Search Brett's Ramblings

Bitcoin Forensics

Two books in the works.

In between the adventures in life and work, I have been busy with writing.  One, a fiction book, is expected to be in print next year (all on the publisher's schedule).  It’s an exciting book and sure to grab your attention. More on that sometime later.  The second book is another nonfiction forensics book, Bitcoin Forensics 😊.

There were a few topics I wanted to write about for my next forensic book; however, considering the recent cases involving cryptocurrency, Bitcoin Forensics is at the top of the list.  A couple of points on the book before you make an assumption about what the book is or is not:

1. The book is not anti-cryptocurrency.  In fact, this book is pro-cryptocurrency not only as use as a currency, but as an investigative target for investigators when following the money.

2.The book will not be about only Bitcoin.  The book will cover cryptocurrency in totality of all-the-coins, to include the major coins (Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc…) and the Altcoins.

 

Like my other books, it will be written for the practitioner, the investigator, and the court officer with duties of trying cases involving cryptocurrency.  Our goal is to write a book that you can read and put to use on day-one.  Oh yeah, did I say “our”?  I sure did.  Tim Carver is my co-author.   If you know of Professor Carver, then you know that you will be learning all you need with the investigative aspects of cryptocurrency in your cases.  Additionally, we have a few contributors (and on the lookout for more!) that have either conducted extensive research or have conducted successfully cases with cryptocurrency as a money laundering aspect of their cases.

I have one confession to make.   Some time ago (a few years?), Tim asked for my opinion on cryptocurrency and money laundering with criminals.  At the time, I said that I believe it may be years before the common criminal uses cryptocurrency for money laundering simply because of the technology.  “Blockchain technology” is not something that everyday meth dealers may be knowledgeable about.  The other obstacle I thought was that converting physical cash into digital cash is not that easy.  On the other end of the criminal spectrum is the DTO (drug trafficking organization). The amount of physical cash generated alone is enough to prohibit converting into digital cash.  I just didn't see cryptocurrency being a major criminal investigative aspect.

But here comes 2017...  I’ve seen more than a few cases in the news of BILLIONS of dollars being laundered. On top of that, after doing research on cryptocurrency for over a year (talking to Tim generated an interest to test theories in cryptocurrency) and coincidentally getting a case with cryptocurrency being a central target in the case….I think I was mistaken.  Cryptocurrency has come and will eventually be part of every criminal investigation that has any financial aspect.

So, there you have it.  The inspiration of the book came from Tim Carver calling me to ask my opinion, a year of research afterward, a cryptocurrency case to figure out, and finally me asking Tim to co-author a book on it.

If you have conducted a cryptocurrency case or done research into cryptocurrency, and you want to be in the book as a contributor (named or unnamed), This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. right away.   If you want to be a bigger part of the book, that is a possibility as well.  Email me and let’s talk.

Until then, expect the book to be in print (or on your mobile device) in 2018.  Cool book topic, and probably one of the most relevant subjects for the years ahead in forensic investigations, both in the criminal case world and private sector engagements.  Don't believe?  No worries.  You will soon enough, just like I did.

 

 

 

  2006 Hits
  0 Comments

Anonymity: Criminals are only as good as their last mistake

I’m big on privacy, even though I know that practically, the only information that is private today is that which (1) only you know and (2) does not exist anywhere outside your head.  Everything else can be had one way or another, by hook or crook.  Most personal information we willingly give away, such as our date of birth when signing up for “free” online services.  Other personal information we are required to give in order to abide by laws, such as applying for a driver’s license.                         


I’m also big on de-anonymizing criminals.   Supporting privacy efforts while at the same supporting de-anonymization efforts is contradictory, but realty. If you have ever been a victim of a crime where the criminal got away with it, you probably feel the same.  Both aspects contradict each other, where I want to have individual privacy but at the same time, I want to be able to de-anonymize someone who is committing crimes facilitated with technology.  What a dilemma...

I tend to focus on de-anonymization of criminals more since we are on a never-ending trend of breaches, hacks, and theft of personal information, let alone crimes against persons using technology. Two of my books were solely focused on the topic.  During presentations on the subject, I have regularly been questioned on “How do I…” in this case or that case from investigators* looking for the magic bullet.  Given just a 15 second brief of an investigation that has been ongoing for months, my typical answer is – the answer is there, you just have to find it. 

Secret Tip: there is no magic bullet until there is one.

The magic bullet in almost every case is a mistake made by the suspect.  An oversight.  An error.  A bad decision.  Or just plain ignorance.  All on the part of the suspect.  But a mistake by itself is not enough to crack a case.  You, the investigator or the analyst, need to catch that mistake.  You have to look for it constantly.  You have to expect to find where the suspect made the error because if you don’t have the intention to find the criminal’s mistakes, you will not find them.  That is when you find the magic bullet to solve your case, by looking for it and not hoping it drops in your lap.

When you do find the break in an analysis or investigation, everything becomes clear and appears to be such an easy thing that you wonder why you didn’t think of it before.  The fact is, finding the errors is not always simple or easy.  The little mistakes are usually hidden in tons of data and easily overlooked.  Sometimes the answer is plain view and no one sees it. Even when you find the suspect’s mistake, if you do not recognize it for what it is, you will quickly pass it and keep looking without realizing you could have solved your case a few minutes prior.

The steps in finding these mistakes made suspects are:

If you don’t have #1 above, then #2 and #3 won’t matter since you won’t be able to identify the evidence or clues you need.  The first things I do in any case is determine the goal or goals. Sometimes the goal is either dictated by someone else or it is obvious.  If the goal is not dictated or obvious, you have to identify the goal or again, step #1 is useless which renders #2 and #3 just as useless.

When you work with these 3 steps, the 6-Ws naturally come up in the case (the 6-Ws: who, what, when, where, how, why).  You need the above 3 steps as your foundation to actually work a case in order to get to the 6 Ws.  Focus on the 3 and the world is yours.  A tip: not everyone does this.  Many many examiners/investigators/analysts simply collect data without reason other than to collect data with the hope the case solves itself.  Don't be that person.

When I was a new investigator, it seemed that every case I received was like Groundhog Day.  No case was like the last, no evidence was consistent among the cases, and the goals were sporadic (other than “find the bad guy”).  Basically, every day I was starting over as new in each assigned case. In time, I learned a few things from experienced investigators, other things I learned the hard way.   In more than one case, I would be given a hint or a tip that would put me on a path to close a case.  A question as simple as, “Did you try this?” or “Did you look here?” was all I needed to plow ahead.  Sometimes, i would figure out an easy way or more effective means of gathering information and intelligence.  Many training courses focus on the technical means, but not the thinking part.  It's nice to know how to recover deleted event logs, but why? If you don't know why you should do it, you won't get anything out of it because you won't see the clues.

In cases with electronic media, the process is the same as in any investigation you have, whether it is a criminal or civil case (or even an internal corporate matter).  Define the goal so you know what to look for, know where to look, and figure out how to look for it.  Apply this to every case and incident you have and your case closure rates will be much better with less work.

For example, a case involving an unidentified cyber-criminal who is ‘hiding behind the keyboard’ clearly means that the what is anything that ties directly to the criminal.  The specifics of the what is important. The where depends on what you have to work with.  Perhaps you have an email, or network traffic, or maybe even physical media.  Somewhere in that data is the where and you need to know in what part of that data you should be looking.  The how is maybe the easiest part.  Maybe you need to look at metadata, or reverse engineer a file, or simply recover a deleted file.  That’s the manual labor part.  You need to work the brain part first, otherwise the labor will be for nothing.  

Recent cases in the news have shown that this method of investigation works on the most difficult of cases.  I must stress that when you see that a major case was solved by the simple piece of evidence of identifying an email address, that this is not so simple.  Every case has at least one error that was made by the suspect, and to discount looking for that mistake is a mistake on your part.

Any case where the article states that, “Oh, the case was easily solved because the suspect forget his email was in the code” seriously discounts the effort of the investigator who took the time to know what to look for, where to look for it, and how to look for it.  Cold cases are solved the very same way.

It’s not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.

This is what I have been teaching for almost 20 years now.  I believe that anyone from any place in any job with any education level can be a superb investigator.   I have met young investigators from small towns who can run circles around someone with 10 times their experience and education in the largest agencies because they apply the foundation principles of what it takes to solve a case.  Once they learn the how of digital forensics, they are just as effective in the digital world as if they were working a street corner robbery.  It’s not a diploma, or a certificate, or a coin in your pocket that makes you good.  You make yourself good.  If you happen to collect some tokens along the way, add them to a shadow box, but bragging about having certs has no weight if you can't work a case.

Another benefit of getting the investigative skills down is that you can apply it to other areas and other types of cases.  If you have the desire and can finesse the skill, you can run with the big dogs in working any type of case.  I truly mean that in every sense.  My first investigator duties, after being a patrol officer, was a narcotics detective.  I used the skills learned in narcs to solve murders, uncover and disrupt organized crime groups, identify terrorists, and work all types of crimes involving technology.   

