Before Putting Client Files in Protégé Vault or Workrooms

LexisNexis describes Vault as a place to upload, store, and analyze document collections and Workrooms as shared spaces with permissions and activity history. Its current product pages also describe encryption, privacy controls, and a policy against using customer data to train public models or improve performance for other customers.

Those vendor statements are relevant, but they do not decide whether a particular client file belongs in a particular workspace. The firm still needs matter-level rules, contract evidence, tested configuration, accountable administration, and a defensible lifecycle. If a public page or available agreement does not document a required control, treat it as an open question, not as an implied feature.

Do not begin with a bulk upload. Create an eligibility matrix that distinguishes public, fictional, internal administrative, client-provided, attorney work product, privileged, personal, regulated, sealed, export-controlled, investigation, litigation-hold, and contract-restricted information.

For each class, identify the client instruction, engagement term, protective order, court rule, insurance requirement, privacy obligation, professional duty, and firm policy that may affect processing. The result may permit a controlled use, require client or counsel review, limit the file type, prohibit external sharing, or exclude the matter entirely.

Record who can approve an exception and what evidence must exist before upload. Technology configuration cannot resolve a legal or ethical question about a matter’s eligibility.

Define who may create a Vault or Workroom, invite a participant, change a role, upload, retrieve, analyze, export, share, or delete. Test those actions with realistic identities and denied cases. Separate ordinary members, matter owners, firm administrators, provider administrators, guests, and support personnel.

The public pages reviewed describe retention and deletion controls at a general level, but they do not by themselves establish the exact schedule, legal-hold interaction, backup disposition, or termination behavior for the firm’s contracted Vault and Workrooms configuration. Request the applicable agreement, service description, administrative documentation, and test evidence.

The lifecycle map should answer:

Determine which firm controls can see and govern the data once it enters the service. Test sensitivity labels, data-loss prevention rules, malware handling, file restrictions, download controls, and alerts where the contracted path supports them. If a firm tool cannot inspect the service, identify the provider evidence or compensating review that will be used.

Ask how encryption applies in transit and at rest, how keys are managed, whether any customer-managed option exists, and where temporary processing, indexes, previews, and backups reside. Avoid inferring certification scope from a logo or a statement about another product. Obtain the current report, scope, exclusions, subservice organizations, and bridge evidence required by the firm’s risk process.

For eDiscovery and audit, define the events needed for access review, incident investigation, client inquiry, and preservation. Test whether the firm can export who created, viewed, searched, analyzed, downloaded, shared, changed, or deleted a file or workspace, with useful timestamps and identifiers. Confirm whether prompts, outputs, versions, permission changes, guest activity, administrator access, and support access are included.

A lifecycle includes abnormal events. Establish who the firm contacts, response times, notification terms, evidence preservation, containment options, and the roles of LexisNexis, the firm’s technology provider, counsel, insurer, and client decision-makers. Test account suspension, guest revocation, workspace isolation, export, and evidence collection before an incident.

Also test accidental deletion, corrupted or unsupported files, unavailable service, failed upload, incomplete analysis, and a departed workspace owner. Decide whether the original DMS or another approved repository remains the authoritative record and whether Vault or Workrooms is a processing copy, collaboration record, or system of record. Backups and recovery expectations must match that decision.

Before the first eligible client file enters the service, require a signed or recorded decision that identifies the matter, file class, purpose, product surface, owner, permitted users, guest rule, source system, authoritative copy, retention schedule, hold status, review gate, export path, incident contact, and evidence reviewed.

Begin with fictional, public, sanitized, or explicitly approved material. Test the full lifecycle, including disposal and export, not only the useful analysis. Expand to another file class or matter only when its distinct obligations and failure consequences have been reviewed.