Commitment and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jul. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Legal Contingencies From time to time, we may be a party to various legal proceedings and subject to claims in the ordinary course of business. BlackBerry Litigation Starting in October 2019, BlackBerry Corp. and its subsidiary Cylance, Inc. (BlackBerry) filed a total of nine proceedings (seven lawsuits and two arbitrations) against us and certain former BlackBerry employees who joined our company. In these proceedings, BlackBerry alleges that it has viable legal claims as a result of its former employees joining us. Many of these proceedings have now been dismissed. The status of each of the currently pending proceedings is discussed below. We have defended against these claims and expect to continue to defend against these claims. BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Coulter, et al. On October 17, 2019, BlackBerry commenced an action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Coulter, et al., No. 953-10-19 (Vt. Super. Ct.) (Vermont Action) against Chris Coulter, an employee on our Vigilance services team. On October 23, 2019, BlackBerry filed an amended complaint that added us as a defendant. The amended complaint asserts claims against us for conspiracy, tortious interference with contract, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duties, and misappropriation of trade secrets. The court entered a preliminary injunction order enjoining Mr. Coulter from working for us through February 2021. As a result of the court’s order, Mr. Coulter chose to seek other employment and is no longer employed by us. On January 15, 2021, the court entered an order narrowing the scope of the case and limiting the claims against us in order to avoid conflict with a similar action that was previously filed in California and was dismissed. The Vermont Action is currently pending. On October 25, 2019, BlackBerry commenced an action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al v. Coulter, et al., No. 2019-0854-JTL (Del. Ch.) against Mr. Coulter and us in Delaware Chancery Court. The court stayed this case pending resolution of the Vermont Action, and on February 7, 2020, BlackBerry voluntarily dismissed without prejudice all claims against Mr. Coulter and us. On December 3, 2019, BlackBerry initiated a largely duplicative action in arbitration solely against Mr. Coulter administered by JAMS, an alternative dispute resolution provider. That arbitration action, however, was dismissed on or about March 30, 2021, with JAMS informing us that they had closed their files on this matter on April 30, 2021. BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Page, et al. On November 18, 2019, BlackBerry commenced an action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Page, et al., No. 2019-CP-07-2552 (S.C. Cir. Ct.) against Barnaby Page, a go-to-market employee, and us, in a South Carolina state court. The complaint asserts claims against us for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duties, tortious interference with contract, and misappropriation of trade secrets. Following initial discovery, on August 27, 2020, we and Mr. Page filed a joint motion for judgment on the pleadings. Following initial discovery, the parties agreed to stipulate to a dismissal of this lawsuit without prejudice, and a dismissal order was entered by the court on January 31, 2022. Blackberry Corp. et al. v. Sentinel Labs, Inc., et al. On January 16, 2020, BlackBerry commenced the action captioned, BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Sentinel Labs, Inc., et al., No. 20CV361950 (Cal. Super. Ct. Santa Clara Cnty.) (Current California Action), against us and unnamed “Doe” defendants, asserting claims against us for trade secret misappropriation and unfair business practices. We filed counterclaims that, in part, seek to invalidate any agreements allegedly supporting BlackBerry’s claims against its former employees. On December 14, 2020, we filed a motion requesting that BlackBerry sufficiently identify any trade secrets it alleges we misappropriated in accordance with California law. On February 12, 2021, the court granted that motion in part, including striking BlackBerry’s expert testimony, and limiting the scope of discovery to customer lists and sales-related information. On March 15, 2021, BlackBerry re-filed a statement identifying its trade secrets to pursue broader claims and discovery. In response, on April 5, 2021, we again filed a motion requesting that BlackBerry sufficiently identify any trade secrets under California law. On June 2, 2021, the court granted the motion in our favor, absent a few discrete areas permitted by the court. On July 2, 2021, Blackberry filed its third amended trade secret identification. In response, on July 16, 2021, we submitted a motion challenging these claims. In its third trade secret statement, in response to our motion again challenging the sufficiency of its trade secret disclosures, Blackberry voluntarily dropped various claims. The parties are currently in the early stages of discovery over the revised trade secret disclosures approved by the court on August 31, 2021. We continue to litigate this action, including actively pursuing our counterclaims against them. BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Quinn, et al. On February 17, 2020, BlackBerry commenced the action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Quinn, et al., No. D-1-GN-20-00096 (Tex. Civ. Ct. – Travis Cnty.) against Sean Quinn, a go-to-market employee, and us, in Texas state court. On August 8, 2020, we and Mr. Quinn moved to stay or dismiss the case in light of the overlapping issues between this case and the Current California Action. On September 21, 2020, the court stayed this case pending resolution of the Current California Action. This lawsuit remains stayed and is pending in abeyance before the Texas court. BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Kaylan Brown Coulter. On or about April 7, 2022, BlackBerry commenced an action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Kaylan Brown Coulter, No. 22-cv-01249 (Vt. Super. Ct.) (Brown-Coulter Action) against Kaylan Brown Coulter, the wife of Chris Coulter (referenced above), alleging breach of non-disclosure and non-solicitation agreements, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of fiduciary duties, and civil conspiracy. While this is part of the same series of lawsuits by BlackBerry, we were not named in this action. On May 6, 2022, Ms. Brown-Coulter removed the case to the United States District Court for the District of Vermont, No. 5:22-cv-98 (D. Vt.). Shortly thereafter, on May 13, 2022, Ms. Brown-Coulter filed a motion to dismiss all claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). This motion is currently pending before the court. We have not recorded any accruals for loss contingencies associated with these legal proceedings, determined that an unfavorable outcome is probable, or determined that the amount or range of any possible loss is reasonably estimable. We believe that there are no other pending or threatened legal proceedings that are likely to have a material adverse effect on our condensed consolidated financial statements. Warranties and Indemnification Our services are generally warranted to deliver and operate in a manner consistent with general industry standards that are reasonably applicable and materially conform with our documentation under normal use and circumstances. Our contracts generally include certain provisions for indemnifying customers against liabilities if our products or services infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights. We also offer a limited warranty to certain customers, subject to certain conditions, to cover certain costs incurred by the customer in case of a cybersecurity breach. We have entered into an insurance policy to cover our potential liability arising from this limited warranty arrangement. We have not incurred any material costs related to such obligations and have not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in the condensed consolidated financial statements as of July 31, 2022 and January 31, 2022. In addition, we also indemnify certain of our directors and executive officers against certain liabilities that may arise while they are serving in good faith in their company capacities. We maintain director and officer liability insurance coverage that would generally enable us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid.