Be prepared that when you start solving cases by finding the “easy” things, that those around you will call you names, like lucky or you only solved the case because of a suspect's mistake. Just smile and carry on.  After enough cases, you won’t be called lucky anymore; you will be called good and that is the goal: be good at what you do. 

 

* I use the term “investigator” to apply to anyone who has the job to find information, curate into intelligence, on which assumptions, conclusions, and judgments can be made.  That means a police detective, federal agent, incident responder, or forensic examiner.

 

 

 

 

  1231 Hits
  0 Comments

Placing the Suspect Behind the Keyboard online course

My newest course is out and it is the best course you will find on the topic.  More than 12 hours of investigative methods and effective techniques to build a case against criminals who use technology to commit crimes.  

  • Learn the methods to track criminals online and in the real world
  • Learn the tricks of the trade (tradecraft) of covert communications and breaking those communications
  • Learn how to build a case that would not have been closed without this course
  • Learn the one thingI that will give you the tools to become not only a great forensicator, but someone that can place a suspect behind the keyboard

Placing the Suspect Behind the Keyboard was the first digital forensics book focusing on building a good case on criminals who use technology to commit crimes. This also the first course teaching that specific topic.  My intention with this online course is to put you into the mindset of someone working toward identifying the suspect, gathering evidence on the suspect, and proving allegations against your suspect; in effect, placing the suspect behind the keyboard.


If your career has been like mine, most cases are fairly straightforward. Perhaps a suspect was already identified and most of the evidence already seized.  In many cases, whether it is a criminal arrest or being hired as a private consultant, generally, you start with all you need to begin examining the media.  But if your career is like mine, there have been a few cases where that is simply not the case.  This course is not only for the easy cases, but especially for the tough ones.Holistically, this course covers everything you need, whether working in the private or public sector.  Investigative techniques are discussed for both sectors as many methods can be used in both case types.  A few sections are LE-only simply because citizens cannot wiretap other citizens (as an example), however, you can see the differences between a method used by law enforcement and the private sector.  Practically speaking however, the actual methods are the same.  A forensic analysis of a flash drive in a criminal case is not different than in a civil case, nor are the methods to tie a person to a device different.

This course is not just for the average case, but developed especially to address the difficult cases.

Cases where the suspect has not been identified.  Cases where the electronic evidence has not been seized.  Cases where there are many suspects.  Cases where the evidence linking the suspect to the device or crime is weak at best.  For those cases, you need to take extra measures, think out of the box, and use everything at your disposal.  You have to work at putting the suspect behind the keyboard, because if you don’t, it won’t happen. 

Don’t let your case go to the cold-case files.  Solve it!  This course shows you how to do it.  The books detail even more on how to put cases together, especially the really difficult cases where you have little to go.  As for incident response cases (breaches), this is not a course on mitigating a breach, or tracking hackers in cyberspace.  Although, many of the methods will work for just that.   Incident Response can benefit greatly for the sake of sometimes the suspect in a breach must be caught for a variety of reasons.  This course and books brings it to you.

The Placing the Suspect Behind the Keyboard online course uses the same material as the 2-day workshop with the biggest difference being not working actual cases in class.  As a side note, in a previous class, a suicide case was reopened as a potential homicide case based on course methods in the class!  The methods are proven to work.

FAQ:

Is there a discount for a bulk order?

With 50%, two free books, and free access to the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner's Guide course, there are no bulk discounts.

My agency/company will take a week or two to get approval to pay.  Can the discount be extended?

Send me an email at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and let me know.  I can extend to get approval, but not for too long.

Will there be another promotion after this one?

Most probably, but it won't be (1) 50% off, and (2) may not include the two books, and (3) most likely won't include access to the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner's Guide course.  This is the best time to get both courses and both books at this price.

  3974 Hits
  0 Comments

The 2 Worst Games to Play in #infosec

The “Hot Potato” Game

The goal of the Hot Potato Game is to simply pass off responsibility to the next person as soon as you can before something bad happens.  When the responsibility lands in your lap again, you pass it to someone else as soon as you can.  Eventually, someone gets caught holding the hot potato and they lose (and you win!!).  A similar version of this game is “Musical Chairs” game or “Kicking the Can Down the Road” game.  By the way, it sucks to lose this game.

I have seen this game played in both the government and the private sector.  Any long-time government employee can point to dozens of managers who are experts at this game.   I believe there are so many experts because it is rare for a government employee to actually suffer when losing this game, which only encourages more people to play and gain experience in tossing the hot potato to the next guy at the table.

In the private sector, losing this game is an entirely different matter, especially when PII or PHI has been stolen.  When that happens, fingers get pointed awfully quick and the government comes in with a hammer to smash as many thumbs as they can find.  Did I mention that losing this game sucks?

  1. The “Are We There Yet” Game

The "Are We There Yet" game is another popular game played in both the public and private sector.  This particular game is also known as “We’ll Cross that Bridge When We Come to It” game.   In this game, you know bad things are coming one day, and you accept that being worry-free today is worth the stress of dealing with an incident tomorrow, because we all know that tomorrow never comes.

I have actually seen budgets with anticipated expenses planned for incidents that could be avoided with preparation and less money.  I guess some organizations believe that if they don’t spend money now on preparation (defense), they may not need it for remediation after a breach, so it may make a better business decision.  This game is also known as “Craps”.

When I consult for corporations and government entities, I always advise to not play these games (in a professional manner rather than saying 'don't play these games').  Fortunately, I find that many organizations are spending money now to prepare rather than hope for the best.  The organizations that want to prepare are doing really good, taking advice, and in some cases, going beyond what is required.  In technical terms, I call this a great job.

I have gotten to the point that when I hear a client choose to play either of these games, I don’t laugh out loud anymore, especially when I hear verbatim, “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it”.   When I hear that, I usually leave a half dozen business cards…

Hopefully you aren’t forced to play in these games and that when you say that you need money and time to prepare for unexpected breaches, you get it.  This same thing applies to internal employee matters too.  Any organization that haphazardly gives out electronic devices without any controls to employees….is an organization playing the hot potato game.  I tend to believe that with so many attacks, so many breaches, and so many organizations frozen with Ransonware, organizations start to take notice.  It's kind of like everyone in your neighborhood getting burglarized.  You can choose to either hope your house is not burglarized or you can install an alarm, lock your doors and windows, and prepare just in case.

  992 Hits
  0 Comments

The 2 Fastest and Least Expensive Ways to Learn X-Ways Forensics

***4/18/2017***

***UPDATE ON THE PROMO***

This is all you need to know: The X-Ways Forensics Practitioner's Guide online course is still available at only $119 instead of the regular tuition of $599 until April 19.

If you missed the promo for 80% with a FREE copy of the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner's Guide book, you still have time to get 80% off the online course without a free copy of the book.  This is still a great deal off the 12-hour, $599 course at only $119.  There will never be a discount this steep again for this course, so get it while you can, because the time to register is running out.

 

   

XWF Practitioner's Guide Promo Countdown! Wednesday, April 19, 2017 11:59 PM 424 Days XWF Practitioner's Guide Promo Countdown!

 

-------------------------------------------------

My advice to X-Ways Forensics users is to stop thinking you can figure it out by yourself, even if you have been using X-Ways Forensics for any length of time.  There are simply far too many nuances and hidden features that you are missing every time you try to figure it out or use on cases.  If you really want to get down and dirty to learn X-Ways Forensics fast and cheap, here is the ONLY way to do it.

  1. Buy the book (list price is $59.95)
  2. Take the online class (regular price is $599.00)

But, wouldn't you rather want to learn how to use X-Ways Forensics saving even more money?  If so, you want to sign up right now because right now is the biggest discount for the course while getting the most swag! Get up to 80% off the price PLUS a FREE copy of the book and if you act fast enough, be invited to even more FREE trainingFree book offer has expired.

If you register within the next 7 days (April 19), you can get the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner’s Guide online course at 50% off for only $299.  80% off for only $119.

**UPDATE  4/16/2017**

The promo is almost over for the free book...  

 

If you do not receive your 80% promo link via Twitter DM, email at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and I'll email it to you.

How about even more!  The first 20 registrations will be invited to a live, 2-hr online X-Ways Forensics course with me to demonstrate using X-Ways Forensics as a triage tool and for electronic discovery (this includes using the latest build of the Windows Forensic Environment – WinFE).  These first 25 registations still receive over 12 hours of the online X-Ways Forensics Practitioner's course and a FREE COPY of the book!   The first 20 just filled up the live course, but the promo for up to 80% plus a FREE book is still good.

The course has never been discounted this deep, so this is the best time to take advantage of learning to how you can exploit X-Ways Forensics to its fullest potential, learning from your computer, on your own time, at the lowest price.  

Since 2014, more than 2,000 students have registered and taken my online courses with 24/7 access.  

