Privilege-log redaction is the removal of personal data from the index of withheld items. FRCP 26(b)(5)(A) asks you to describe them without revealing what is privileged. anonym.plus runs on your device, so each entry keeps its stated basis.
When this applies
Rule 26(b)(5)(A) makes a log the price of withholding. Author, recipient, and subject fields name people. A thin entry risks the claim itself; a verbose one can disclose the very content you withheld.
How anonym.plus handles it
- Load the file into anonym.plus on your device.
- The tool scans author, recipient, and description fields.
- It flags names, dates, and contacts in each row.
- Confirm the flags; keep the stated basis text intact.
- Replace or mask the confirmed PII.
- Save the clean index with no network call.
What you need to provide
- The file as XLSX, CSV, DOCX, or PDF.
- An operator: Mask for partial names, Replace for aliases.
- Optional steady labels so one person maps to one alias.
PII entity types detected
| Category | anonym.plus entity type | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Names | PERSON | From: J. Marek → [AUTHOR] |
| Names | PERSON | To: Dr. Lindqvist → [RECIPIENT] |
| Dates | DATE_TIME | Sent 04/02 → [DATE] |
| Contact | EMAIL_ADDRESS | j.marek@firm.com → [EMAIL] |
| Identifiers | US_SSN | SSN in subject → [SSN] |
| Document IDs | PERSON | Bates PRIV-0042 → [DOC_ID] |
Compliance achieved
- Describes withheld items as FRCP 26(b)(5)(A) requires, without the content.
- Masking author and recipient leaves the claim testable rather than waived.
- In-house work avoids the vendor disclosure that puts you on FRE 502(b).
Anonymize privilege logs offline — see plans & start free →
Limitations & cautions
Each row must still describe its item enough to test the claim. Mask names, but do not strip so much that the basis becomes vague. Over-redaction can itself draw a motion to compel, so review every entry.
Frequently asked questions
Can a weak log forfeit the privilege?
It can. Courts have treated an index too vague to test as a forfeit of the claim. Keep the date, document type, and basis on every row, and mask only the personal data.
Does masking a name waive anything?
No. Rule 26(b)(5)(A) asks for a description that lets the other side assess the claim, not a full identity list. A steady alias per person keeps the index readable.
What if a privileged item slips into the set?
Rule 26(b)(5)(B) governs. You give notice, and the receiving party must return, sequester, or destroy it. An FRE 502(d) order makes that non-waiver binding.