Starting in October 2019, BlackBerry Corp. and its subsidiary Cylance, Inc. (BlackBerry) filed a total of nine proceedings (seven lawsuits and two arbitrations) against us and certain former BlackBerry employees who joined our company. In these proceedings, BlackBerry alleges that it has viable legal claims as a result of its former employees joining us. Many of these proceedings have now been dismissed. The status of each of the currently pending proceedings is discussed below. We have defended against these claims and expect to continue to defend against these claims.

BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Coulter, et al. On October 17, 2019, BlackBerry commenced an action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Coulter, et al., No. 953-10-19 (Vt. Super. Ct.) (Vermont Action) against Chris Coulter, an employee on our Vigilance services team. On October 23, 2019, BlackBerry filed an amended complaint that added us as a defendant. The amended complaint asserts claims against us for conspiracy, tortious interference with contract, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duties, and misappropriation of trade secrets. The court entered a preliminary injunction order enjoining Mr. Coulter from working for us through February 2021. As a result of the court’s order, Mr. Coulter chose to seek other employment and is no longer employed by us. On January 15, 2021, the court entered an order narrowing the scope of the case and limiting the claims against us in order to avoid conflict with a similar action that was previously filed in California and was dismissed. The Vermont Action is currently pending. On October 25, 2019, BlackBerry commenced an action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al v. Coulter, et al., No. 2019-0854-JTL (Del. Ch.) against Mr. Coulter and us in Delaware Chancery Court. The court stayed this case pending resolution of the Vermont Action, and on February 7, 2020, BlackBerry voluntarily dismissed without prejudice all claims against Mr. Coulter and us. On December 3, 2019, BlackBerry initiated a largely duplicative action in arbitration solely against Mr. Coulter administered by JAMS, an alternative dispute resolution provider. That arbitration action, however, was dismissed on or about March 30, 2021, with JAMS informing us that they had closed their files on this matter on April 30, 2021.

BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Page, et al. On November 18, 2019, BlackBerry commenced an action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Page, et al., No. 2019-CP-07-2552 (S.C. Cir. Ct.) against Barnaby Page, a go-to-market employee, and us, in a South Carolina state court. The complaint asserts claims against us for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duties, tortious interference with contract, and misappropriation of trade secrets. Following initial discovery, on August 27, 2020, we and Mr. Page filed a joint motion for judgment on the pleadings. Following initial discovery, the parties agreed to stipulate to a dismissal of this lawsuit without prejudice, and a dismissal order was entered by the court on January 31, 2022.

Blackberry Corp. et al. v. Sentinel Labs, Inc., et al. On January 16, 2020, BlackBerry commenced the action captioned, BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Sentinel Labs, Inc., et al., No. 20CV361950 (Cal. Super. Ct. Santa Clara Cnty.) (Current California Action), against us and unnamed “Doe” defendants, asserting claims against us for trade secret misappropriation and unfair business practices. We filed counterclaims that, in part, seek to invalidate any agreements allegedly supporting BlackBerry’s claims against its former employees. On December 14, 2020, we filed a motion requesting that BlackBerry sufficiently identify any trade secrets it alleges we misappropriated in accordance with California law. On February 12, 2021, the court granted that motion in part, including striking BlackBerry’s expert testimony, and limiting the scope of discovery to customer lists and sales-related information. On March 15, 2021, BlackBerry re-filed a statement identifying its trade secrets to pursue broader claims and discovery. In response, on April 5, 2021, we again filed a motion requesting that BlackBerry sufficiently identify any trade secrets under California law. On June 2, 2021, the court granted the motion in our favor, absent a few discrete areas permitted by the court. On July 2, 2021, Blackberry filed its third amended trade secret identification. In response, on July 16, 2021, we submitted a motion challenging these claims. In its third trade secret statement, in response to our motion again challenging the sufficiency of its trade secret disclosures, Blackberry voluntarily dropped various claims. The parties are currently in the early stages of discovery over the revised trade secret disclosures approved by the court on August 31, 2021. We continue to litigate this action, including actively pursuing our counterclaims against them.

BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Quinn, et al. On February 17, 2020, BlackBerry commenced the action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Quinn, et al., No. D-1-GN-20-00096 (Tex. Civ. Ct. – Travis Cnty.) against Sean Quinn, a go-to-market employee, and us, in Texas state court. On August 8, 2020, we and Mr. Quinn moved to stay or dismiss the case in light of the overlapping issues between this case and the Current California Action. On September 21, 2020, the court stayed this case pending resolution of the Current California Action. This lawsuit remains stayed and is pending in abeyance before the Texas court.

BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Kaylan Brown Coulter. On or about April 7, 2022, BlackBerry commenced an action captioned BlackBerry Corp., et al. v. Kaylan Brown Coulter, No. 22-cv-01249 (Vt. Super. Ct.) (Brown-Coulter Action) against Kaylan Brown Coulter, the wife of Chris Coulter (referenced above), alleging breach of non-disclosure and non-solicitation agreements, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of fiduciary duties, and civil conspiracy. While this is part of the same series of lawsuits by BlackBerry, we were not named in this action. On May 6, 2022, Ms. Brown-Coulter removed the case to the United States District Court for the District of Vermont, No. 5:22-cv-98 (D. Vt.). Shortly thereafter, on May 13, 2022, Ms. Brown-Coulter filed a motion to dismiss all claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). This motion is currently pending before the court.

We have not recorded any accruals for loss contingencies associated with these legal proceedings, determined that an unfavorable outcome is probable, or determined that the amount or range of any possible loss is reasonably estimable. We believe that there are no other pending or threatened legal proceedings that are likely to have a material adverse effect on our condensed consolidated financial statements.

Our services are generally warranted to deliver and operate in a manner consistent with general industry standards that are reasonably applicable and materially conform with our documentation under normal use and circumstances. Our contracts generally include certain provisions for indemnifying customers against liabilities if our products or services infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights.

We also offer a limited warranty to certain customers, subject to certain conditions, to cover certain costs incurred by the customer in case of a cybersecurity breach. We have entered into an insurance policy to cover our potential liability arising from this limited warranty arrangement. We have not incurred any material costs related to such obligations and have not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in the condensed consolidated financial statements as of July 31, 2022 and January 31, 2022.