“It has helped shed lights on things I have missed in the past.”  -student

“I got to say I’m enjoying the videos.” – student

Don't miss the boat!  80% off 12 hours of X-Ways Forensics Practitioner's Guide training plus a FREE COPY of the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner's Guide.  ONLY $119 for the regular $599 tuition with a free copy of the book!

http://bit.ly/xwfpromo80 expired

 

*For outside the USA, only a Kindle version is available as part of this promotion.  Registrations within the USA can choose between print or Kindle.

  2477 Hits
  0 Comments

FREEZE! Busted by the Fridge. The ways that tech influences writing fiction, making movies, and busting criminals.

One interesting investigation I had was that of a murder-for-hire in one city that the suspect used a Google search to find the victim’s home address in another city.  Simple enough crime to plan.  Google the name, find the address, do the hit.  Except in this particular case, although the suspect Googled the correct name, there were two people with the same name in the same city and he picked the wrong one.  I called this case my “Sarah Connor” case.

Fortunately, we intercepted the hit before it happened and prevented a random murder on the wrong person (as well as preventing the murder of the ‘right’ person).  In a basic sense, the suspect used the technology of one of the most advanced computer systems in the world (Google….) to attempt a murder only to choose the wrong name in a Google search hit.  This type of criminal incompetence and carelessness is commonplace.  It is also the way that most get caught. 

On the other end of the spectrum, we have Hollywood’s version of high tech crime fighting.  Minority Report with Tom Cruise showed us that not only can crimes be solved with technology, but that crimes can also be prevented with technology.  As for the technology used in the movie, it could have only been more accurate had a predictive analysis computer system been used in place of the fortune-telling humans (“Precogs”) in a big bathtub.

In a turn-key surveillance system, no person is anonymous.  Whether it is a private business or government agency, no one is immune from potentially being watched, tracked, or reported.  Private businesses use facial recognition for both improving customer service by detecting your mood through facial expressions as well as preventing crime.

“…faces of individuals caught on camera are converted into a biometric template and cross-referenced with a database for a possible match with past shoplifters or known criminals.” https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/mar/03/revealed-facial-recognition-software-infiltrating-cities-saks-toronto  

Criminals who try to avoid using technology are severely limited on the type of crimes they can commit.  That’s a good thing.  A drug dealer without a cell phone is like a taxi cab driver without a taxi.  It is part of the business and can be tracked, traced, monitored, intercepted, and forensically examined.  Technology is a natural and required part of any criminal’s operations.  Criminals not using technology are ineffective as criminals, for the most part.

Criminals who try to avoid surveillance technology in public, such as license plate readers and facial recognition are also extremely limited in the crimes they can commit since they would have to remain in their homes to commit crimes outside of public surveillance methods.  Even then, committing a crime in a home is not without the risk of being monitored, either by a government agency, a private corporation, or an electronic device plugged into an outlet.  If you own a Vizio television, consider yourself tracked, hacked, and sold to the highest bidder. http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/7/14527360/vizio-smart-tv-tracking-settlement-disable-settings

From Amazon’s Echo to an Internet-connected fridge, data is collected as it happens, and stored either locally on the device or on a remote server (or both).  Depending on how ‘smart’ a home is, every drop of water usage can be tracked, every door opening logged, and every person entering and leaving the home gets recorded.  This does not even include cell phone use that is tracked within the home by providers.  And the computer use!  The things we do on the computer leave traces not only on the hard drive, but also on the servers we touch with every www typed.  Criminals in their home are no more protected from being discovered than on the street.  This is a good thing.

As to the significance of some of these high tech smart home devices, consider that water usage can give inferences as to what was done in a home, such as cleaning up a crime scene…

 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/12/police-ask-alexa-did-you-witness-a-murder/ 

During all the years of being a detective, I did trash runs.  Lots and lots of trash runs.  I hated the trash runs until I found good evidence.  Garbage smells really bad, especially during the summer.  Digging through garbage bags in a dumpster in the middle of a hot day can make the toughest person gag or puke.  But you can get some really good information on the criminals you seek. Did I mention it can smell really bad?

That is one of the reasons I really enjoyed moving into digital forensics.  Digging through the garbage of data on a hard drive is a lot easier on the nose than digging through a dumpster.  Plus, the information you get is sometimes a lot better than what you can find in a garbage can.  There are exceptions…you won’t find the murder weapon in a folder on the C:/ drive of a hard drive unless the murder weapon was a computer program. 

You would think that with the amount of technology available and already in place that police would be able to uncover more crimes, find more criminals, and be more effective.  When a smart home can email the home owner a photo of someone ringing the doorbell, newer cars come with pre-installed GPS tracking systems, and a fridge can record a live stream of residents in the kitchen, the ease of finding evidence should be easier…right?

Not quite.

That brings us to the biggest hurdle to crime fighting: incompetency and laziness.  Government agencies are not immune to the same human fallacies found elsewhere. There are hard workers in government just as there are hard workers in the private sector.  Same holds true for laziness and incompetence, which criminals take advantage.

In any case where electronic devices are not being seized for examination, evidence is intentionally being left behind.  I am not referring to the electronic devices that are difficult to find, like a camouflaged USB device hidden within a teddy bear. I’m talking about the cell phone sitting on the car seat of the suspect arrested for burglary.  Yes. I’ve seen it happen.  Part of the reason is that unless lead is flying, most criminal cases and dispatched calls are boring to the responding officer.  As an example, with a residential burglary, the suspect is usually gone and the victim is lucky if the officer even tries to recover prints from the scene.  Stolen car?  Oh well. Fill out the report and call your insurance company.

I have been out of police work for about 10 years and I had hoped this lack of urgency in police work has changed.  But apparently not.  I recently helped someone with their stolen purse from a gym.  I got the call first instead of 911, but that’s another story.  Anyway, I showed up to give some guidance and eventually the district officers arrived.  Even after being told that video cameras faced the parking lot, and that the suspect/s went inside another victim’s car, the officers said, “The cameras probably didn’t get it”. The manager of the gym even offered up the video and said the cameras face the victim’s car... but the officers they left without even asking to see the video.  After telling the officers that the suspect/s just used the stolen credit cards in a store less than 5 miles away and that the store surely must have cameras, one of the officers said, “We can’t get much from a store’s security cameras.  You just need to call your bank to cancel your cards.” End result: File a report.  Call the banks. Get a replacement driver’s license.  Yes.  This still happens.  And criminals thrive on it.

The irony with a lack of seizing electronic evidence is that for most of the forensic examiners in law enforcement, they love to dig and dig and dig and dig through data to find the smoking gun.  It is the lifeblood of what they do.  If only the devices were seized and given to them.  Case in point:  I was called to exam a laptop of a missing teenager, six months after she was reported missing.   The detective simply did not put any reliance on a laptop, in which the teenager was religiously using for social media, as a source of important evidence.  The teen’s body was later found buried less than 5 miles from the police department where this detective drank coffee at his desk, with the laptop sitting downstairs in evidence for months.  I would have loved to examine that laptop ON THE SAME DAY the teen was reported missing.  It was virtually useless by the time I got it.

Seeing that tech should make it easier for police work, it should make it easier for writers of fiction.  It doesn’t.  I read (and write) a lot.  Technology can ruin good fiction.  No longer can a fictional criminal live his or her life under the radar.   Even the good guys can’t avoid ‘the radar’.   The Jack Reacher series should have been set in the 80s, because there is no way that Jack Reacher can roam the country without ever ringing some bells in surveillance tracking technology and live only with the technology of a single ATM card.  I was lucky that my undercover work was before the Internet really took off.  Backstopping an ID today requires way more than it did when I was undercover.

Writing fiction set in today requires knowing technology, because any scene that should have technology but doesn’t simply makes that scene unbelievable.  Same with Hollywood. Seriously.  It gets harder and harder to watch a movie that intends to be realistic without realistically using technology.   Show me a movie where no one is texting anywhere in a scene and I’ll show you a movie where technology is selectively ignored for the sake of simplicity at the cost of plausibility.

I can hear it now.  Police work is hard.  It’s not easy to get search warrants.  Not every department has a forensic unit.  We are too busy to solve crimes.  We are short-staffed. We don’t get enough training.  Blah blah blah.  I’ve heard it before and proved it can be done time and time again.  I have always believed that 10% of law enforcement do 90% of the work while 90% of law enforcement try to pawn off the remaining 10% of the work (while fighting over taking credit for it).  If just another 10% of law enforcement suddenly got a sense of urgency to require high tech investigations be a part of every crime scene, we’d reduce crime stats in half and solve twice as many crimes.

Now if only I can find a book or movie that doesn’t pretend technology doesn’t exist..

 

  1464 Hits
  0 Comments

Want to know how to break into DF/IR?

I see the digital forensics training market reaching a saturation point in some aspects.  Most, if not all, forensic software companies provide training, govt agencies provide internal training, individuals provide training, every college looking for a new revenue stream is adding forensic programs for training, and a new forensics book comes out every few weeks or so.  Add that to those who can teach themselves and you have DF/IR training market that is fat.  By the way, if you can teach yourself forensics by gobbling up every crumb you can find, you will have a long career in this field. 

