The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently decided a case I was involved with.  The issue was whether GPS data automatically generated by a computer from an ankle monitor was hearsay.  The Court said no.  So the evidence was admissible to place the defendant at a particular location at a particular time.  Pretty damning to the defendant.  The Court ruled that such evidence was not hearsay because it was not a statement made by a declarant as required by Evidence Rule 801.  And it was not an assertion of non-verbal conduct by a person.  That would seem to be the final challenge to any kind of computer generated data including cell phone records.  The authentication requirement of Evidence Rule 901 has previously been addressed and now Rule 801 says you can’t claim the data is an out of court statement offered for the truth because it’s not a “statement”.  That requires verbal or non-verbal conduct by a PERSON.