Effective Digital Data Collection, Research Paper Example

Many mistakes are made during the collection of evidence which limit, and possibly prohibit, its presentation at trial. The collection of digital evidence is, naturally, also subject to these mistakes with the special variations resulting from the uniqueness of such evidence. Network forensics is a growing field with a wide range of potential tools from which to choose.

So, looking into said tools, which kinds of collections would be considered effective for digital data collection? Programs like “eMailTrackerPro” help to discover the physical locations of people sending specific emails (Allam, Moore, & Meghanathan, 2009). Another, “Web Historian” aims to uncover how long any site was visited by the user and whether or not any files were up- or downloaded (Allam, Moore, & Meghanathan, 2009). Then there are also packet sniffers such as “Ethereal” that help to “capture and analyze the data exchanged among the different computers in the network (Allam, Moore, & Meghanathan, 2009). In addition to programs that are effective to effective digital data collection, there are also techniques and procedures that should be taken into account, for example, computers being examined for forensic purposes should be closely guarded through the chain of custody so that no tampering or “spoliation” occurs (Shirk, 2007). In that same line of thought, one should ensure that the ‘investigators’ do their own work and do not simply entrust people to forward the emails and files that they think might be relevant to the case at hand.

Clearly, now, there are circumstances that should never occur that would lead to ineffective digital data collection. The aforementioned spoliation due to unguarded chain of custody for example. There is also ensuring that collectors should never become ‘lazy’ and ensure that they go through all devices and data themselves. Additionally, IT tools should be “tested and validated for litigation purposes” to ensure there is no inferior software missing out on importance evideice ie. email attachments (Shirk, 2007). Last, but not least, it is always going to be essential that bias be sidestepped as much as reasonably possible.

Bibliography

Allam, Smanth R. Moore, Loretta A. and Meghanathan, Natarajan. (2009). “Tools and   Techniques for Network Forensics.” International Journal of Network Security and Its Applications (IJNSA). Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14-25, 2009. Retrieved from: http://airccse.org/journal/nsa/0409s2.pdf

Shirk, Eric. (2007). “The Dangers of Do-It-Yourself Computer Forensics.” Law Practice Today. Retirieved on: 4 September 2012. http://apps.americanbar.org/lpm/lpt/articles/tch11071.shtml