There have been a lot of blog posts, articles, forums, and opinions posted online about how to break into the field of DF/IR.  Here are a few decent links, and of course, a Google search will find dozens more. You will see by the dates that it has been years of the same question being asked...

https://digital-forensics.sans.org/blog/2010/08/20/getting-started-digital-forensics-what-takes/ 
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-security/breaking-into-the-digital-forensics-field-melia-kelleys-path/
https://www.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/1o2s5x/looking_to_get_into_computer_forensics/
http://www.techexams.net/forums/jobs-degrees/99839-looking-enter-into-digital-forensics-field-need-advice.html
http://smarterforensics.com/2016/08/so-you-want-to-break-into-the-field-of-digital-forensics/
https://www.thebalance.com/how-to-become-a-digital-forensic-examiner-974633
https://articles.forensicfocus.com/2011/10/07/advice-for-digital-forensics-job-seekers/

The common theme is asking, "How do I get into digital forensics?" when the better questions to ask are, "Which college program will work best for me?", "Which discplines in DF/IR should I focus on?", "Which programming languages are relevant?", "Which software should I learn?", "What are hiring managers looking for?".  

You won’t usually find this topic constantly being brought up in other career fields. For example, if someone wants to become a doctor, there isn’t much to the answer other than, “go to a medical school.”  If someone wants to become a lawyer, the answer is typically, “to go a law school.”

To become a digital forensics analyst, there isn’t an answer like “go to a digital forensics school” because there are more than a few ways to get into the field depending upon your individual and unique situation.  On top of that, simply getting a degree in digital forensics doesn’t automatically make you qualified.  Many forensic analysts fell into the job while working another job, like a police detective suddenly having to do computer-related crime cases, takes lots of training, and works major cases.  The rest have to fight to get into the job or to at least get through the door.

My brief opinion on getting into the field is that a new person needs one or more (sometimes all) of these:

  • Certs and/or degrees
    • Helps check the boxes on the job application
    • Shows that you sat in a chair and passed tests
    • Shows that you paid lots of money (or may have lots of student loans)
    • Shows that you can complete a system of training/learning
    • Implies you should know what the paper says you should know
  • Experience in a close-enough-related-job
    • Shows that you have been doing the job, or close-enough-related-job
    • Implies that you have competence, since you were being paid
  • Competence
    • Hardest way to get in without something else (experience and/or education)
    • Difficult to get past the application if blindly applying to jobs if you can’t check the required boxes
    • Have to prove yourself beforehand (write a software program, discover something useful for the field, etc...)
    • Nothing is implied, because you need proof of competence.

Each of these require time.  If you want to get into a good digital forensics job within a year, and the only thing you have ever done is read a blog about forensics, then consider that it might not happen as quick as you would like.  If you don’t want to spend any money (on tuition, tools, books, training courses), then you must be able to learn open source forensics…and teach yourself.  Lastly, you need capability.  Not everyone can or wants to spend the time and money to become competent.  You have to put in your dues to get the potential rewards.  If you don't work on being able to do the job, simply wanting to do it is not going to be enough.  A lot of people want to be a cyber hero, but not a lot of people want sacrifice for what it takes to get there.

A brief note about the exceptions and exceptional people: I have met some exceptions to the rules of getting through the DF/IR door. I am referring to those who are mostly self-taught and have no education to speak of (insofar as a technical education).  If you are one of those, then you go through the back door.  You just need to find someone to show you where the back door is.  If you are an exception, that means that you can be given a desk and computer and from Day – One, you can do magic.  If you are not an exception, you will be knocking on the front door.

So, to be able to at least submit an application, get qualified enough to check the boxes.  One of the things I have never understood is that some (many?) jobs require a bachelor’s degree in virtually anything in order to apply for a job that clearly does not require a college education.  If that is the kind of job you want, which is a considerable amount of federal jobs, get the degree or you will not even be able to check the one box that is required to apply, no matter your experience (for exceptions, refer to the previous note). 

On picking a training path, be choosy because it’s not only money you are spending. It is also your time.  I started a college program once, only to quit because I could have taught it since the ‘professor’ never ever never even imaged a hard drive, nor did a forensic exam ever.  It was clearly a new revenue stream for the college.  I’ve taken a few private courses that had the effect of me trying to forget what I learned because so much of it was incorrect or out-of-date.  I’ve been "taught" how to testify in court by someone who never testified in court…or tried a case…or ever practiced law.  Conversely, I have taken some outstanding training, college courses, and attended superb conferences that made all the difference in the world.  The trick is sorting through which is which.  Those are the questions to ask.

Disclaimer: I am but a lowly forensic guy, not the end-all-be-all or know-it-all (I learn something every day).  These are just my opinions.  I have hired and fired employees, passed and failed students, taught and been taught forensics.  But like everyone, experiences, perceptions, education, and opinions vary.

Tags:
  2160 Hits
  0 Comments

Reminder for the last discount for the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner’s Guide Online and On demand course.

If you were thinking of doing it, this is the best time since the $599 online course will only be at a discount of 60% for less than two weeks (until Dec 31, 2016) for only $235.  PLUS, registering before December 31, 2016 gets you a print copy of the book, the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner’s Guide shipped to you. Unfortunately, the book is only included for US/Canada registrants since shipping a book outside the USA or Canada costs more than the book.  Shipping to some countries costs more than the entire X-Ways online course costs.  I’m happy to ship a copy, but the shipping fees must be added.  Best bet is to order a book online that delivers locally without extreme duty fees.

Register with the 60% discount using this URL: 

Just a few notes on the online XWF course based on emails I have received:

Time limit:  You have a year to view the course as often as you want.

Software: Not included.  You don’t need it for the course, but I think you’ll want to have a license.  If you want to know how XWF compares to other tools, you can get 12 hours of instruction showing how it works and much of what it can do.  Once you start using XWF, you’ll begin to see that it can do a lot more than what the manual or any course can teach. 

About forensics: The online course doesn’t teach forensics, except to demonstrate features of XWF.  Don't expect to learn 'what is the registry' in this course.  It's all about X-Ways Forensics, to get you up and running right away.

Competence: If you go through this course (and you have a foundation of digital forensics knowledge), you’ll have enough knowledge to use XWF on a real case.

Students: If your school uses XWF, you’ll be much better off learning XWF online away from class to get the full benefit of using XWF.   School programs can only teach so much with software in courses where they must teach everything.

The book:  Through Dec 31, 2016 the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner’s Guide book (print copy) is included with your tuition (USA/Canada shipping only).   There is no other book on X-Ways Forensics available.  The next edition may not be for another year or two.  Get your copy as part of the course.  The cost savings of a book + 12 hours of X-Ways Forensics training at $235 is the best deal you can find anywhere.

Course updates: The course may be updated throughout the year when XWF has enough smaller updates to add up to a new course or updated lessons.  You get that as part of your registration.  Revisit the course throughout the year, anytime you want, from anywhere online.

XWF as a primary or other forensic tool:  If you currently use or plan to use XWF in your work, get some training.  Either this course or a course from X-Ways AG, or somewhere.  XWF is not a tool for self-learning when you need it for casework tomorrow.  Especially for a primary tool, get some training.  This course gives you the information to use it either as your primary tool or secondary tool.

If you have any questions, hit me up J

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

  2494 Hits
  0 Comments

The most important tool in DFIR that you must have...

One of the workstations I have ranks up there in the clouds insofar as hardware.  You name it, this machine has it.  Lots of it.  Crammed into a huge case with lots of lights and liquid cooling hosing.  I call it the “Monster”.  No matter what I throw at it, it chews it up, spits it out, and smiles asking for more.  Seriously.  It’s a dream machine of a forensic workstation.

One thing about it however is that no matter how fast it is, or how cool it looks, it doesn’t really do forensics.  You see, I have this other little computer (laptop).  It’s really really small and light.  No CD/DVD drive, one USB port, and stuffed with high-speed hardware, but not that you can stuff that much in such a small laptop.  I call this one my “Little Baby”.

When I go somewhere, I take my Little Baby.  It does everything I need for the most part.  I would not want to try to index a terabyte or more to index, or try to do any serious processing with it.   However, this Little Baby does forensics work.  I've done forensic work in the offices of lawyers, in front of judges, and in court.  Each time using my Little Baby (I have a few, but they are all my Little Babies).  

I mean this in the manner that it’s not the machine (such as my Monster or Little Baby), but the examiner, that does the forensic work.  If you forego “processing” and “indexing”, the forensic machine comparisons in speed become irrelevant and everything comes down to the examiner.  I mean everything.  The best examiner can use X-Ways or Encase or FTK or any open source forensic tool on practically ANY computer when it comes down to deep-diving into electronic evidence.  The machine allows the examiner to use a software to access the media.  That’s it.  A million gigs of RAM won’t let you examine the registry any faster than 4GB will.  Your eyes and the stuff between your ears will get the job done.

