Case Study: A US Law Firm Secures Client Files With Encryption First
Law firms are different from most businesses in one important way. It is not just that they manage sensitive documents. It is that a single missing document can change the outcome of a case, a contract, or a dispute. When the stakes are that high, backup and disaster recovery cannot be treated as a background IT task. It has to be part of how the firm protects its clients.
This case study follows a mid sized US law firm that modernized how it protected files, email exports, matter folders, and internal records. Their biggest requirement was simple and non negotiable: backups must be encrypted before data leaves their environment. They wanted strong security without creating a daily headache for staff. And they wanted a recovery process that could be executed quickly if something went wrong.
They achieved that by moving to a backup and storage strategy built around encryption first, structured retention, and tested restores, using RedVault Systems cloud storage and a defined Backup & Disaster Recovery workflow.
Firm Profile and Data Reality
The client was a US based law firm with roughly 60 employees across two offices. They supported a mix of litigation, business contracts, and estate work. That mix shaped their data.
- Litigation teams needed fast access to large case folders that included PDFs, evidence files, scanned documents, and discovery exports.
- Business contract teams had a high volume of smaller files, but those files were extremely sensitive and often time critical.
- Estate work included personal identification documents, financial statements, and signed materials that had both legal and privacy implications.
Their environment included a central file server, a document management layer, and a small set of virtual machines that supported authentication and internal apps. Many employees worked hybrid, which meant remote access and more endpoints.
Like many firms, they had "enough backup" on paper, but not enough confidence in practice.
The Pain That Triggered Change
Three events pushed the firm to act.
First, they had a near miss with a phishing attempt that reached multiple staff. It did not turn into a full breach, but it shook leadership. The managing partner asked IT a direct question: "If ransomware hit us tomorrow, how quickly can we restore the files we need for court next week?"
The honest answer was "We think we can, but we have not tested it recently."
Second, the firm had a matter file accidentally overwritten by an internal process. It was recoverable, but it took longer than it should have because the restore path was clunky. Partners do not forget wasted time when deadlines are tight.
Third, they faced a client security questionnaire during onboarding for a large corporate account. One of the questions was essentially: "How do you protect backup data, and is it encrypted before leaving your control?" The firm had partial encryption, but it was not enforced as a standard.
That combination created urgency. They did not want to "hope" their backup was secure. They wanted a system they could explain confidently.
Goals and Requirements
The firm defined success with four requirements.
Encryption first
Backups must be encrypted before they are sent to storage. That meant the firm would not be relying on storage side encryption alone. They wanted the data protected before it ever left their environment.
Predictable restores
They needed a restore workflow that could recover individual folders, entire matter directories, and critical systems without guesswork.
Retention aligned with legal reality
Some matter files must be retained for years. Others could be archived after a period. They wanted a retention plan that supported legal obligations without ballooning costs or creating confusion.
Minimal disruption
Attorneys and paralegals do not want new prompts, new steps, or new "rules" that slow their work. The solution had to run quietly, with good visibility for IT.
Because RedVault Systems Backup & Disaster Recovery encrypts data before it is sent to Backblaze B2 storage, it matched the firm's top priority. From there, the rest of the design could be built around recoverability and process.
The Implementation Approach
The rollout was done in phases to keep risk low and minimize disruption.
Phase 1: Inventory and Classification
The team started with a plain language inventory.
- What are the systems we must restore first to keep the firm operating?
- Which file shares are active and constantly changing?
- Which data sets are archives, and which are "active matter work"?
They classified data into three tiers.
- Tier 1: authentication services, document management functions, critical virtual machines, and the most active matter directories.
- Tier 2: standard file shares, department folders, and operational documents.
- Tier 3: long term archives, closed matter folders, and historical repositories.
This classification was not just for IT. Partners reviewed it and agreed on what mattered most. That alignment prevented future arguments and made recovery planning easier.
Phase 2: Backup Scheduling That Matches the Work
The firm did not need everything backed up every hour. They needed frequent protection on the highest value active areas, and steady protection elsewhere.
- Tier 1 data got tighter backup intervals and shorter RPO targets.
- Tier 2 data used consistent daily protection and additional restore points based on change rate.
- Tier 3 data focused on long term retention, with fewer restore points but strong continuity.
The design goal was to improve recovery, not create constant backup noise.
Phase 3: Retention Policy That Supports Legal Retention
Retention was where many firms get stuck. They either keep everything forever, which gets expensive and messy, or they set rules that are too aggressive and create risk.
This firm built a retention model around practical legal and operational needs:
- Short term restore points to cover human mistakes and quick recovery requests
- Medium term restore points for typical case timelines and internal rework
- Long term archive points for closed matters
They also created a simple internal rule: when a matter closes, the folder moves into an archive classification, and retention shifts accordingly. The key was consistency.
Phase 4: Restore Testing and Runbook
This was the most important phase. Backups without restore practice are a comfort blanket, not a plan.
They performed test restores for each tier:
- A folder level restore of an active matter directory
- A system level restore simulation for a critical virtual machine
- An archive restore of a closed matter folder
They documented the steps in a runbook written for real people, not just engineers. It included:
- What to do first in an incident
- Who to notify
- How to select restore points
- How to validate restored data
- How to communicate progress to partners
They also defined what "done" looks like for a restore. It is not "files restored." It is "the right people can access the right files and continue work."
