±Forensic Focus Partners

Become an advertising partner

±Your Account


Username
Password

Forgotten password/username?

Site Members:

New Today: 0 Overall: 36763
New Yesterday: 2 Visitors: 181

±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

Faraday Protection

Discussion of forensic issues related to all types of mobile phones and underlying technologies (GSM, GPRS, UMTS/3G, HSDPA, LTE, Bluetooth etc.)
Subforums: Mobile Telephone Case Law
Reply to topicReply to topic Printer Friendly Page
Forum FAQSearchView unanswered posts
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next 
  

pbeardmore
Senior Member
 

Re: Faraday Protection

Post Posted: Mar 21, 09 16:10

As usual, very useful advice, thanks, trewmte,

must buy you a pint if our paths cross.

PS how are you plans going for running some mobile phone forensic training, I have a grad who would be very interested  
 
  

bigjon
Senior Member
 

Re: Faraday Protection

Post Posted: Mar 21, 09 21:05

To clarify the home office issue, I dont have papers that state specifically YOU MUST RETRIEVE POST SEIZURE MESSAGES
The home office do state that there may be circumstances where the investigator or examiner determines it is appropriate in the specific circumstances of an operation or investigation for the device, to remain on and connected to a network, or to be reconnected to a network, or, if having been switched off, to be switched back on and reconnected to a network
In this way a record may be made of previously undelivered messages and their evidential value considered.???? ---If you don’t know the content how do you value it? Which handsets do I decide to get post seizures from? What if the one I decide NOT to do ends up with the other side and there are messages in there that are incriminatory or exculpatory? Will I be looked at as maybe trying to pervert?? “ You do it with one handset but not another what’s your method for choosing bigjon?”
In circumstances where messages are delivered to the device after it has come into lawful possession of the investigator it is the view of the Home Office and DCG that if the device has been lawfully seized or obtained, and proper consideration has been given to the circumstances of the case, then the receipt of those messages and making record of them will be lawful. There is nothing in UK law that enables a police officer or public authority investigator to stop the delivery of a communication to an intended recipient. Equally it can be technically impossible for a communication service provider to stop the transmission of a communication or recover messages that are awaiting delivery to a device that has either been disconnected from a network or been switched off by the investigator or examiner  
 
  

trewmte
Senior Member
 

Re: Faraday Protection

Post Posted: Mar 21, 09 21:25

- pbeardmore
PS how are you plans going for running some mobile phone forensic training, I have a grad who would be very interested


Thanks pbeardmore...

There is a course coorindation meeting in April and I believe by June a series of courses will be available offering high level skillsets, knowledge and experience.

How to use the mobile telephone standards
GSM SIM - Examination
3G USIM - Examination
Mobile Phones - Examination
Smart Phones - Examination
Call Records Analysis
Cell Site Analysis
Interpretation of Evidence

However, if anyone has a particular subject matter of interest please let me.
_________________
Institute for Digital Forensics (IDF) - www.linkedin.com/groups/2436720
Mobile Telephone Examination Board (MTEB) - www.linkedin.com/groups/141739
Universal Network Investigations - www.linkedin.com/groups/13536130
Mobile Telephone Evidence & Forensics trewmte.blogspot.com 
 
  

bigjon
Senior Member
 

Re: Faraday Protection

Post Posted: Mar 21, 09 21:58

trew, i would also like to be kept informed re the training thanks  
 
  

bigjon
Senior Member
 

Re: Faraday Protection

Post Posted: Apr 01, 09 15:12

I would appreciate any views but I am writing a paper for our department to outline the examination of mobiles guidance
my method is remove sim card and read.
Replace SIM in handset and switch on....read.
Take out SIM re read to show the differences between reads, whilst making contemperaneous notes and photographing where necessary.
No Faraday bag/box as this alters data on the SIM card which is automated data ( ie.real evidence),
There have been discussions re the wireless telegrahy act prohibiting "interference" and some examiners have placed this at the "jammers" door as the jammers are wireless tools and think it doesnt include Faraday,but,my understanding is different especially when you read heading DELIBERATE INTEREFERENCE, it states the use of ANY apparatus whether or not wireless telegrahy appartus for the purpose of interfering......  
 
  

_nik_
Senior Member
 

Re: Faraday Protection

Post Posted: Apr 02, 09 20:03

Jammers are legal - as long as no signal escapes the faraday cage.

All the PASSIVE enclosures that I have seen do fail under strong signals. I had conducted the testing close to an antenna ( it's on top of the building ).
None of the ones I could see did work.

Neutrino comes with a faraday bag that is very good - because it is active. In the bag there is a noise generator that will make the bag much more effective.

If you want to see which was the last tower that was connected to the phone, you have to stop it from being on the network.  
 
  

bigjon
Senior Member
 

Re: Faraday Protection

Post Posted: Apr 11, 09 23:07

I HAVE A FARADAY CAGE FOR SALE WOULD HAPPILY SELL TO YOU ITS THE SECOND EDITION FROM PHONEBASE THE FLAT BLUE BOX WITH THE PERSPEX-ISH WINDOW  
 

Page 3 of 4
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next