API-Based Forensic Acquisition of Cloud Drives
Cloud computing and cloud storage services, in particular, pose new challenges to digital forensic investigations. Currently, evidence acquisition for these services follows the traditional method of collecting artifacts residing on client devices. This approach requires labor-intensive reverse engineering effort and ultimately results in an acquisition that is inherently incomplete. Specifically, it makes the incorrect assumption that all the storage content associated with an account is fully replicated on the client. Additionally, there is no current method for acquiring historical data in the form of document revisions, nor is there a way to acquire cloud-native artifacts from targets such as Google Docs.
This chapter introduces the concept of API-based evidence acquisition for cloud services, which addresses the limitations of traditional acquisition techniques by utilizing the officially-supported APIs of the services. To demonstrate the utility of this approach, a proof-of-concept acquisition tool, kumodd, is presented. The kumodd tool can acquire evidence from four major cloud drive providers: Google Drive, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox and Box. The implementation provides command-line and web user interfaces, and can be readily incorporated in established forensic processes.
KeywordsCloud forensics Cloud drives API-based acquisition
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.DeFelippi, D.: Dropship (2016). github.com/driverdan/dropship
- 3.Drago, I., Bocchi, E., Mellia, M., Slatman, H., Pras, A.: Benchmarking personal cloud storage. In: Proceedings of the ACM Internet Measurement Conference, pp. 205–212 (2013)Google Scholar
- 4.Drago, I., Mellia, M., Munafo, M., Sperotto, A., Sadre, R., Pras, A.: Inside dropbox: understanding personal cloud storage services. In: Proceedings of the ACM Internet Measurement Conference, pp. 481–494 (2012)Google Scholar
- 5.Dropbox, Core API Best Practices, San Francisco, California (2016). www.dropbox.com/developers/core/bestpractices
- 6.ElcomSoft, ElcomSoft Cloud eXplorer, Moscow, Russia (2016). www.elcomsoft.com/ecx.html
- 8.Gartner, Gartner’s 2014 hype cycle for emerging technologies maps the journey to digital business, Stamford, Connecticut, August 11, 2014. www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2819918
- 9.Gartner, Gartner Hype Cycle, Stamford, Connecticut (2016). www.gartner.com/technology/research/methodologies/hype-cycle.jsp
- 10.Google, Drive, Mountain View, California (2016). developers.google.com/drive
- 12.Huber, M., Mulazzani, M., Leithner, M., Schrittwieser, S., Wondracek, G., Weippl, E.: Social snapshots: digital forensics for online social networks. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, pp. 113–122 (2011)Google Scholar
- 14.Mell, P., Grance, T.: The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing, NIST Special Publication 800–145, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland (2011)Google Scholar
- 15.Orland, K.: Dropbox clarifies its policy on reviewing shared files for DMCA issues, Ars Technica, March 30, 2014Google Scholar
- 18.RightScale, RightScale 2015 State of the Cloud Report, Santa Barbara, California (2015). assets.rightscale.com/uploads/pdfs/RightScale-2015-State-of-the-Cloud-Report.pdf