Deciphering Digital Forensics: Unraveling the Process of Evidence Collection
Introduction:
Welcome to the third edition of our blog on digital forensics series. In our previous blog we discussed the difference between copying, cloning, and imaging in the context of Digital Forensics, and found out why imaging is a better process. Today we will discuss the process of evidence collection in Digital Forensics. The whole process starts with making sure the evidence collection team has all necessary tools required for the task.
Investigating Tools and Equipment:
Below are some mentioned tools that the team should carry with them for a successful evidence collection:
- Anti-static bags
- Faraday bags
- Toolkit having screwdrivers(nonmagnetic), scissors, pins, cutters, forceps, clips etc.
- Rubber gloves
- Incident response toolkit (Software)
- Converter/Adapter: USB, SATA, IDE, SCSI
- Imaging software
- Volatile data collection tools (FTK Imager, Magnet Forensics RAM Capture)
- Pens, permanent markers
- Storage containers
- Batteries
- Video cameras
- Note/sketch pads
- Blank storage media
- Write-Blocker device
- Labels
- Crime scene security tapes
- Camera
What sources of Data are necessary for Digital Evidence?
- Hard-Drive (Desktop, Laptop, External, Server)
- Flash Drive
- SD Cards
- Floppy Disks
- Optical Media (CD, DVD)
- CCTV/DVR
- Internal Storage of Mobile Device
- GPS (Mobile/Car)
- Call Site Track (Towers)
- RAM
Evidence Collection
The investigators encounter two primary types of evidence during the course of gathering evidence: non-electronic and electronic evidence.
The following approaches could be used to gather non-electronic evidence:
- In the course of looking into electronic crimes, recovering non-electronic evidence can be extremely important. Be cautious to make sure that this kind of evidence is retrieved and kept safe. Items that may be relevant to a later review of electronic evidence include passwords, papers or printouts, calendars, literature, hardware and software manuals, text or graphical computer printouts, and photos. These items should be secured and kept for further examination.
- They are frequently found close to the computer or other related hardware. Locating, securing, and preserving all evidence is required by departmental procedures.
Three scenarios arise for the collection of digital evidence from computers:
Situation 1: The desktop is visible, and the monitor is on.
- Take a picture of the screen and note the data that is visible.
- Utilize tools for memory capturing to gather volatile data.
- Look for virtual disks. If so, gather mounted data's logical copies.
- Give each port and connection a label.
- Take a picture of them.
- Turn off network access to stop remote access.
- Cut off the power or turn it off.
- Locate and disconnect the hard drive by opening the CPU chassis.
- Take all evidence and place it in anti-magnetic (Faraday) bags.
- Deliver the evidence to the forensic lab.
- Keep the chain of custody intact.
Situation 2: The monitor is turned on, but it either has a blank screen (sleep mode) or an image for the screensaver.
- Make a small mouse movement (without pressing buttons). The work product should appear on the screen, or it should ask for a password.
- If moving the mouse does not result in a change to the screen, stop using the mouse and stop all keystrokes.
- Take a picture of the screen and note the data that is visible.
- Use memory capturing tools to gather volatile data (always use a write blocker to prevent manipulation during data collection).
- Proceed further in accordance with Situation 1.
Situation 3: The Monitor Is Off
- Write down the "off" status.
- After turning on the monitor, check to see if its status matches that of situations 1 or 2 above, and then take the appropriate action.
- Using a phone modem, cable, confirm that you are connected to the outside world. Try to find the phone number if there is a connection to the phone.
- To protect evidence, take out the floppy disks that might be there, package each disk separately, and label the evidence. Put in a blank floppy disk or a seizure disk, if one is available. Avoid touching the CD drive or taking out CDs.
- Cover the power connector and every drive slot with tape.
- Note the serial number, make, and model.
- Take a picture of the computer's connections and make a diagram with the relevant cables.
- To enable precise reassembly at a later date, label all connectors and cable ends, including connections to peripheral devices. Put "unused" on any connection ports that are not in use. Recognize docking stations for laptop computers in an attempt to locate additional storage media.