If you want a comparable structure for your business, the foundational approach is what RedVault Systems cloud storage supports, because it ties storage to recovery discipline and encryption first.
The Security Backbone: Encryption Before Storage
This firm's leadership cared about one detail above all else: backup data must be protected even if something else fails.
Their backups were encrypted before being sent to B2 storage. That changed the security conversation immediately.
It meant:
- Backup data remained protected in transit and at rest.
- Storage access alone did not equal data access.
- The firm could answer client security questionnaires with confidence.
For a law firm, that is not just a technical benefit. It is a business benefit. Clients trust firms with sensitive information, and firms increasingly need to prove they handle data responsibly.
The encryption first posture gave the partners peace of mind. It also reduced internal pressure on IT, because they were no longer defending "good enough" security.
The Real World Event: Suspicious Encryption Activity
About two months after rollout, the firm faced an incident that tested the design.
An endpoint security alert flagged suspicious file modification patterns from a user workstation. The behavior looked like mass file changes, the kind you might see in the early stages of ransomware.
The firm did not wait to see if it became worse. They acted quickly.
- IT isolated the affected workstation from the network.
- They disabled the user's account and forced credential resets for a small set of related accounts.
- They temporarily restricted access to certain shared folders while they investigated.
- They communicated to partners that an incident response was in progress and that they were protecting matter files.
At this point, the firm was not sure if files were encrypted, corrupted, or simply touched. But they had a clear goal: stop spread, confirm impact, restore clean data if needed.
Determining the Blast Radius
They checked the affected file shares and identified that one active matter directory had unusual file changes and a few files that would not open. It did not appear to be a firm wide encryption event, but it was a risk.
They chose a conservative approach. Instead of trying to repair individual files, they restored the affected matter directory to a clean restore point, then compared a small set of documents to verify integrity.
This was where the earlier testing paid off. They did not have to invent steps under pressure.
Recovery Timeline
The incident response and recovery moved in a controlled, predictable way.
- Hour 0 to 1: isolate workstation, lock down account access, confirm alerts
- Hour 1 to 2: assess impacted folder, identify last known good restore point
- Hour 2 to 3: restore affected matter directory from clean point
- Hour 3 to 4: validate restored files with the practice group, confirm access, reopen folder permissions
By the end of the day, attorneys working that matter had clean files and minimal disruption. They lost very little work because the restore point was recent and the folder level recovery was targeted.
Most importantly, they did not experience panic. The partners did not feel like the firm was "in free fall." That is what a good plan does. It keeps leadership calm because the steps are known.
What Made the Outcome Strong
Several factors combined to create a good outcome.
A tested restore path
Because restores had been practiced, the team knew what was possible and how long it would take.
Tiering prevented overreaction
Instead of shutting down everything, they isolated what was needed, protected critical areas, and recovered only the impacted data.
Clear communication
Partners got updates that were easy to understand. They were told what was affected, what was not, and what the next milestone was.
Encryption first reduced the "what if" fear
Even if the incident had escalated, encrypted backups meant the firm had protected recovery points that were not easy targets.
This is why the firm's leadership later said the biggest win was confidence. They were no longer guessing. They had a system.
Operational Improvements After the Incident
Even though the event was contained, the firm improved three things afterward.
Faster escalation rules
They created a simple "trigger list" for when IT isolates a workstation, even if the user claims "nothing happened." They preferred early caution.
Quarterly restore drills
They scheduled short restore tests each quarter. One test focused on active data. Another focused on archives. This kept the process fresh.
Tighter permissions on matter folders
They reviewed who needed access to what. Reducing broad access also reduced the chance of wide impact from one compromised endpoint.
These are not huge changes, but they build resilience over time.
Business Impact
The business impact went beyond a single incident.
- The firm could now confidently answer client security questions about backups and encryption.
- Attorneys regained trust in IT's ability to restore files quickly.
- The firm reduced risk of missed deadlines due to data loss.
- Partners felt more comfortable expanding remote work because recovery and protection were stronger.
In a competitive legal market, that matters. Clients care about results, and results depend on information availability.
If your organization has similar requirements, the approach behind RedVault Systems Backup & Disaster Recovery fits the same priorities: encryption first, secure cloud storage, and restore readiness that you can rely on.
Lessons Learned
This case reinforced a few practical truths for US firms handling sensitive data.
- Backups are part of client trust, not just IT maintenance.
- Encryption before storage simplifies risk discussions.
- Restore testing is the difference between confidence and hope.
- Retention should be designed around real business needs, not blanket fear.
- Incident response works best when it is a calm checklist, not a last minute scramble.
Most firms do not need a complex solution. They need a disciplined one.
Conclusion
This law firm did not modernize backup just to check a box. They did it to protect clients, protect operations, and protect deadlines. They built a plan around encryption first, tiered retention, and restore practice. When a suspicious incident hit, they executed calmly and recovered clean data quickly.
That is what "ready" looks like.
If you are building a similar posture for your US business, start with the same fundamentals supported by RedVault Systems cloud storage: encrypt before storage, design for recovery, and make restores routine.
References
- NIST guidance concepts for incident response and contingency planning (general reference)
- Common US legal industry data protection and backup best practices (general reference)
- Backblaze B2 storage and durability concepts used in cloud storage planning (general reference)