⚖️ ShieldDrop Legal Suite
PricingGet Compliant →
ETHICS & COMPLIANCE

ABA Rule 1.6 requires you
to scrub your metadata.

ABA Formal Opinion 06-442 explicitly states that attorneys must exercise reasonable care to prevent inadvertent disclosure of confidential information in metadata. Multiple state bars have issued similar opinions. Non-compliance is a disciplinary risk.

Start Scrubbing Now →

Relevant ABA Model Rules

Rule 1.1 (Competence)

A lawyer shall provide competent representation. Comment 8 specifically includes technological competence — including understanding how metadata works in documents you transmit.

Rule 1.6 (Confidentiality)

A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent. Hidden metadata in documents constitutes an inadvertent revelation.

Rule 4.4(b) (Inadvertent Disclosure)

If you receive a document that was clearly sent inadvertently (including metadata), you must promptly notify the sender. But preventing the disclosure in the first place is always better.

Ethics opinions requiring metadata scrubbing

Multiple jurisdictions have issued formal opinions making metadata scrubbing an ethical obligation.

JurisdictionOpinionYearKey RulingPractical Implication
ABAFormal Opinion 06-4422006Attorneys must exercise reasonable care to prevent the disclosure of confidential information in metadata when transmitting electronic documents. This includes reviewing documents for metadata before sending.Sending a Word document without scrubbing metadata may constitute an ethics violation.
New YorkNYSBA Ethics Opinion 7822004Lawyers have a duty to use reasonable care when transmitting electronic documents. Metadata should be removed to protect client confidences.New York attorneys face state bar scrutiny if metadata reveals client information.
FloridaFL Bar Ethics Opinion 06-22006Florida attorneys must take reasonable steps to remove metadata from electronic documents before transmitting them to third parties.Florida attorneys are on notice — metadata disclosure is a disciplinary risk.
AlabamaAL Ethics Opinion 2007-022007Attorneys should make reasonable efforts to remove metadata from electronic documents to ensure client confidentiality.Negligent metadata exposure could trigger Bar discipline proceedings.
ArizonaAZ Ethics Opinion 09-042009Lawyers have an obligation to exercise reasonable care to remove metadata from electronic documents before transmitting them to third parties.Metadata scrubbing is not optional — it's part of competent representation.

ShieldDrop = automatic ABA compliance.

Drag a document into ShieldDrop. Every metadata field — author names, GPS, revisions, device fingerprints — is stripped instantly. No server upload. No data retention. The strongest possible compliance posture for Rule 1.6.

Zero server transmission200+ metadata fields strippedVerifiable in DevTools11 AI tools included
Get Compliant Now →

7-day trial · $49/month · Cancel anytime

Frequently Asked Questions

Does ABA Rule 1.6 specifically mention metadata?

Not in the rule text itself, but ABA Formal Opinion 06-442 (2006) explicitly interprets Rule 1.6 to include metadata. The Opinion states that attorneys must exercise reasonable care to prevent disclosure of confidential information embedded in document metadata. Multiple state bars have issued similar opinions.

Can I be disciplined for not removing metadata?

Yes. If metadata in a document you transmitted reveals client confidential information, you may face disciplinary action for violating Rule 1.6 (Confidentiality) and Rule 1.1 (Competence). Comment 8 to Rule 1.1 specifically includes technological competence.

What types of metadata are most dangerous for attorneys?

The most dangerous categories are: (1) Author identity — revealing who drafted or edited a document; (2) GPS coordinates in photos — revealing locations; (3) Revision history — exposing deleted content, tracked changes, and editing patterns; (4) Timestamps — potentially contradicting testimony about when documents were created.

Is metadata removal enough for HIPAA compliance?

Metadata removal is one component of HIPAA compliance. ShieldDrop's zero-retention, browser-only architecture means protected health information (PHI) in documents is never transmitted to any server, which satisfies the most stringent reading of HIPAA data handling requirements.

How does ShieldDrop compare to Word's built-in Document Inspector?

Word's Document Inspector removes some metadata but misses many fields, doesn't handle non-Word file types, and still processes files on your local device. ShieldDrop strips 200+ metadata fields across PDFs, images, Office documents, and 200+ file types — all in-browser with zero server contact.

Do I need to scrub metadata on every document?

Best practice under ABA Opinion 06-442 is to treat metadata removal as a standard step before any document leaves your firm — to opposing counsel, courts, clients, or third parties. This includes email attachments, court filings, discovery productions, and shared drive uploads.

Related Resources

Metadata Risk AssessmentHow Opposing Counsel Mines MetadataState Metadata RulesDocument Security ChecklistMetadata Cases That Destroyed Careers
🚫We never sell your data. Ever.
🛡️Zero file retention — documents deleted instantly
🔒No ad tracking. No data brokers. No exceptions.
⚖️Attorney-client privilege protected by architecture