5 ms·
How credible are all these logs? Email records (came up in Oracle Android case) are one thing, emails are a known thing. But how trustworthy are Google Drive lo
by patmcguire 10y ago
How credible are all these logs? Email records (came up in Oracle Android case) are one thing, emails are a known thing. But how trustworthy are Google Drive logs, a record that only exists within Google, when what they've recorded helps their case? I'm not casting aspersions, just curious how a new kind of evidence plays out.
- Xorlev 10y agoLet's not pretend that you can't fabricate emails too. I strongly suspect that the existence and timestamps of the Drive logs can be verified at multiple levels and exist in backups made around that time. HTTP logs as well as MTA logs have been provided as evidence before, those too could be fabricated.
- patmcguire 10y agoYeah, I didn't mean to imply fabrication: just there are going to be hiccups and weird inconsistencies in any data source, and it's not one where the hiccups have been seen before in a legal context. You have multiple levels, some slightly disagree, which is correct? Email you have a bunch of different parties: the sender, the receiver, the servers in the middle, all of which are going to record something, and maybe they differ in weird ways, but if you got it you go it.
- scarmig 10y agoBy what process do you think Waymo (or is it Alphabet) would fabricate these logs? Like, who in particular would do it? Would they form a team of a dozen, two dozen people to do all the fabrication across all the systems that would be impacted, without leaving any fingerprints? And of course none of this planning could be done over email or Google docs, so it all has to be coordinated in person with only handwritten notes. And you've got to make sure a co-operative representative from legal is involved, just so the evidence generated in the logs corresponds to the cover story.
- patmcguire 10y agoYeah, I thought I made it clear I didn't think there would be any fabrication. That's different from it being able to completely rely on something being accurate, I doubt it's recorded with the same care financial data is, for instance.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> But how trustworthy are Google Drive logs, a record that only exists within Google, when what they've recorded helps their case? Routinely-kept business records are common evidence in cases, and, while any evidence is subject to impeachment, "it supports the case of the party keeping the records" is almost never sufficient to get a trier of fact (jury in the case of a jury trial) to dismiss the evidence; you generally need either some more concrete evidence of fabrication or independent evidence contradicting the conclusion the evidence is offered to support. Google Drive logs are fundamentally no different than email, or even paper business records, in this context.
- elsewhen 10y agoremember that in civil cases, the burden of proof is 'preponderance of the evidence', not 'beyond a reasonable doubt' as it is for criminal cases.
- powera 10y agoGoogle has SOX controls for this type of thing, that should allow them to prove that the requests came from a specific user at a specific time. Also, if he actually did the queries, the defense team is incredibly unlikely to claim that Google may be forging evidence.
- patmcguire 10y agoMan, I really didn't make it clear enough that I didn't think forgery would ever happen. Mostly interested in how bug-free it could be demonstrated.