When I teach forensics, one of the things I try to get across is that it is the person that gets the job done.  Flashing lights are cool on a computer, but if the examiner doesn’t know how (or where) to find evidence on a hard drive, then the flashing lights are not going to help.  If the examiner does not have critical thinking skills to investigate (or now commonly being described as "hunting") threats or evidence, then the tools are useless.

Don’t get me wrong. I like fast machines.  I need fast machines for some work.  But that work isn’t typically “forensics” but rather automated processes like imaging, or indexing, or some specific processing or decryption. That type of work requires computing power to get done.  Once that part is done, it comes down to fingers, eyes, and brain to do the real work.

I’m not advocating to not have a Monster machine or two, but I am advocating to rely on your brain, not the machine to the analysis.

BUT.  There is always an exception to forensic machines.  If you choose to have a RAM-sucking, space-eating, and overly-hungry-system-resource software as your primary forensic software, you are going to need a Monster machine to run it.  And if you expect to take that resource-intensive software outside the lab for use, you’ll need a 15-pound laptop along with a small RAID box to bring along so you can use it.

Be able to do anything you need to do with anything you have at hand at anytime needed. I've been around a lot of people with a lot of excuses ("I can't do this without my particular workstation or my particular software or etc...").  The world of DFIR is similar to the military. Make do with what you got.  Excuses not accepted.

I’m sure Picasso could paint a masterpiece using peanut butter and jelly.   An effective digital forensics analyst could do worse than being able to run a forensic application on a little bitty laptop if she knows what she is doing.  The most important tool in DFIR work?  That's your brain.  Think critically.  Link inferences.  About hardware and software?  Those are just things to let your brain connect to the evidence.  

In short, become a Picasso of forensics.  

  1784 Hits
  0 Comments

Learn by drawing out the experiences of others

I have taught digital forensics at the University of Washington (on and off) for the better part of a decade.  I have also been a guest speaker at several universities for longer than that.  One thing that I learned from the continuing education courses is that most of the students are already working adults with many already working in the IT industry, and I take advantage of their experience by incorporating it into the classroom.

For example, I have had attorneys (prosecutors, public defenders, and civil attorneys), police officers, federal agents, software developers (some were founding members of commonly used software), and a few ‘white hat’ hackers in my courses.  Students who did not fit in any of those categories sat right next to them.
 

Can you imagine what you can learn being a student sitting next to the developer of a major Microsoft program for 10 weeks? Or next to a federal agent who was involved in well-known national security investigations?  Or a homicide detective of a large police department?

That was the benefit to the students: being able to absorb information from fellow students with years, if not decades, of experience.  On the first day of every course, I stress this to the students.  Take advantage of the 10-minute breaks, not by checking your email, but by talking.  Those 10-minutes breaks produce more relevant information than can be gained from a Google search, because you can talk to the people who have done it, do it every day, and want to share.  Rather than 'read' about a case, speak directly with someone who does those cases.

As for me, you better believe I took advantage of the students with experience, all for the betterment of the courses and myself.  In my prior law enforcement career as a city cop, I was a detective that worked undercover and was assigned to state, local, and federal task forces as well as investigated cyber-related crimes that spanned the planet.  I also investigated multi-national organized crime groups (drug trafficking organizations, gun trafficking, outlaw motocycle gangs, street gangs, human trafficking, counterfeit goods, etc…), terrorist cells in the United States, along with a few other crimes that took me across several states.

I give my brief background not to brag, but to show that even with my experience, I gained something from every class from nearly every person and I asked for it directly.  When I found that I had a software developer from a major software company in class, who worked on a program that I use daily…I used him for discussions in class on incorporating that program into forensic analysis reporting and visualization.  Every student in the course may not have recognized the value of speaking with someone instrumental in that one program, but we all learned new ways to use something in forensics that we would not have learned otherwise.  

Courses with law enforcement and attorneys as students also created a great amount of material and discussion based on how they do different aspects of the same job, in their different positions, titles, and agencies.  Hearing from a federal public defender talk about how forensics fits in with her work alongside a prosecutor talking about the same information but applied differently really gives the entire room a wide spectrum of knowledge.  Throwing in the investigator perspective rounds it all out. 

Granted, I’m only talking about continuing education programs.  I’ve taken and spoken at a few college degree programs where the students are students and not yet even in the workforce.  That type of class is an entirely different animal where the instructor had better know what she is talking about.  And yes, I’ve taken courses where a professor had never connected a write-blocker to a hard drive, ever…not in real life or in the classroom…never testified…never created a forensic image…yet teaches the students to do this by reading a book.  That is not the case with most schools, but certainly a few.  

In the course I teach at the University of Washington (I will call it “my” course…), I give students maximum hands-on, maximum time on the keyboard, maximum time working with the tools and maximum real-life information so that they are not only near-competent to competent, but marketable.  I call my course, “Brett’s Digital Forensics Bootcamp” (without the yelling). I don’t like wasting time and I want to teach a course that I wish I could have taken when first starting out.  That means getting your hands on data as much as possible.

One last point about continuing education programs (for higher education courses)

A conversation I had last week about DFIR certifications ended with me talking about continuing education and college degrees as perhaps a better route over certifications for certain people.  For anyone already in the IT field, I find that a continuing education certification from a major university to be ‘better’ than a vendor certification, or if not better, certainly worthwhile.  I say ‘better’ in the sense that most people in IT already have some certs on their resume.  They may not be digital forensics certs, but technology-related certs nonetheless.  Certs also expire, or are discontinued because a business goes out of business or decides to create a new cert.  Having a continuing education cert from the University of Name Your College doesn’t expire, has more clout (or is that now called klout?) through regional accreditation, and is most times considered graduate-level instruction. 

Another benefit of a continuing education course is that since the courses are not vendor specific, the whole gamut of tools can be explored along with the SPECIFICS OF THE JOB.  Vendor courses focus so much on the sale and function of their tool, little time is left to the other aspects of the job that are just as important, if not more important.  I’ve taken well over a dozen vendor courses and I cannot remember any of the courses teaching forensics, other than what their tool does for forensics.

Not knowing how to collect, analize, and present defensible evidence effectively makes the examiner ineffective, incompetent, and can ruin a case.  Especially when someone has not been taught "what is evidence", finding the elusive evidence is near impossible if you don't know what it is.  Even police officers must know the elements of a crime in order to know what a crime looks like.

Yes, you must know how software works, but you also must know the job.  It’s like driving.  You may know how to drive a car, but if you don’t know the rules of the road, you will end up getting ticketed or worse.

  1825 Hits
  0 Comments

Jimmy Weg's blog archive

Most people in the DF field know or know of Jimmy Weg.  His blog was one of the most popular in the community, but like anyone, Jimmy has retired and will be retiring his blog.  

However, he has offered the blog to be used by anyone until the domain expires.  I know that one DF association (IACIS) will be archiving the blog for its members and Jimmy graciously has allowed me to archive it as well for anyone to use as reference.

Over the next weeks or so, I will be adding each of Jimmy's posts onto my blog, with Jimmy as the author.  You will be able to find all his blog posts on my blog, but under the JustAskWeg category (http://brettshavers.cc/index.php/brettsblog/categories/justaskweg).  Some of the posts are old, as in 2 years which can be old in the tech world, but the information from those posts, especially those concerning virtualization should be relevant for more years to come.  Jimmy's blog is one of those blogs that are valuable to many folks working in the DF field, and it is my pleasure to host his blog while it is still useful. Thanks to Jimmy!

About Jimmy Weg

  1904 Hits
  0 Comments

Ye ol’ Windows FE

Not to get into the long history of WinFE, but rather focus on the course I created about 2 years ago…it’s time for an update to the course.  There have been almost 5,000 people that signed up for the online WinFE course since 2014.  WinFE has been taught everywhere since its inception, from colleges to federal forensic courses to everything in between.  

Technology changes and with that, WinFE needs to be updated along with a second related topic to be included in the course.  In the next few weeks, I am updating the WinFE course and adding Linux distros to the mix (only the most current Linux forensic distros, not the outdated and non-maintained systems).  The new course is tentatively titled,

"Bootable Forensic Operating Systems"

or something to that affect of having both Windows and Linux forensic boot systems.

The intention of this new course is the same as the previous course: Give forensic analysts additional options in collection, preview/triage, and analysis.

On a side note, I have had about a dozen or so emails about WinFE telling me that;

  1. You have to use a write-blocker

  2. You can’t trust bootable media to be forensically sound

  3. No one does it this way anymore

  4. Today’s computers don’t allow booting to external media

Each time, I have said, “You’re right.  Feel free to use what you want.”  I really don’t see a need to argue with anyone set in his or her ways in the DFIR field.  My opinion is simply that if something works, use it.  If something doesn’t work, don’t use it.  This applies to WinFE, a Linux forensic boot disc, or a write blocker as much as it applies to X-Ways, EnCase, or FTK.

