Tools for counsel handling digital evidence
Seven browser tools, free and without a sign-up. Each one answers a question that comes up before anyone is ready to describe a live matter to an expert — how long the logs will survive, what an artifact can actually prove, whether a report satisfies the rule, what the work costs. Every figure states where it came from, and every tool says what it cannot tell you.
- TOOLS
- 7 interactive
- COST
- Free · no sign-up
- DATA
- Stays in your browser
- SOURCES
- Cited and dated on the page
- EXPORT
- Browser print · Save as PDF
- ADVICE
- None of it is legal advice
These seven tools cover the questions counsel asks before retaining a digital forensic expert: when each system’s retention window closes, what a given artifact does and does not establish, how to vet a candidate, where a methodology is exposed under Rule 702, whether an expert report satisfies Rule 26(a)(2)(B), which admissibility standard your forum applies, and what an engagement of this shape costs in the market. Nothing you enter leaves your browser.
- TOOL 01 / RETENTION
Preservation Deadline Calculator
Enter an incident date, pick the systems in play, and see when each source's default retention window closes — with the licence tier every figure depends on stated beside it.
OPEN→ - TOOL 02 / ARTIFACTS
Can This Artifact Prove That?
Pick the claim you need to support. See which artifacts bear on it, what each one actually records, and — the half that matters on cross — what none of them establishes.
OPEN→ - TOOL 03 / RETENTION DILIGENCE
Expert Vetting Checklist
The nine-step vetting procedure and the eight documents to request, as a checklist you can work through, save in your browser, and print for the file.
OPEN→ - TOOL 04 / RULE 702
Daubert Exposure Check
Twelve questions about an expert's methodology, mapped to the six failure modes that account for most digital-forensics exclusions, with the remediation for each gap.
OPEN→ - TOOL 05 / DISCLOSURE
Rule 26 Report Check
The six things Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) requires a retained expert's report to contain, quoted in full, as a checklist against the report on your desk.
OPEN→ - TOOL 06 / JURISDICTION
Daubert or Frye Lookup
Which admissibility standard each state applies to expert evidence, including the states whose posture is mixed, state-specific, or has recently changed — and the amended federal Rule 702.
OPEN→ - TOOL 07 / SCOPE
Engagement Scope Estimator
Build a scope schedule from device count, device type, question complexity, deadline and deliverable — the drivers that move a forensic estimate, itemised.
OPEN→
Why these are free, and what they are for
Most people who arrive here are not ready to retain anyone. They have a question — whether the Slack history is still there, whether a USB connection record proves a file was copied, whether the report that just landed satisfies the disclosure rule — and they need an answer before they need an expert. A tool that answers the question honestly is more useful than a contact form, and it is a fair test of whether the firm behind it knows the subject.
So the constraint on this subtree is that every tool has to be genuinely usable by someone who never calls us. The reference data renders in the page whether or not you touch a control; the sources are named and dated so you can check them; nothing you type is transmitted anywhere; and each tool carries a “what this does not tell you” section that is as long as the output warrants. That last part is the point. This firm’s published argument is that an opinion fails when it is stated more strongly than the evidence supports — a calculator that prints a confident number it cannot justify would be making that error in our own voice.
Where to start
If something has just happened and nothing has been preserved, start with the preservation deadline calculator: retention windows close on their own schedule, and the sources most likely to be missed are the ones nobody thinks of as a document repository.
If a report or a forensic assertion has landed on your desk, the order is what the artifact can prove, then the Rule 26 completeness check, then the Daubert exposure check — and which standard your forum applies before you brief any of it.
If you are choosing an expert, the vetting checklist is the working form of the hiring guide, and the scope estimator — together with the market fee ranges behind it — turns the budget question into a schedule of drivers rather than a single number nobody can defend.
These tools answer the questions that have general answers. Where the answer depends on the media, the custodians, or the record in a live matter, that is an examination — and it starts with a conflicts check and a scoping call.
A conflicts check and scoping call follow, normally within one business day. Please do not send privileged or case-sensitive material until conflicts have cleared.
Attorney advertising / expert services. This tool describes forensic practice and the procedural rules that govern expert evidence in general terms. It is not legal advice, it does not create an attorney–client or expert-engagement relationship, and it is not a substitute for checking the rules, standing orders, and case law of your own forum. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.