Abstract
Traditional approaches to digital forensics deal with the reconstruction of events within digital devices that were often not built for the creation of evidence. This paper focuses on incorporating requirements for forensic readiness – designing in features and characteristics that support the use of the data produced by digital devices as evidence. The legal requirements that such evidence must meet are explored in developing technical requirements for the design of digital devices. The resulting approach can be used to develop digital devices and establish processes for creating digital evidence. Incorporating the legal view early in device design and implementation can help ensure the probative value of the evidence produced the devices.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
K. Brady, C. Crowley, P. Doyle, M. O’Neill, J. Shook and J. Williams, The Sedona Conference Commentary on ESI Evidence and Admissibility, The Sedona Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, 2008.
M. Calhoun, Scientific evidence in court: Daubert or Frye, 15 years later, Washington Legal Foundation, vol. 23(37), pp. 1–4, 2008.
J. Christiansen, Discovery and admission of electronic information as evidence, in E-Health Business and Transactional Law: 2010 Cumulative Supplement, J. Sullivan (Ed.), BNA Books, Arlington, Virginia, pp. 427–452, 2010.
B. Endicott-Popovsky, B. Chee and D. Frincke, Calibration testing of network tap devices, in Advances in Digital Forensics III, P. Craiger and S. Shenoi (Eds.), Springer, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 3–19, 2007.
B. Endicott-Popovsky and D. Frincke, Embedding forensic capabilities into networks: Addressing inefficiencies in digital forensic investigations, Proceedings of the IEEE Information Assurance Workshop, pp. 133–139, 2006.
D. Fridman and J. Janoe, The state of judicial gatekeeping in California, presented at the Criminal Justice Gatekeeping Seminar, 1999.
W. Jansen and R. Ayers, Guidelines on Cell Phone Forensics, NIST Special Publication 800-101, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 2007.
N. Kuntze and C. Rudolph, Secure digital chains of evidence, Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering, 2011.
M. LeMay and C. Gunter, Cumulative attestation kernels for embedded systems, Proceedings of the Fourteenth European Conference on Research in Computer Security, pp. 655–670, 2009.
R. McKemmish, When is digital evidence forensically sound? in Advances in Digital Forensics IV, I. Ray and S. Shenoi (Eds.), Springer, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 3–15, 2008.
J. McLaughlin (Ed.), Weinstein’s Federal Evidence: Commentary on Rules of Evidence for the United States Courts, Matthew Bender, New York, 1997.
C. Mitchell, Trusted Computing, Institute of Engineering and Technology, London, United Kingdom, 2005.
G. Paul and B. Nearon, The Discovery Revolution: e-Discovery Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, American Bar Association, Chicago, Illinois, 2006.
J. Richter, N. Kuntze and C. Rudolph, Securing digital evidence, Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering, pp. 119–130, 2010.
B. Schneier, The story behind the Stuxnet virus, Forbes.com, October 7, 2010.
J. Tan, Forensic readiness ( isis.poly.edu/kulesh/forensics/forensic_readiness.pdf ), 2001.
U.S. Court of Appeals (Fourth Circuit), Silvestri v. General Motors Corp., Federal Reporter Third Series, vol. 271, pp. 583–595, 2001.
U.S. District Court (Northern District of Illinois), In re Brand Name Prescription Drugs Antitrust Litigation, Westlaw, no. 360526, 1995.
U.S. Government, Rule 26(b)(2), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, United States Code, p. 156, 2006.
U.S. Government, Rule 34(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, United States Code, p. 195, 2006.
U.S. Government, Rule 702, Federal Rules of Evidence, United States Code, p. 357, 2006.
U.S. Supreme Court, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., United States Reports, vol. 509, pp. 579–601, 1993.
T. Winkler and B. Rinner, Applications of trusted computing in pervasive smart camera networks, Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Embedded Systems Security, 2009.
T. Winkler and B. Rinner, Trustcam: Security and privacy-protection for an embedded smart camera based on trusted computing, Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance, pp. 593–600, 2010.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kuntze, N., Rudolph, C., Alva, A., Endicott-Popovsky, B., Christiansen, J., Kemmerich, T. (2012). On the Creation of Reliable Digital Evidence. In: Peterson, G., Shenoi, S. (eds) Advances in Digital Forensics VIII. DigitalForensics 2012. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 383. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33962-2_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33962-2_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33961-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33962-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)