Seriously, if WinFE works for you in a given situation, and you have a choice, feel free to use it.  It’s been battle-proven more than enough.  Same with the Linux distros. If you like it, and it works, and it fits to your needs, why not use it.

With that, I still believe forensically sound bootable media still has its place in the forensic world.  The upcoming course will talk all about it, including building a WinFE and perhaps even putting together your own Linux distro.

  3675 Hits
  0 Comments

X-Ways Forensics Sucks….

…only with decryption, and even at that, it does everything else superbly.

I probably caught your attention if you are an X-Ways Forensics user.  The only thing that sucks about X-Ways Forensics is that it doesn’t do encryption.  By “doing encryption”, I mean that it doesn’t decrypt encrypted files or systems.  Besides that one aspect of forensic work, X-Ways Forensics rules.

**UPDATED X-WAYS FORENSICS PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE ONLINE COURSE**

I completely updated and extended an online course based on my book, the “X-Ways Forensics Practitioner’s Guide”.  It has taken some time to create a course that has 95% of what you need to use X-Ways Forensics without being an overly long instruction of the software.  The remaining 5% changes every week or so with new features and updates added by X-Ways.  This course covers X-Ways Forensics up to version 19, but know that X-Ways will be adding new features every week that aren’t included in this course yet.  After enough ‘little’ features and improvements have been added, more content to the course will be added as well.

Here is the gist of this post

Register before November 8, 2016 to get both 50% off tuition and a printed copy of the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner’s Guide.  Use this link for the discount: http://courses.dfironlinetraining.com/x-ways-forensics-practitioners-guide-online-and-on-demand-course?pc=blog

Personal anecdote: While sitting in BCERT at FLETC years ago, I brought my trust X-Ways Forensics v13 to class.  FLETC issued FTK and Encase as the forensic suites during this time, and also issued a license for WinHex. The Winhex instruction was probably 30 minutes long.

I had already been using X-Ways Forensics and the FLETC instructors allowed me to use my license alongside their issued tools.  With a FLETC provided image that was given to every student in the course, X-Ways data carved hundreds of pornography pictures from my image while both FTK and Encase did not.  The instructors thought I had been surfing porn in class until I carved from someone else’s image.  Encase and FTK, for some reason, did not carve up the pictures that X-Ways did.  In about 5 minutes after seeing that X-Ways carved up porn that other tools missed, every image was collected from class by the instructors….

I emailed Stefan Fleischmann of X-Ways during lunch to let him know that his X-Ways Forensics program works pretty good.

My personal experience with X-Ways Forensics started because I was a curious about a ‘new’ forensic program based off of Winhex. I only tried X-Ways Forensics because (1) it was cheaper than anything else, (2) looked kinda cool, (3) and got deep into the actual files like a hex editor.  However, I tried to figure it out and the best way to do that was to host a course.  The only reason I gave X-Ways Forensics a chance was because X-Ways agreed to give a training course in Seattle if I would arrange it, their first course ever.  After seeing how X-Ways worked in that one course, I was hooked using X-Ways Forensics as my primary forensic tool for well over a decade.

I have met many examiners who have tried to use X-Ways Forensics and have nearly always gone back to their other tools, like Encase or FTK.  Mostly, I see this to be because of fear of change and lack of information to use X-Ways Forensics.  There were no books about X-Ways Forensics.  The manual was (is) clearly lacking in giving instruction in using X-Ways, the courses were (are) expensive and not typically where you’d like them to be.  Compared to Encase, as one example, books on using Encase have been around for some time, Encase has been taught in government forensic courses for well over a decade, and courses have been planted everywhere around the world for so long that it seems strange to not have a course local to you every year or so.  Plus, the other tools throw parties, like huge beer fests poolside in Vegas or somewhere neat.  X-Ways? No parties.  No beer fests.  It’s all down and dirty with hex, which is just the way I like it.

The manner in which this online course works is similar to the book that Eric Zimmerman and I wrote on X-Ways Forensics.  We wrote, and titled, the book for practitioners.  The manual is not for practitioners.  Do not start reading the manual hoping to find the ‘how to use X-Ways’.  Do read the X-Ways Forensics Practitioner’s Guide to find out.  Unfortunately, books and manuals simply do not fill the remaining gap of instruction and demonstration.  Short videos on Youtube won’t do it either.  You need a course to learn what you need to learn as fast as you can learn it in order for you to be able to use it right away.

If you cannot attend the official X-Ways Forensics course due to time/money, or maybe you want a refresher to the course you took five years ago, or maybe you are in a forensic course in college that uses X-Ways, this online course is the least expensive you can find (the only one currently in the world) that fills that need.

I can promise that after you complete the course, you will have a different perspective of X-Ways.  You most likely will use X-Ways Forensics as a secondary or validation tool.  Many of you will move completely over to X-Ways Forensics and turn your other tools into secondary tools.  Some of you will turn your entire lab into an X-Ways Forensics lab that uses the “other tools” as validation.

One thing the online course does not do is teach forensics.  You might learn a little something since the course uses publicly available forensic images and gives suggestions on workflows (based on case types, such as picture intensive or user document intensive cases), but don’t expect this course to teach everything about forensics.  For that, you need to take a digital forensics course to show what a “lnk” file is, or how to examine the registry.  The X-Ways Forensics Practitioner’s Guide course teaches you how to plug the X-Ways Forensics dongle into your machine and push all the buttons you need to push to get what you are looking for.  That’s more than half the battle for any forensic software: what button do I push to get forensic artifact “x”, “y” and “z”?

Watch the introductory video (free) to get a handle on why you should take this course.  Whether you have been using X-Ways Forensics for more than a day, new to X-Ways Forensics, or thinking about trying it out, this course is the fastest, least expensive, and easiest method to learn. Bar none.

 

Recent Comments
Brett Shavers
Sorry, but the promo expired.
Saturday, 02 September 2017 16:04
  5039 Hits
  2 Comments

Virtual Machines, like anything else in technology, can be used for bad

Virtual machines have always been one of the neatest aspects in computer technology.  My first exposure to a virtual machine was in a digital forensics courses I took at FLETC and I knew that this would be the coolest thing ever.  The coolness factor of being able to run one operating system (the virtual machine or VM) inside another operating system (the host) has not grown old for me especially because of the forensic and security implications that exist more so today than that day of first exposure.

It has been 10 years since I wrote the first of two papers on virtualization and forensics.  The first, “vmware as a forensic tool” and subsequentlyVirtual Forensics: A Discussion of Virtual Machines Related to Forensic Analysis”.  Some of the information has been outdated, but most of the information and certainly the concepts are still in play today.  I recommend looking at these two papers to get started on thinking about VMs as it relates to your cases.

Skip forward some years after those first papers; I began to find VM use occur more often on forensic cases in civil litigation matters.  In the majority of the cases, the VMs I found were not used to facilitate any malicious activity, but did result in longer examination time of each hard drive with VMs.  In one case of my cases, a single hard drive contained over 50 (yes, FIFTY) virtual machines and each one VM had multiple snapshots and practically all were being used with malicious intent.  After that case, I made sure to include virtual machine investigative information in two books I wrote (Placing the Suspect Behind the Keyboard and Hiding Behind the Keyboard) to make sure investigators consider VMs as a source of evidence.

There was a time when computer users, including criminal using computers, were oblivious to the amount of evidence a forensic analysis can recover.  Those days are virtually gone since most anyone with a computer knows for the most part, that a ‘deleted’ file can be recovered.  In addition, with Hollywood producing movies and TV shows showing forensic analysis of computers, common criminal knowledge now includes knowing about electronic evidence that is created on computers and forensics recovers it.  Every push of a button, click of a mouse, and click of a link litters the system with evidence.  The litter (creation/modification/access/deletion of files) is everywhere in the system, spread out among various locations from the registry to free space to system files, and most can be attributed to a user’s activity.  Getting rid of every bit of the electronic litter is practically impossible, even as certain amounts can be wiped securely.

However, with a VM, all of that electronic litter, aka evidence, is kept within one file that stores the virtual machine.  The user need only wipe that one file to destroy all the electronic litter and evidence that was created during the malicious activity.   The only evidence able to be found will be on the host, and usually that will just show a VM had been started.  The malicious activity/user activity…gone.    Going a step further, a VM booted to a Linux bootable OS (even to an .iso file), will have no evidence saved in the VM to begin with.

I am not discounting other important evidence, such as network logs, captured traffic, or the evidence that can be recovered on the host machine.  That is all good evidence too, but when the actual user activity is contained in a single file that can be wiped securely, digital forensics gets harder if not downright impossible.

A recent article I read on malicious use of VMs goes one-step further.  In the article (https://www.secureworks.com/blog/virtual-machines-used-to-hide-activity), an attempt to remotely start a VM inside a compromised system failed only because the compromised system was also a VM.  Considering that scenario, a hacker starting a VM on a compromised machine can effectively hide nearly all activity within that VM by subsequently wiping it after the hacker is finished.  Incident response just got harder.

