Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in
Menu
Find a journal Publish with us
Search
Cart
Book cover

IFIP International Conference on Communications and Multimedia Security

CMS 2012: Communications and Multimedia Security pp 99–106Cite as

  1. Home
  2. Communications and Multimedia Security
  3. Conference paper
A Method for Reducing the Risk of Errors in Digital Forensic Investigations

A Method for Reducing the Risk of Errors in Digital Forensic Investigations

  • Graeme Horsman18,
  • Christopher Laing18 &
  • Paul Vickers18 
  • Conference paper
  • 1187 Accesses

  • 1 Citations

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNSC,volume 7394)

Abstract

Motivated by the concerns expressed by many academics over difficulties facing the digital forensic field, user-contributory case-based reasoning (UCCBR); a method for auditing digital forensic investigations is presented. This auditing methodology is not designed to replace a digital forensic practitioner but to aid their investigation process, acting as a method for reducing the risks of missed or misinterpreted evidence. The structure and functionality of UCCBR is discussed and its potential for implementation within a digital forensic environment.

Keywords

  • Digital forensics
  • Auditing
  • Case-based reasoning
  • Contributory

Download conference paper PDF

References

  1. Bem, D., Feld, F., Huebner, E., Bem, O.: Computer Forensics - Past, Present and Future. Journal of Information Science and Technology 5(3), 43–59 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rogers, M.K., Goldman, J., Mislan, R., Wedge, T., Debrota, S.: Computer Forensics Field Triage Process Model. In: Conference on Digital Forensics, Security and Law (2006), http://www.digitalforensics-conference.org/CFFTPI/CDFSL-proceedings2006-CFFTPM.pdf

  3. Lalla, H., Flowerday, S.V.: Towards a Standardised Digital Forensic Process: Email Forensics. In: 2010 Information Security for South Africa (ISSA 2010) Conference (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Freiling, F.C., Schwittay, B.: A Common Process Model for Incident Response and Computer Forensics. In: 2007 Proceedings of Conference on IT Incident Management and IT Forensics, Germany (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Richard, G.G., Roussev, V.: Next-generation digital forensics. Communications of the ACM 49(2), 76–80 (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Sheldon, A.: The future of forensic computing. Digital Investigation 2, 31–35 (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Bruschi, D., Monga, M.: How to Reuse Knowledge About Forensic Investigations. In: Digital Forensics Research Workshop (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  8. ADF Triage Solutions for Evidence and Intelligence Acquisition (2010) (accessed: March 24, 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ayers, D.: A second generation computer forensic analysis system. Digital Investigation 6, 34–42 (2009)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Taylor, C., Endicott-Popovskyb, B., Frinckec, D.A.: Specifying digital forensics: A forensics policy approach. Digital Investigation 4, 101–104 (2007)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Expert Working Group on Human Factors in Latent Print Analysis. Latent Print Examination and Human Factors: Improving the Practice through a Systems Approach. U.S. Department of Commerce (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Erbacher, R.F.: Validation for Digital Forensics. In: 2010 Seventh International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations, ITNG (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bruschi, D., Monga, M.: How to Reuse Knowledge About Forensic Investigations. In: Digital Forensics Research Workshop (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sheldon, A.: The future of forensic computing. Digital Investigation 2, 31–35 (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Jamil, S., Aeiker, J.D., Crow, D.R.: Auditing is Key. IEEE Industry Applications Magazine 16, 47–56 (2010)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Aamodt, A., Plaza, E.: Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variations, and System Approaches. AI Communications 7, 39–59 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Xu, L.: Developing a case-based knowledge system for AIDS prevention. Expert Systems 11, 237–244 (1994)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Guidance Software ‘EnCase Forensic’ (2012), http://www.guidancesoftware.com/forensic.htm

  19. Rissland, E., Kevin, A., Branting, L.K.: Case-based reasoning and law. The Knowledge Engineering Review 20, 293–298 (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Katedee, S., Sanrach, C., Thesawadwong, T.: Case-Based Reasoning System for Histopathology Diagnosis. In: 2010 International Conference on Educational and Information Technology, ICEIT (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kolodner, J.: An Introduction to Case-Based Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence Review 6, 3–34 (1992)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  22. Kerr, S.G., Jooste, S., Grupe, F.H., Vreeland, J.M.: A case-based approach to the evaluation of new audit clients. Journal of Computer Information Systems 47(4), 19–27 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Aamodt, A., Plaza, E.: Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variations, and System Approaches. AI Communications 7, 39–59 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Keppens, J., Schaferb, B.: Knowledge based crime scenario modelling. Expert Systems with Applications 30, 203–222 (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  25. Dudai, Y.: How Big Is Human Memory, or On Being Just Useful Enough. Learning and Memory 3(5), 341–365 (1997)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  26. Timmermans, D.: The Impact of Task Complexity on Information Use in Multi-attribute Decision Making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 6, 95–111 (1993)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  27. Reeson, A., Dunstall, S.: Behavioural Economics and Complex Decision-Making. Implications for the Australian Tax and Transfer System (2009), http://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/content/html/commissioned_work/downloads/CSIRO_AFTS_Behavioural_economics_paper.pdf (accessed February 1, 2012)

  28. Horsman, G., Laing, C., Vickers, P.: A Case Based Reasoning Framework for Improving the Trustworthiness of Digital Forensic Investigations. In: The 11th IEEE International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computing, Engineering and Information Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, United Kingdom

    Graeme Horsman, Christopher Laing & Paul Vickers

Authors
  1. Graeme Horsman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher Laing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Vickers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, IBBT-DistriNet, K.U. Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200A, 3001, Leuven, Belgium

    Bart De Decker

  2. School of Computing, University of Kent, CT2 7NZ, Canterbury, Kent, UK

    David W. Chadwick

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

About this paper

Cite this paper

Horsman, G., Laing, C., Vickers, P. (2012). A Method for Reducing the Risk of Errors in Digital Forensic Investigations. In: De Decker, B., Chadwick, D.W. (eds) Communications and Multimedia Security. CMS 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7394. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32805-3_8

Download citation

  • .RIS
  • .ENW
  • .BIB
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32805-3_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-32804-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-32805-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Search

Navigation

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Books A-Z

Publish with us

  • Publish your research
  • Open access publishing

Products and services

  • Our products
  • Librarians
  • Societies
  • Partners and advertisers

Our imprints

  • Springer
  • Nature Portfolio
  • BMC
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Apress
  • Your US state privacy rights
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Help and support

167.114.118.210

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2023 Springer Nature