±Forensic Focus Partners

Become an advertising partner

±Your Account


Forgotten password/username?

Site Members:

New Today: 0 Overall: 36783
New Yesterday: 0 Visitors: 1395

±Follow Forensic Focus

Forensic Focus Facebook PageForensic Focus on TwitterForensic Focus LinkedIn GroupForensic Focus YouTube Channel

RSS feeds: News Forums Articles

±Latest Articles

±Latest Videos

±Latest Jobs

Computer Forensics project

Computer forensics training and education issues. If you are looking for topic suggestions for your project, thesis or dissertation please post here rather than the general discussion forum.
Reply to topicReply to topic Printer Friendly Page
Forum FAQSearchView unanswered posts
Page Previous  1, 2, 3 

Senior Member

Re: Computer Forensics project

Post Posted: Nov 05, 19 14:55

- Rich2005
In that, generally speaking, you should seek to avoid accessing/modifying original data, but if it's necessary, the person should be competent enough to know and explain what they did, and why it was necessary. I think this would cover lots of things - mobile extractions probably being the most common example.

Yep Smile , but in this I am seemingly a little stricter in my interpretation, in the sense that even if no data is actually modified, the person should be competent enough anyway, i.e. not a "button pusher".

Anyway, the whole point I was trying to make still revolves not on the (undoubtable) validity of "principles", I don't think anyone can seriously be against any of them in theory, the issues are only about how they are put (or often actually not put) in practice.

Which is not entirely unlike the majority of critiques on ISO 17025, there is nothing actually "wrong" in their provisions, the issue comes when/where yje norm is applied to digital forensics and with the actual ways it is put in practice by real world labs/investigators on real world cases.

- In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is. - 

Page 3 of 3
Page Previous  1, 2, 3