Not only are virtual machines used to facilitate criminal activity, but can also be used as a tool to compromise systems.  One creative example of malicious VM use can be read here: https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2016/08/18/compromising-linux-virtual-machines/  where virtual machines in the cloud can be used to attack another virtual machine if hosted on the same server.  Now that is clever.

Virtual machines are here to stay for all the good uses they provide, which also means they are here for all the bad uses too.  In the world of cyber-cop vs cyber-criminal, every day is another day where each side tries to out-MacGyver the other side with something new, unique, and sometimes pretty cool.

 

 

 

 

  1740 Hits
  0 Comments

Mini-WinFE and XWF

Due to a dozen tragedies, a half dozen fires popping up, and twice as many projects due at the same time, I’ve been way late in updating an X-Ways Forensics course along with updating the WinFE.  But now, the X-Ways course is about done to be uploaded as soon as the finishing touches are finished.  The new course includes a whole lot more than originally made and updated to the current version of X-Ways (everyone currently registered will receive an email when  the course has been published (no cost to current registrants). 

The WinFE online course will be depreciated and replaced with a longer ‘Forensic Boot CD Course” that includes Linux forensic CDs along with some updated WinFE  information.  The goal of this course is to complete cover just about every aspect of using a forensic boot OS (CD/DVD/USB), with examples of the most currently updated Linux forensic CDs.  There are plenty of outdated distros to avoid and those are not described in the course.

Until the Forensic Boot CD Course is uploaded, you can download the Mini-WinFE builder from this link: http://brettshavers.cc/files/Mini-WinFE.2014.07.03.zip  as currently, the reboot.pro download link for Mini-WinFE is broken.  I have sent the developer a message to repair it.

  3853 Hits
  0 Comments

Compiling Identity in Cyber Investigations

Digital forensics analysis is the easy part of an investigation. That is not to say that the work of digital forensics is simple, but rather recovering electronic data is a rote routine of data carving and visual inspection of data. Interpreting the data requires a different type of effort to put together a story of what happened ‘on the computer’.  As important an analysis is to determine computer use, it is just as important to identify the user or users and attribute computer activity to each user.  An investigation without an identified suspect is a case that remains open and unsolved..sometimes for years or forever.

In many investigations (civil and criminal), identifying the computer user is obvious through confessions or by process of elimination.  Proving a specific person was at the keyboard is barely a consideration since the person either admitted control of the device or was caught red-handed and the examiner can focus more on the user activity on the computer devices rather than spending time identifying the user.

However, simply accepting the suspect’s identity without further investigation into other aspects of the suspect’s identity may sell the investigation short.  Whether the suspect is known or unknown, compiling a complete identity of the suspect adds important information that is beneficial to a case, such as motives, intentions, and identification of more crimes.  The most important point is that a physical person that has been identified, or even arrested, does not give a complete identity of that person.  It is only the physical identity.  Investigators should strive to compile a complete identity that includes digital identities.

So what’s in it for you?

Building a case against a suspect requires more than just finding evidence.  A case needs evidence to point to a suspect as well as showing motive and opportunity.  Providing evidence of every identified persona of a suspect paints a picture of the suspect, to include intent, desires, motive, behaviors, and overall character to add to the supporting evidence.  In short, you get a better case.

The Complete Identity

A physical identity (aka biometric identity) and digital identity comprises the complete identity of a person.  Biometrical features of a person, such as fingerprints and eye color, are bound to the physical identity and typically permanent to the person depending on the feature.  Although eye color can be temporarily changed with color contacts and hair can be temporarily dyed to a different color, the majority of physical features cannot be changed without drastic injury or surgery. 

Internet users create digital trails of use and subsequently (and without intention) create digital personas based on their unique computer use.  The normal, everyday use of the Internet creates a digital identity that is based on Internet surfing habits (the Websites visited), communications made online through forums, chats, e-mails, blog posts and comments, and through the accounts created for online services to include online shopping.

Compiling the digital identity and physical identity may seem like an obvious and easy task, but assembling the identities is not so simple.  In an ideal case, a suspect has a single physical identity and a single digital identity, but in reality, a person may have multiple physical personas tied to a single physical identity and multiple digital personas.  Some personas may be intentional while others unintentional.  For example, a criminal wanting to travel in a name other than his true name may create or purchase a fake driver’s license. As he goes about using the fake or stolen driver’s license, he creates a persona under the false name.  Although this persona is not truly a ‘physical’ identity, as it is not biometrically tied to a physical body, it is part of his physical identity as he uses the false name as if it were his true name. 

One example of a digital identity is the accumulation of normal Internet and computer use.  A person’s computer use is generally a reflection of that person’s personality, desires, and intentions.  The unique activity of one device is typically replicated across devices under that person’s control.  For instance, given a new computer, a user will configure it by personal preference by arranging icons, colors, sounds, and folder structure to save.  When the user has an additional computer, both computers will have a very similar order of computer activity when used over time and will even look the same, such as the placement of desktop icons and wallpaper choice.  Configurations of the computers will likely be similar, if not exact for some items, and Internet use will most certainly mirror each other by bookmarks and frequently visited Websites.  Merely comparing the type of computer use and configuration between two or more devices can give an indication that the same person used all of the devices. 

Adding to the complexity of finding both digital and physical identity of a suspect is that of multiple aspects of both types of identity.  A person leading a double life may have two spouses and two jobs with one being a false identity.  This person is physically tied to both identities, even if the false identity contains no true information.   Leading a double life is an extreme example of a fake physical identity, and examples that are more common include using a fake ID to make consumer purchases, or using fake names to register at hotels.  The depth of a fake physical identity depends upon the person’s intention and resources. Types of physical identifiers are seen in the following figure.

Digital identities, being far easier to create, generally mean that any one person can have multiple, or even hundreds, of fake digital identities.  A harassment suspect may have dozens of online identities that he uses to harass a single victim or victims through repeated e-mails from different e-mail accounts created to appear as different people.  In any investigation, treat each digital identity as its own identity that will be tied to a physical person at some point in the investigation.  Each identity gives information about a person based on the fake identity, whether the only information is the username of an e-mail or a completely falsified social networking account.

An example of having multiple digital identities is that of one fake identity used to create specific online accounts and a different fake identity used to create other specific online accounts.  In this manner, a person is simply trying to distance himself from something (such as registering for a pornographic Website) by using a fake digital identity while using a different fake identity to distance himself from other aspects of his online life.  An investigator who can identify the fake accounts adds to the case by showing the intentionally hidden aspects of a personality, motive, or intention of the real person based on the real person’s actions under the fake digital identities.  A pedophile whose physical identity has no ties to pedophilia may appear innocent until fake digital personas are found and tied to his physical identity.

Of note is that each person has a true physical identity and a true digital identity.  Typically, the true digital identity shows the real information, such as a real name, and is easily tied to the physical person.  However, every identity and persona (real and fake, digital and physical) should be compiled together to show the complete identity of a person.  False information is just as important as the true information to build a complete picture of a suspect.

A great example of tying a physical identity to a false persona is in the Silk Road case where the creator of Silk Road (Ross Ulbricht) used his public e-mail/forum (rThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.) account on the open Internet to market the Silk Road.  One simple post eventually tied his legitimate physical identity to a secret, false, and criminal persona on the Dark Web site, the Silk Road.

Identifying the digital identity becomes easier as Big Data continues to grow exponentially through massive data collection by government and corporations.  Social media sites contribute to identifying digital identities as the connectivity between sites exists through single usernames, using the same e-mail address across online accounts, and algorithms created to ‘find’ friends based on relationships and Internet use.  The digital identity is the sum of all electronic information of a person.  Corporations have been compiling digital identities of consumers in order to focus on advertising efforts.  Investigators should focus on compiling digital identities of suspects to determine motive and opportunity.

Any investigation benefits by compiling the complete identity of suspects.  Whether the identities contain true information about a suspect is not as relevant as tying the identities and personas to a person. Motives and intentions are clearer with a complete picture of a person in both the physical and digital worlds. 

Now that you know the ‘why’, become competent in the ‘how’ in each investigation with thorough research to find the connection between each identity in order to place your suspect at the keyboard.  Digital forensic skills are necessary and important, but solid cases usually need some old fashioned, gumshoe detective work too.

  3530 Hits
  0 Comments

The Secret to Becoming More-Than-Competent in Your Job

The Secret to Becoming More-Than-Competent in Your Job

I was part of an interesting and product online podcast today.   You can check it out at: http://nopskids.com/live/

The topics ranged from hacking, forensics, how to catch hackers, and a little on how criminals sometimes get away with it. Although I didn’t give any tips on how to get away with a crime, other than DON’T DO IT, I did speak a little on some of the things that can be found forensically on a hard drive.  Actually, I think I only had time to talk about one thing (the Windows registry) for a few minutes and nothing of which that has any impact on a criminal using the information to get away with a crime.

