Daniel B. Garrie

Daniel B. Garrie

Where law meets technology

Daniel B. Garrie is a keynote speaker, JAMS neutral and Harvard Extension School instructor who explains what AI-generated evidence, deepfakes and cyberwarfare actually mean for the people who have to decide about them — boards, security leaders, and courts. He created a TED-Ed lesson on defining cyberwarfare, has written five books on digital evidence, and holds five U.S. patents in forensic scanning technology.

Book Daniel to speak Watch him on stage

See him work a room

The fastest way to judge a speaker is to watch one. Start with the TED-Ed lesson.

Still from Daniel B. Garrie's TED-Ed lesson on cyberwarfare

TED-Ed

Defining Cyberwarfare… In Hopes of Preventing It

What Every CISO Must Know About the Law

For security leaders

Cyber Warfare in the Digital Age

Panel discussion

Mediator and Arbitrator Profile

JAMS

Five talks

Each runs as a keynote, a workshop or a moderated conversation, and is rebuilt around the room it is given in.

Boards, general counsel, litigators

When the Evidence Is a Deepfake

Anyone can now manufacture a convincing recording of anyone saying anything. Courts, investigators and companies are still deciding what to do about it.

  • How synthetic audio and video are actually detected, and where detection fails
  • What a court needs before it will admit a recording as genuine
  • Where your organisation is currently trusting evidence it should be testing

Keynote, workshop, fireside

General and policy audiences

Defining Cyberwarfare

The TED-Ed lesson. Decades into the problem, there is still no working legal definition of an act of cyberwar — and you cannot deter what you cannot define.

  • Why existing law of armed conflict does not map onto network attacks
  • What separates espionage, crime and an act of war in practice
  • What a workable definition would have to do

Keynote, fireside

Directors, executives, CISOs

What Every Board Must Know Before the Breach

Directors carry legal exposure from the moment an incident starts, and most of the decisions that determine that exposure get made in the first forty-eight hours.

  • Which decisions in an incident create legal liability and which reduce it
  • What privilege does and does not protect once forensics begin
  • The questions a board should be asking before anything happens

Keynote, board session, workshop

Judges, litigators, expert witnesses

Teaching the Court to Read Code

Technical disputes are won and lost on whether the decision-maker understands the technology. Usually nobody has made it their job to explain it.

  • How to make software architecture legible to a non-technical decision-maker
  • Where technical expert testimony most often falls apart
  • What judges say they actually need from technical experts

CLE, judicial education, workshop

In-house counsel, litigators, ADR programmes

Inside the Special Master's Chair

When a technical dispute stalls a case, a special master is often what unsticks it. Few people outside the role know how that work actually gets done.

  • When appointing a neutral resolves a dispute faster than litigating it
  • How discovery and forensic disputes get narrowed in practice
  • How to design a mediation around a genuinely technical disagreement

Keynote, CLE, panel

Stages and audiences

Selected appearances. Every entry is listed by the organising body, by JAMS, or by a federal court — none of it rests on this site's own say-so.

Judges and the courts

  • Federal Judges Association, Tenth Quadrennial Conference Washington, D.C., 2022 — “Virtual Litigation”
  • Ninth Circuit, 2014 District Court Conference Featured presenter
  • New York State Bar Association, Commercial & Federal Litigation Section Annual Meeting, 2021 — cybersecurity and privacy obligations in commercial litigation

Security leaders and technologists

  • RSA Conference “Bug Bounty: Keeping Hacks Ethical”, 2022
  • Cybertech Global Tel Aviv, 2023 — “Foreign Interference via Internet and Social Media”
  • S4x23 Miami Beach, 2023 — “Two Sides of the Same Coin: Legal Security for ICS”
  • HTCIA International Conference & Expo Atlantic City, 2022 — authentication and immutable ledgers
  • Percona Live Amsterdam, 2026 — “Your Retention Policy Is a Legal Position”

Boards and the C-suite

  • The Official Cybersecurity Summit — Dallas 2025 — opening security keynote
  • The Official Cybersecurity Summit — nineteen city editions New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Seattle, Atlanta, Denver, Dallas, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Nashville, Silicon Valley and Washington, D.C., 2016–2022

Lawyers, arbitrators and in-house counsel

  • ABA TECHSHOW Los Angeles, 2022 — “Stopping the Trojan Horse: Securing and Preserving Your Business”
  • ABA Business Law Section, Spring Meeting Atlanta, 2022 — “Artificial Intelligence in International Arbitration”
  • ABA Dispute Resolution Section, Spring Conference Chicago, 2025
  • IP and International Dispute Resolution Seminar WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, IPOS and Penn State Dickinson Law — New York, 2025
  • Epiq Mass & Class Fort Lauderdale, 2024 — eDiscovery in data privacy class actions

Teaching

Harvard Extension School — Fundamentals of the Law and Cybersecurity (CSCI E-147A), co-taught with David Cass. Rutgers Law School — adjunct professor. Chicago-Kent College of Law and UCLA Extension — cybersecurity certificate programmes for lawyers.

