AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
![]() There is a pressing need to update digital forensic effective practice guidelines, error mitigation strategies, and associated training to include bias mitigation practices. Everyone who employs digital forensics has a responsibility to implement strategies that mitigate those influences which might interfere with accurate observations and inferences in forensic decision making. Bias Mitigation is crucial as more digital evidence is stored on embedded systems that require forensic micro-repair or chip-off. ![]() Enhanced techniques for treating damaged or secured embedded systems to obtain needed digital evidence are presented in two highly specialised papers. This issue shows the power of collaboration between researchers and practitioners to create new knowledge that directly impacts digital investigations. In 2019, digital forensics reached the threshold of maturation both as computer science and forensic science. There are numerous digital investigative decisions that can be made with a lower confidence level. In addition to digital evidence, these transformations involve the treatment of all traces with big data analysis and forensic intelligence tools. To prevent obsolescence, Forensic Science must adapt to the digitalized world and undergo digital transformations. After addressing crucial operational challenges, forensic science becomes relevant and adds value.ĭigital forensics can benefit from the application of Forensic Science techniques, particularly for expert testimony in court. In order to fix immediate difficulties, protect victims, and catch offenders, these operations must be nimble. However, they are not as useful when digital forensics is used to combat terrorist activities or to prevent recurrent financial crime and fraud. In certain contexts, like as the courtroom, it is advantageous to strictly adhere to Forensic Science's formalities. Digital forensic effective practice guidelines, error reduction measures, and related training must be updated to incorporate modern Forensic Science principles. Common forensic science practices, such as cognitive bias reduction, aid in preventing erroneous judgements, costly wasted effort, and miscarriages of justice. A House of Lords investigation is examining issues about digital forensics, and the Forensic Science Regulator is pursuing digital forensic service provider accreditation.įorensic Science techniques for understanding and assessing evidence can improve digital investigations. Errors in the United Kingdom illustrate the negative impact of disregarding Forensic Science concepts and practices. ĭigital forensic skills are being given to non-scientists for the preservation of digital evidence and the triage scanning of computers and smartphones for investigation reasons. How, given their efficacy, can digital investigations benefit from closer ties to Forensic Science?. The application of artificial intelligence is bolstering these formidable skills. Digital investigations can uncover connections that traditional forensic disciplines cannot, and they can prevent criminal acts by intercepting them in the planning stages. Some digital devices capture biometric characteristics in addition to contextual information, such as time and location, which can be used for investigative and forensic purposes. Digital investigation and forensic scienceĪ person's activities, including mobility across time and interactions, can be reconstructed in great detail using digital evidence. Notably, the previous seven topics have been absorbed into two of the topics in the current review. The previous (2016–2019) review included seven broad topics, whereas the current (2019–2022) review includes nine topics. ![]() There has been a substantial change and development in the field over the three years of the review. It is my hope that those continuing to work in the field both in operational and academic roles are mindful of this in their future endeavours. While testimony in both written and oral forms might be technically correct, the ability of the expert to accurately convey that testimony in an understandable form with an appropriate weighting is occasionally given insufficient attention. The court of law is the forum in which the facts are determined and from which essential feedback is provided to the field and to the practitioners. In short, the primary reason for which I disagree is the author(s) has/have paid insufficient regard to the forum in which the output of the digital forensics process is ultimately assessed and in which decisions are made. Such articles have been included as they do contribute to the knowledge in the field and the field is strengthened with a range of views. A small minority articles have been included with which, as the reviewer, I disagree. ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |