Advertisement

AEACFE System—An Intelligent Digital Forensic System

  • Shruti B. YagnikEmail author
  • Esan P. PanchalEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 797)

Abstract

The significant increase in cyber crime has led to an increasing demand for researches to be done on cyber forensics. Cyber forensic investigation paradigm is laborious and requires significant expertise on the part of the investigators. There are various cyber forensic tools that are available in the market to analyze cyber forensic evidences. Those tools need manual intervention to make analysis and generate reports accordingly. Analysis of cyber forensic evidences needs to be automated such that investigator can directly conclude cyber forensic case. Taking and preserving evidences and analyzing evidences become a need of the hour. This paper highlights the various phases in which automation is a substitute for manual evidence taking and analysis. Evidences are automatically taken and analyzed without much intervention of the investigators. This method makes use of special kind of machine learning algorithms which aids in these situations. Machine learning algorithm analyzes digital evidences and presents hidden features to digital forensic investigators that may useful to make decision of digital forensic crime. Hence, this work is a complete fusion of cyber forensics and machine learning.

Keywords

Automation Cyber crime Cyber forensics Evidences Forensic investigations Machine learning algorithms 

References

  1. 1.
    Garfinkel S (2006) AFF: a new format for storing hard drive images. Commun ACM 49(2):85–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Panchal EP (2013) Extraction of persistence and volatile forensics evidences from computer system. Int J Comput Trends Technol (IJCTT) 4(5):964–968. ISSN 2231-2803. www.ijcttjournal.org. Published by Seventh Sense Research Group
  3. 3.
    Migletz JJ (2008) Automated metadata extraction. Dissertation Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate SchoolGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Migletz JJ (2008) Automated metadata extraction. Doctoral dissertation, Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate SchoolGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Digital Forensics XML and the DFXML Toolset by Simson Garfinkel in Naval Postgraduate School, 900 N. Glebe, Arlington, VA 2220Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Patel PC (2013) Aggregation of digital forensics evidences. Int J Comput Trends Technol (IJCTT) 4(4):881–884. ISSN 2231-2803. www.ijcttjournal.org. Published by Seventh Sense Research Group
  7. 7.
    Garfinkel SL (2009) Automating disk forensic processing with SleuthKit, XML and Python. In: 2009 Fourth international IEEE workshop on systematic approaches to digital forensic engineering. SADFE’09. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Allen WH (2005) Computer forensics. Secur Privacy IEEE 3(4):59–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mitchell TM (1997) Machine learning. McGraw HillGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yagnik SB (2013) Requirements to build a system that uses machine learning based approach for analysis of forensic data. Int J Comput Trends Technol (IJCTT) 4(4):927–932. ISSN 2231-2803. www.ijcttjournal.org. Published by Seventh Sense Research Group
  11. 11.
    Perumal S (2009) Digital forensic model based on Malaysian investigation process. Int J Comput Sci Netw Secur 9(8):38–44Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reith M, Carr C, Gunsch G (2002) An examination of digital forensic models. Int J Digit Evid 1:1–12Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Casey E (2004) Digital evidence and computer crime, 2nd edn. Elsevier Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Garfinkel SL (2010) Digital forensics research: the next 10 years. Digit Invest 7:S64–S73CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Science and Engineering DepartmentCalorx Teachers’ UniversityAhmedabadIndia
  2. 2.Computer Science and Engineering DepartmentRai UniversityAhmedabadIndia

Personalised recommendations