What judges and counsel say

Published comments on Daniel B. Garrie's work as a neutral and as an instructor, reproduced verbatim from the Counsel Comments section of his JAMS profile. Most are anonymous exactly as published.

  • His report was a model of clarity—even to a lay person—and demonstrated how extremely conscientious and thorough he had been. The report was directly responsible for the prompt settlement not only of the case immediately before me, but also seven other disputes between the parties.

    Judge who appointed Mr. Garrie as a special master on a complex dispute

  • Thank you for volunteering to share your expertise in mediating e-discovery disputes. The quality of your instruction reflected the depth of both your technical expertise in electronic discovery and your facilitative expertise as a mediator.

    Magistrate judge who oversaw mediator training for the Seventh Circuit Electronic Discovery Pilot Program

  • Mr. Garrie is one of the few people who understand both the technical and legal issues that arise in disputes. His knowledge of each is at an expert level. This allows for more nuanced mediation and the higher likelihood of finding a compromise.

    Chief Privacy Officer and Partner, global law firm

  • The resume for Daniel Garrie provides a fair insight into his overall competence, experience, and abilities, but does not do justice to his reputation, brilliance and fairness which make him a truly extraordinary forensic neutral. One instance is illustrative. In a bitter, “scorched earth” trade secret case I handled, three weeks before trial, the trial court ordered the computer imaging of ten of my clients' computers and electronic devices to be completed within two weeks under the supervision of a forensic neutral expert. Together with opposing counsel and their client, we stipulated that Mr. Garrie could serve as the discovery neutral in the electronic discovery protocol order. He met the stringent time deadlines for the search, scanning, listing, incorporating redaction(s) for attorney-client privilege documents, and timely delivery of over 70,000 documents in the electronic discovery. An extraordinary achievement.

    Richard A. Love, Love LLP

  • I can't tell you enough how grateful I am that we picked you as our mediator and how lucky we are to have settled all things now being considered.

    Bankruptcy law attorney

About Daniel

Portrait of Daniel B. Garrie

Daniel B. Garrie sits in the seat where law and technology collide, and has done for most of his career. He is a neutral at JAMS, serving as arbitrator, mediator and court-appointed special master in disputes that turn on evidence most lawyers cannot read. He founded Law & Forensics, teaches cybersecurity law at Harvard Extension School, and holds five U.S. patents — one family, covering parallel malware scanning of forensic images.

He has written five books, published by the American Bar Association, Thomson Reuters and the Federal Judicial Center among others, including a guide to software written specifically for judges. He founded and edits the Journal of Law & Cyber Warfare.

He is a useful speaker for the same reason he is a useful neutral: he has to explain hard technical material to people who need to make a decision about it, and be understood the first time.

Recognition

Fellow of the Academy of Court Appointed Neutrals. Distinguished Neutral, CPR Institute. Fellow, Ponemon Institute.

Education

J.D., Rutgers School of Law. M.A. Computer Science with honours. Brandeis University.

Named

Leading Forensics & eDiscovery Expert by the New York Law Journal. Honorary admittance, Federal Court of Claims.

Bylined and quoted

  • Bloomberg Law
  • Law360
  • Forbes
  • ABA Journal
  • National Law Review

The rest of the practice

Speaking is one part of it. Organisations reach him for these too.

Arbitration and mediation

Arbitrator, mediator and court-appointed special master, through JAMS.

Full JAMS profile

Consulting and expert services

Digital forensics, incident response and expert testimony at Law & Forensics.

Law & Forensics

Five books

On digital evidence, cybersecurity, eDiscovery and software for the courts.

All titles

Scholarship

Founder and editor of the Journal of Law & Cyber Warfare, and a long list of articles.

Google Scholar

Book Daniel to speak

Tell him about the event and the room. He will come back to you directly about fit, format and availability.

Prefer email? info@lawandforensics.com
Organisers who need to circulate him internally can use the speaker kit.

What you enter here is used only to answer your speaking inquiry. It is never sold or shared, and no tracking or advertising cookies are set. See the privacy policy. This form is for event inquiries — please don't send confidential or privileged information, which the disclaimer explains.