Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Year: 2019
Volume: 14
Issue: 19
Page No. 7048 - 7058

A Model for Evaluating Digital Forensic Tools

Authors : Precilla M. Dimpe and Okuthe P. Kogeda

References

Aamodt, A. and E. Plaza, 1994. Case-based reasoning: Roundational issues, methodological variations and system approaches. Artificial Intelli. Commun. IOS Press, 7: 39-59.

Anonymous, 2001. General test methodology for computer forensic tools. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA.

Anonymous, 2012. Paraben device seizure Version 4.3 evaluation report. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC., USA. https://manualzz.com/doc/6952177/paraben-device-seizure-version-4.3-evaluation-report

Anonymous, 2018. SWGDE recommended guidelines for validation testing. Scientific Working Group on Digital Evidence, New York, USA. https://www.swgde.org/documents/Current%20Documents/SWGDE%20Recommended%20Guidelines%20for%20Validation%20Testing,

Armstrong, C., 2003. Developing a framework for evaluating computer forensic tools. Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Evaluation in Crime Trends and justice: Trends and Methods Conjunction with the Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra Australia, March 24-25, 2003, Canberra, Australia, pp: 1-8.

Arthur, K.K. and H.S. Venter, 2004. An investigation in to computer forensic tools. Comput. Sci., 1: 1-11.
Direct Link  |  

Baggili, I.M., R. Mislan and M. Rogers, 2007. Mobile phone forensics tool testing: A database driven approach. Intl. J. Digital Evidence, 6: 168-178.
Direct Link  |  

Beckett, J. and J. Slay, 2007. Digital forensics: Validation and verification in a dynamic work environment. Proceedings of the 2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'07), January 3-6, 2007, IEEE, Waikoloa, Hawaii, USA., pp: 266a-266a.

Carrier, B., 2002. Open source digital forensics tools: The legal argument. Master Thesis, Stake Center Locating, Kernersville, North Carolina, USA.

Cengage Learning, 2010. Computer Forensics Investigating Data and Image Files. Cengage Learning, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,.

DHS., 2012. Test results for graphic file carving tool: Adroit photo forensics 2013 v3.1d. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA.

DHS., 2013. Test results for digital data acquisition tool: Image Masster solo-4 Forensic. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/235710.pdf

DHS., 2015. Oxygen forensic suite 2015-analyst v.7.0.0.408: Test results for mobile device acquisition tool. Oxygen Forensics Inc., Alexandria, Virginia. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Oxygen%20Forensic%20Suite%202015%20-%20Analyst%20v7.0.0.408%20Test%20Report_Final_0.pdf

Dimpe, P.M. and O.P. Kogeda, 2017. Impact of using unreliable digital forensic tools. Proceedings of the International World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science WCECS Vol. 1, October 25-27, 2017, San Francisco, USA., pp: 118-125.

Guo, Y., J. Slay and J. Beckett, 2009. Validation and verification of computer forensic software tools-searching function. Digital Invest., 6: S12-S22.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

Hildebrandt, M., S. Kiltz and J. Dittmann, 2011. A common scheme for evaluation of forensic software. Proceedings of the 2011 6th International Conference on IT Security Incident Management and IT Forensics, May 10-12, 2011, IEEE, Stuttgart, Germany, ISBN:978-1-4577-0146-7, pp: 92-106.

Horny, M., 2014. Bayesian networks. Ph.D Thesis, Department of Health Policy and Management, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts.

Houcque, D., 2005. Introduction to Matlab for Engineering Students. Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois,.

Iacob, I.M. and R. Constantinescu, 2008. Testing: First step towards software quality. J. Appl. Quant. Methods, 3: 241-253.
Direct Link  |  

Irmler, F., K. Kroger and R. Creutzburg, 2013. Possibilities and modification of the forensic investigation process of solid-state drives. Multimedia Content Mob. Devices, 8667: 866-874.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

Jaakkola, H. and B. Thalheim, 2010. Architecture-driven modelling methodologies. Inf. Modell. Knowl. Bases, 225: 97-116.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

James, I.J., 2018. Survey of evidence and forensic tool usage in digital investigations. University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin. http://dfire.ucd.ie/?p=858

Kevin, B. and E. Ann, 2004. Bayesian Artificial Intelligence. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.,.

Kragt, M.E., 2009. A Beginners Guide to Bayesian Network Modelling for Integrated Catchment Management. Landscape Logic, Durham, North Carolina,.

Kubi, A.K., S. Saleem and O. Popov, 2011. Evaluation of some tools for extracting E-evidence from mobile devices. Proceedings of the 2011 5th International Conference on Application of Information and Communication Technologies (AICT), October 12-14, 2011, IEEE, Baku, Azerbaijan, ISBN:978-1-61284-831-0, pp: 1-6.

Nidhra, S. and J. Dondeti, 2012. Black box and white box testing techniques-A literature review. Intl. J. Embedded Syst. Appl., 2: 29-50.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

Owuor, D.L., O.P. Kogeda and J.I. Agbinya, 2017. Three tier indoor localization system for digital forensics. Intl. J. Electr. Comput. Energetic Electron. Commun. Eng., 11: 645-653.
Direct Link  |  

Pan, L. and L.M. Batten, 2009. Robust performance testing for digital forensic tools. Digital Invest., 6: 71-81.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

Qureshi, M.A., M. Salman and R. Khalid, 2013. Development of a framework for strategic outsourcing in developing countries. Intl. J. Mater. Mech. Manuf., 1: 92-96.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

Selamat, S.R., R. Yusof and S. Sahib, 2008. Mapping process of digital forensic investigation framework. Intl. J. Comput. Sci. Network Secur., 8: 163-169.
Direct Link  |  

Van Den Bos, J. and R. Van Der Knijff, 2005. TULP2G-an open source forensic software framework for acquiring and decoding data stored in electronic devices. Intl. J. Digital Evidence, 4: 147-166.
Direct Link  |  

Vandeven, S., 2014. Forensic images: For your viewing pleasure. SANS Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0f17/8513b0ca85662a92a34c9d42a09562a1f0ee.pdf?_ga=2.250350534.1741136004.1551269898-2143312028.1535543438

Wilsdon, T. and J. Slay, 2006. Validation of forensic computing software utilizing black box testing techniques. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Australian Digital Forensics, December 4, 2006, Edith Cowan University, Perth Western Australia, pp: 1-10.

Design and power by Medwell Web Development Team. © Medwell Publishing 2024 All Rights Reserved