- All evidence should be seized and placed in anti-magnetic (Faraday) bags.
- All evidence should be seized and placed in anti-magnetic (Faraday) bags.
- Put a tag or label on every bag.
- Deliver the evidence to the forensic lab.
- Keep the chain of custody intact.
Following the effective gathering of data, the following steps in the process are crucial: data packaging, data transportation, and data storage.
The following are the steps involved in data packaging, transportation, and storage:
Packaging:
- Label every computer system that is gathered so that it can be put back together exactly as it was found
When gathering evidence at a scene of crime,
- Before packing, make sure that every piece of evidence has been appropriately labeled and documented.
- Latent or trace evidence requires particular attention, and steps should be taken to preserve it.
- Use paper or antistatic plastic bags for packing magnetic media to prevent static electricity. Do not use materials like regular plastic bags (instead use faraday bags) that can cause static electricity.
- Be careful not to bend, fold, computer media like tapes, or CD-ROM.
- Make sure that the labels on every container used to store evidence are correct.
Transporting
- Make sure devices are not packed in containers and are safely fastened inside the car to avoid shock and excessive vibrations. Computers could be positioned on the floor of the car,and monitors could be mounted on the seat with the screen down .
When transporting evidence—
- Any electronic evidence should be kept away from magnetic sources. Radiation transmitters, speaker magnets, and heated seats are a few examples of items that can contaminate electronic evidence.
- Avoid leaving electronic evidence in your car for longer than necessary. Electronic devices can be harmed by extremes in temperature, humidity.
- Maintain the integrity of the chain of custody while transporting any evidence.
Storing
- Evidence should be kept safe and away from extremes in humidity and temperature. Keep it away from dust, moisture, magnetic devices, and other dangerous impurities. Be advised that extended storage may cause important evidence—like dates, times, and system configurations—to disappear. Because batteries have a finite lifespan, data loss may occur if they malfunction. Whenever the battery operated device needs immediate attention, it should be informed to the relevant authority (eg., the chief of laboratory, the forensic examiner, and the custodian of the evidence).
CONCLUSION:
Thus, securing the crime scene to packaging, transportation and storage of data are the important steps in the process of collecting digital evidence in forensic investigations. Keeping the authenticity during the process along with their provenance is critical during this phase. It is also important to ensure the admissibility of evidence in legal proceedings. This systematic approach is essential for effectively investigating and prosecuting digital crimes.
Related Blogs
Introduction
AI has revolutionized the way we look at growing technologies. AI is capable of performing complex tasks in fasten time. However, AI’s potential misuse led to increasing cyber crimes. As there is a rapid expansion of generative AI tools, it has also led to growing cyber scams such as Deepfake, voice cloning, cyberattacks targeting Critical Infrastructure and other organizations, and threats to data protection and privacy. AI is empowered by giving the realistic output of AI-created videos, images, and voices, which cyber attackers misuse to commit cyber crimes.
It is notable that the rapid advancement of technologies such as generative AI(Artificial Intelligence), deepfake, machine learning, etc. Such technologies offer convenience in performing several tasks and are capable of assisting individuals and business entities. On the other hand, since these technologies are easily accessible, cyber-criminals leverage AI tools and technologies for malicious activities or for committing various cyber frauds. By such misuse of advanced technologies such as AI, deepfake, and voice clones. Such new cyber threats have emerged.
What is Deepfake?
Deepfake is an AI-based technology. Deepfake is capable of creating realistic images or videos which in actuality are created by machine algorithms. Deepfake technology, since easily accessible, is misused by fraudsters to commit various cyber crimes or deceive and scam people through fake images or videos that look realistic. By using the Deepfake technology, cybercriminals manipulate audio and video content which looks very realistic but, in actuality, is fake. Voice cloning is also a part of deepfake. To create a voice clone of anyone's, audio can be deepfaked too, which closely resembles a real one but, in actuality, is a fake voice created through deepfake technology.
How Deepfake Can Harm Organizations or Enterprises?
- Reputation: Deepfakes have a negative impact on the reputation of the organization. It’s a reputation which is at stake. Fake representations or interactions between an employee and user, for example, misrepresenting CEO online, could damage an enterprise’s credibility, resulting in user and other financial losses. To be protective against such incidents of deepfake, organisations must thoroughly monitor online mentions and keep tabs on what is being said or posted about the brand. Deepfake-created content can also be misused to Impersonate leaders, financial officers and officials of the organisation.
- Misinformation: Deepfake can be used to spread misrepresentation or misinformation about the organisation by utilising the deepfake technology in the wrong way.
- Deepfake Fraud calls misrepresenting the organisation: There have been incidents where bad actors pretend to be from legitimate organisations and seek personal information. Such as helpline fraudsters, fake representatives from hotel booking departments, fake loan providers, etc., where bad actors use voice clones or deepfake-oriented fake video calls in order to propose themselves as belonging to legitimate organisations and, in actuality, they are deceiving people.
How can organizations combat AI-driven cybercrimes such as deepfake?
- Cybersecurity strategy: Organisations need to keep in place a wide range of cybersecurity strategies or use advanced tools to combat the evolving disinformation and misrepresentation caused by deepfake technology. Cybersecurity tools can be utilised to detect deepfakes.
- Social media monitoring: Social media monitoring can be done to detect any unusual activity. Organisations can select or use relevant tools and implement technologies to detect deepfakes and demonstrate media provenance. Real-time verification capabilities and procedures can be used. Reverse image searches, like TinEye, Google Image Search, and Bing Visual Search, can be extremely useful if the media is a composition of images.
- Employee Training: Employee education on cybersecurity will also play a significant role in strengthening the overall cybersecurity posture of the organisation.
Conclusion
There have been incidents where AI-driven tools or technology have been misused by cybercriminals or bad actors. Synthetic videos developed by AI are used by bad actors. Generative AI has gained significant popularity for many capabilities that produce synthetic media. There are concerns about synthetic media, such as its misuse of disinformation operations designed to influence the public and spread false information. In particular, synthetic media threats that organisations most often face include undermining the brand, financial gain, threat to the security or integrity of the organisation itself and Impersonation of the brand’s leaders for financial gain.
Synthetic media attempts to target organisations intending to defraud the organisation for financial gain. Example includes fake personal profiles on social networking sites and deceptive deepfake calls, etc. The organisation needs to have the proper cyber security strategy in place to combat such evolving threats. Monitoring and detection should be performed by the organisations and employee training on empowering on cyber security will also play a crucial role to effectively deal with evolving threats posed by the misuse of AI-driven technologies.
References:
- https://media.defense.gov/2023/Sep/12/2003298925/-1/-1/0/CSI-DEEPFAKE-THREATS.PDF
- https://www.securitymagazine.com/articles/98419-how-to-mitigate-the-threat-of-deepfakes-to-enterprise-organizations
Executive Summary:
A photo allegedly shows an Israeli Army dog attacking an elderly Palestinian woman has been circulating online on social media. However, the image is misleading as it was created using Artificial Intelligence (AI), as indicated by its graphical elements, watermark ("IN.VISUALART"), and basic anomalies. Although there are certain reports regarding the real incident in several news channels, the viral image was not taken during the actual event. This emphasizes the need to verify photos and information shared on social media carefully.
Claims:
A photo circulating in the media depicts an Israeli Army dog attacking an elderly Palestinian woman.
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the posts, we closely analyzed the image and found certain discrepancies that are commonly seen in AI-generated images. We can clearly see the watermark “IN.VISUALART” and also the hand of the old lady looks odd.
We then checked in AI-Image detection tools named, True Media and contentatscale AI detector. Both found potential AI Manipulation in the image.
Both tools found it to be AI Manipulated. We then keyword searched for relevant news regarding the viral photo. Though we found relevant news, we didn’t get any credible source for the image.
The photograph that was shared around the internet has no credible source. Hence the viral image is AI-generated and fake.
