Retained data and lawful disclosure: TS 102 657 and TS 103 705
ETSI TS 102 657 addresses request and delivery of retained data. TS 103 705 defines data structures for lawful disclosure. These support controlled search and handover of provider-held data; actual retention duties and eligible categories come from applicable law, not the standard.
Safety boundary: this chapter teaches lawful, governed system design from public standards. It does not provide operational targeting, activation, decryption, surveillance-evasion, or covert collection instructions.
The mental model
| Concept | Plain meaning | Control that must travel with it |
|---|---|---|
| Retained data | Provider data lawfully held under normal or mandated retention | Do not create data merely because a request might arrive |
| Request interface | Structured query under a validated disclosure authority | Bound scope, time, service, and data categories |
| Response | Available authorized records plus status or lawful refusal | Distinguish none found from not held or not permitted |
| 103 705 structure | Common data structures for disclosure | Pin edition and national profile |
| Search provenance | Records sources, query version, and processing outcome | Do not expose unrelated data in audit |
| Partial result | Explicitly reports limits, gaps, or unavailable data | Never fabricate completeness |
Apply it as a controlled workflow
- Validate disclosure authority independently from the query syntax.
- Map requested categories to governed provider systems and retention state.
- Search only approved fields, services, identities, and time window.
- Review, minimize, package, and validate the result.
- Deliver to the approved recipient and record receipt.
- Apply post-delivery retention, hold, and deletion policy.
Evidence to demand
- The system distinguishes not found, not held, legally unavailable, and technical failure.
- Queries cannot traverse unrelated customer or analytics repositories.
- Data lineage proves source and transformation.
- Retention policy is documented independently from disclosure capability.
Failure to reason about
A request asks for two years of data, but policy lawfully retains only six months. The system returns the eligible available window with an accurate status; it does not imply records were lost or expand retention retroactively.
Feynman check
Disclosure asks the provider for permitted pages already on its shelf. The catalog must say what is actually held, and the request cannot search every room.