional 1.7.3-r27410 Cause: org.apache.lucene.index.IndexFormatTooNewException: Format version is not supported (resource: MMapIndexInput(path="path="C\<redacted>\<redacted>\<redacted>\index\modifableText\segments.gen")): -3 (needs to be between -2 and -2) at org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$FindSegmentsFile.run(SegmentInfos.java:722) at org.apache.lucene.index.StandardDirectoryReader.open(StandardDirectoryReader.java:52) at org.apache.lucene.index.DirectoryReader.open(DirectoryReader.java:66) at com.vound.gee.lucene.LuceneIndex.openIndexSearcher(LuceneIndex.java:1170) at com.vound.gee.lucene.LuceneIndex.getDocIDs(LuceneIndex.java:197) at com.vound.gee.lucene.LuceneIndex.getDocIDs(LuceneIndex.java:183) at com.vound.gee.lucene.LocalLuceneFacet.getDocuments(LocalLuceneFacet.java:69) at com.vound.intella.model.query.KeywordQueryResult.getIdSet(KeywordQueryResult.java:52) at com.vound.intella.model.query.QueryResultBase.setContents(QueryResultBase.java:240) at com.vound.intella.model.query.QueryResultBase.evaluate(QueryResultBase.java:209) at com.vound.intella.model.query.QueryResultBase$1.run(QueryResultBase.java:269) at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471) at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262) at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145) at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)

Hi AdamS, You know how you can upload a keyword list. Can you do something with tags. Can I put 20 or so commonly used tags in a UTF-8 txt file and have that uploaded and update the case so they are ready to be used. Reason being is that as it stands at the moment, I receive data; I process; I push to Connect for review. If I receive another dataset for the same project, I've got to create another case file. So if I end up with 15 case files all associated with one project, can I simply upload a tag list and have them created and ready to be used within all 15 of my cases, without having to go into each case and manually add each tag for reviewers to use. I'm thinking of a way to automate and standardis on tags within case files. Regards

Hi, Can someone confirm if Windows Server 2012 R2 is supported? I'm looking to move Intella Pro and Connect to a more powerful 8 Core, 96GB ram server, which by default comes with Windows Server 2012 R2. Am I still ok to installed Pro and Connect on this server? Thanks.

Hi, To address your points: 4. Maybe this is another IE thing. But rather than just having a more useful name like "Keywords 2014-007-30" or some other descriptive name, instead the full path is used \\xxxx\xxxx\xxxx\xxx\xxxx\Keywords 2014-007-30.txt. If the path is very long it just makes it difficult from a user perspective to read it keyword list name. I would think the other is more perferable, because if I have 7 keyword lists uploaded, then all the user sees is: \\xxxx\xxxx\xxxx\xxx\xxxx\...... \\xxxx\xxxx\xxxx\xxx\xxxx\...... \\xxxx\xxxx\xxxx\xxx\xxxx\...... \\xxxx\xxxx\xxxx\xxx\xxxx\...... \\xxxx\xxxx\xxxx\xxx\xxxx\...... \\xxxx\xxxx\xxxx\xxx\xxxx\...... \\xxxx\xxxx\xxxx\xxx\xxxx\...... It might be just cosmetic, but I just know going forward, reviewers will make the same comment that they would be unable to see the keyword names to make it easier to apply the ones they want. By the way this works fine in Intella Pro, but if you upload through Connect you get the full path as part of the name. 6. I added admin to my list of reviewers or case admin roles and I tried loggging in with admin, but it just takes me to the admin console, not the review tool. I'm using Intella Connect 1.7.4 Thanks.

As a feature, I would like in the future to be able to share a case whilst still being able to access it in Intella Pro. The reason being is that if I receive a custodian's data, more often than not, I'm required to process it and make it available for review immediately, but of course, it doesn't mean this will be the only custodian's data I receive. No doubt, as time goes by I will receive more data that needs to be processed and made available for review through Connect. I simply can't kick everyone out of Connect so that I can make them wait until I've processed the new data. I don't want to create another case for this secondary dataset because I want to keep all datasets for a particular case together in one case. Would it be technically possible to process in Pro, and review data in Connect at the same time?

Hi, I though I'd share the current user interface issues I'm experiencing with Intella Connect 1.7.4: Even though my username has the "Can delete tags and other tags from other Reviewers" permission, I can't untick a tag from a document. - This is a fundamental basic function! Redact function broken in IE9 - Upgrading to IE10 or another browser is not an option at this time. If I select items in the details pane, I can't export results as a CSV - can do this in Intella Pro but not Connect. When loading a keyword list, there is no option to name the keyword list. Instead the full path to my uploaded file is used. When uploading a keyword list, the "File Upload - keyword file uploading, please wait" box remainins on the screen even though it has finished uploading the keyword list. I would have thought the box disappears once you have uploaded the file. Can't login into a case as the admin user to untick tags from specific documents. If I share two or more cases, then at some later stage I unshare a case - Intella Connect Server instead tells me my other shared case is locked, users can't access it from the web browser, and I have to restart the Connect Server. In one case, simply unsharing a case whilst sharing another caused the the server to crash. Apart from these, I really like Intella Connect, and would like to see more functionality.