Conclusion:
The circulating photo of an Israeli Army dog attacking an elderly Palestinian woman is misleading. The incident did occur as per the several news channels, but the photo depicting the incident is AI-generated and not real.
- Claim: A photo being shared online shows an elderly Palestinian woman being attacked by an Israeli Army dog.
- Claimed on: X, Facebook, LinkedIn
- Fact Check: Fake & Misleading
Introduction
In the vast, cosmic-like expanse of international relations, a sphere marked by the gravitational pull of geopolitical interests, a singular issue has emerged, casting a long shadow over the fabric of Indo-Canadian diplomacy. It is a narrative spun from an intricate loom, interlacing the yarns of espionage and political machinations, shadowboxing with the transient, yet potent, specter of state-sanctioned violence. The recent controversy undulating across this geopolitical landscape owes its origins to the circulation of claims which the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) vehemently dismisses as a distorted tapestry of misinformation—a phantasmagoric fable divorced from reality.
This maelstrom of contention orbits around the alleged existence of a 'secret memo', a document reportedly dispatched with stealth from the helm of the Indian government to its consulates peppered across the vast North American continent. This mysterious communique, assuming its spectral presence within the report, was described as a directive catalyzing a 'sophisticated crackdown scheme' against specific Sikh diaspora organizations. A proclamation that MEA has repudiated with adamantine certainty, branding the report as a meticulously fabricated fiction.
THE MEA Stance
The official statement from the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) emerged as a paragon of clarity cutting through the dense fog of accusations, 'We strongly assert that such reports are fake and emphatically concocted. The referenced memo is non-existent. This narrative is a chapter in the protracted saga of a disinformation campaign aimed against India.' The outlet responsible for airing this contentious story, as per the Indian authorities, has a historical penchant for circulating narratives aligned with the interests of rival intelligence agencies, particularly those associated with Pakistani strategic circles—a claim infusing yet another complex layer to the situation at hand.
The report that catapulted itself onto the stage with the force of an untamed tempest insists the 'secret memo' was decked with several names—all belonging to individuals under the hawk-like gaze of Indian intelligence.
The Plague of Disinformation
The profoundly intricate confluence of diplomacy is one that commands grace, poise, and an acute sense of balance—nations effortlessly tip-toeing around sensitivities, proffering reciprocity and an equitable stance within the grand ballroom of international affairs. Hence, when S. Jaishankar, India's Minister of External Affairs, found himself fielding inquiries on the perceived inconsistent treatment afforded to Canada compared to the US—despite similar claims emanating from both—his response was the embodiment of diplomatic discretion: 'As far as Canada is concerned, there was a glaring absence of specific evidence or inputs provided to us. The robust question of equitable treatment between two nations, where only one has furnished substantive input and the other has not, is naturally unmerited.'
The articulation from the Ministry's spokesperson, Arindam Bagchi, further solidified India's stance. He calls into question the credibility of The Intercept—the publication that initially disseminated the report—accusing it of acting as a vessel for 'invented narratives' propagated under the auspices of Pakistani intelligence interests.
Conclusion
In the grand theater of international politics, the distinction between reality and deception is frequently obscured by the heavy drapes of secrecy and diplomatic guile. The persistent denial by the Indian government of any 'secret memo' serves as a critical reminder of the blurred lines between narrative and counter-narrative in the global concert of power and persuasion. As observant spectators within the arena of world politics, we are endowed with the unenviable task of untangling the convoluted web of claims and counterclaims, hoping to uncover the enduring truths that linger therein. In this domain of authentic and imaginary tales, the only unwavering certainty is the persistent rhythm of diplomatic interplay and the subtle shadows it casts upon the international stage. The Ministry of External Affairs fact-checked a claim on the secret memo, rubbishing it as fake and fabricated. The government has said there is a deliberate disinformation campaign that has been on against India.
References
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/mea-denies-report-it-issued-secret-memo-on-nijjar-to-missions/articleshow/105884217.cms?from=mdr
- https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-denies-secret-memo-against-nijjar-report-peddled-by-pak-intelligence-101702229753576.html