The one thing I wanted to stress that even if every top secret, secret squirrel, spy and investigative method was exposed, criminals would still get caught using the very techniques they know.  Proof in the pudding is seeing cops being arrested for committing crimes.  You’d figure they would be the most knowledgeable of not getting caught, but they get caught. Same with accountants being arrested for fraud, and so forth.  I’ve even arrested criminals when they had in their possession, books on how not to get caught.   The most diligent criminal can be identified and arrested by simple mistakes made and sometimes by sheer massive law enforcement resources put on a single case to find a criminal or take down an organization.

With that, I learned a few things from the podcast too.  One of the moderators was actually a case study in my latest book (Hiding Behind the Keyboard).  To be an expert, to be knowledgeable, and to be more than just competent requires talking, listening, and sharing.  That doesn’t mean sharing trade secrets or confidential information, but it does mean having conversations to learn your job better.

When I worked as a jailer, I talked to every person I booked (at least the sober arrestees and those cooperating with the booking process).  I asked personal questions like, “how did you get started with drug use?” and “how did you start doing X crime”?  I learned a lot after hundreds of bookings.  I learned so much that when I make it to patrol and hit the streets, I had a big leg up on the criminal world, in how it worked with people.  That directly helped me in undercover work.  I spoke to so many criminals, both as a police officer and as an undercover (where they didn’t know I was a police officer), that I learned how to investigate people who committed crimes.  I was darn effective.

The point of all this is that talking to “the other side” is not a terrible idea.  Working on the law enforcement side, I promise that if you have a conversation with a criminal defense expert, you will learn something to help win YOUR case.  If you talk to a hacker, you will learn something to help figure out YOUR cases.  The best part, like I said, nothing you give will make a criminal’s job easier.  In fact, anything you say will only make them worry and make more mistakes.

If you are more-than-competent, you can do your job like a magician.   My first undercover case was buying a gram of meth from a cold phone call of a guy I didn’t even have a name for.  As soon as we met, I recognized the meth dealer as someone I arrested a half dozen times when I was in patrol.   Luckily for me, he didn’t recognize me and believed my UC role.  Arrested, booked, and convicted.  This was a career criminal with dozens of arrests who probably met more cops that I ever did at that time.  Still, he was arrested, by me, because I was more-than-competent in my job.  Digital forensics work is no different.

Talk to everyone and share.  I promise you will get more than you give.  And there is no shame in learning that you don't know it all, because none of us do.

  1956 Hits
  0 Comments

Behind the Keyboard - Enfuse 2016 Presentation download

I had the amazing honor of speaking before a full room at Enfuse this week.  This was not only my first time speaking at Enfuse, it was my first time at Enfuse. The conference was put together well.  Kudos to poolside event coordinator.  Those who know my forensic tool choices also know that I do not use Encase as my primary forensic tool.  However, I have a license for v7 and have used Encase since v4 (with sporadic breaks of use and licensing).

This year at Enfuse, I did not speak on any forensic software (or hardware) at the conference. I gave a snippet of two recent books I published (Placing the Suspect Behind the Keyboard and Hiding Behind the Keyboard).  I say “snippet” because one hour is not even near enough time to talk about the investigative tips in the books.  I was able to give a few good tips that I hope someone will be able to take the bank and boost case work.   I could spend weeks talking about investigative methods of not only finding suspects that are using computers to facilitate crimes, but also to place them at a specific device with both forensic analysis and traditional investigative techniques.   

After my talk, I received emails from some who did not or could not attend my Enfuse talk; I am providing my slidedeck for them and others who may want to see high-level notes from the Powerpoint slides.  However, I removed a number of slides that had personally identifiable information to avoid any embarrassment from Google searches and cases.  I did not get to a few slides in the presentation due to time (only one hour!), and I removed them as well.   Nonetheless, the meat and potatoes of the presentation is in the below PDF.

  

 

A few toughts on digital forensic skill development and giving away investigative secrets

Forensic examiners/analysts generally follow the same path in skill development, with some exceptions of course.  For most of us, the tools are just plain neat and we initially focus on the tools.  High tech software and using the type of hardware that you cannot find at Frys turns work into play.  We dive into the box, swim around in it for days, weeks, or even months, and then we pull out every artifact we can to write a report of what happened ‘in the box’.  Writing a report usually means pushing the "Create Report" button. I suggest that every examiner go through this stage quickly and move forward.  Get it out of your system as soon as you can. There is more to digital forensics than the toys, I mean, tools.

Digital forensics investigators must investigate, unless your job is solely looking at data because someone else is investigating the case.  This is where leaving the stage of ‘playing with high-tech toys’ turns the new forensic examiner into a real digital forensics crime fighter.  When an examiner can integrate data recovered from ‘the box’ with information collected from ‘outside the box’, using any tool and investigative method available, we have a competent and effective digital forensics investigator, not just a tool user.

I have always believed that a good digital forensics investigator can practically use any software, as long as the software can do the job, without relying on the software to do the complete job.  Pushing a button to find evidence, then pushing another to print a report does not a forensic analysis make.  Just as Picasso could paint a masterpiece only using an old paintbrush and watercolors, a good forensic examiner can make a great case with only using a hex editor and gumshoe detective mindset.  The high-tech tools should be used to make the work easier and faster without becoming a crutch.

And that was the inspiration of why I wrote Placing the Suspect Behind the Keyboard and Hiding Behind the Keyboard, boiled down in two simple intentions:

1) To push forensic examiners out of the high-tech toy reliance into becoming a well-rounded, effective, efficient, and competent investigator.

2) As a reminder to the former investigator-turned-forensic-analyst to get back into the investigative mindset.

If you are currently in the ‘gotta-have-the-most-expensive-tools-on-the-planet’ stage while at the same time not working outside the CPU, don’t fret. It happens to most everyone, and not just in the digital forensics field.  When I was a young Marine, I went to the local army surplus store and base PX to buy every cool tool I could think that would help me in the field.  I had so many ‘tools’ that my ALICE pack looked like a Christmas tree dangling a five years' worth of trinkets from New Orleans’ Mardi Gras parades.  After one trip to the field, I realized how much money I wasted on unnecessary gear (if you could actually call some of those things I bought "gear"..) and focused on using only the things that work and making things work for me.  Digital forensics work is no different.  Consider yourself DFIR SEALTeam 6 once you can work a case using ANY computer and ANY tool.

Giving away trade secrets?

There is a long-standing problem in the digital forensics world: Sharing, or rather, lack of sharing.  Yes, experts and practitioners share their work, but many do not.  I completely understand why.  When you share your ideas and research to the public, there is a fear that the bad guys will see it and use it for their benefit.  The fear is that once the methods are known to the criminal world, the methods become ineffective.

In short, that thinking is incorrect.

First off, cybercriminals and criminals, in general, share information with each other.  They share the methods when they work together to commit crimes, they share it online,  and they share it during their stays in the big house.  Still, they get caught.  Still, they make mistakes. Still, the methods work against them.  I have even arrested drug dealers when they had in their possession, books on 'how not to get caught dealing drugs'.  Cybercrime is no different.  An entire website can be written on how to get away with crime on the Internet and read by every cybercriminal, and yet, they can still be identified, found, and arrested.  

Second, lack of sharing only hurts us all. If you were to find a better way to find evidence, but keep it to yourself, the entire community stagnates.  But when shared, we push ourselves ahead in skills.  Do not be afraid that the bad guys will get away with crimes if they know how you catch them.  Just as watching a Youtube video on Marine Corps boot camp does not make boot camp any easier, criminals that know how we place them behind a keyboard does not negate the process that can place a suspect behind a keyboard.  In fact, the more they know, the more chance they will slip up more than once out of sheer fear of how easy it is to put enough investigative resources to find a criminal that cannot be countered with any amount of preparation.  

  2185 Hits
  0 Comments

Reviewing a tech book technically makes you a peer reviewer…

    If you have been in the digital forensics world for more than a day, then you know about peer reviews of analysis reports.  If you have ‘only’ been doing IR work where forensics isn't the main point (as in taking evidence collection all the way to court), then you may not be reading reports of opposing experts.  Anyway, the opposing expert peer review is one of the scariest reviews of all since the reader, which is again, the opposing expert, tries to find holes in your work.  The peer review is so effective to push toward doing a good job that I think it prevents errors by the examiner more than it does help opposing experts find errors of the examiner.  Peer reviews take different shapes depending on where it is being done (review of a book draft, review of a report, etc...) but in general, a peer review is checking the accuracy of the written words.

    Academia has always been under the constant worry of peer reviews.  One professor's journal may be peer reviewed by dozens of other professors in the same field, with the end result being seen by the public, whether good or bad. Peer reviews are scary, not for the sake that you made a mistake, but that maybe you could have missed something important that someone else points out to you.

    If you read a tech book and write a review of it (formally in an essay/journal, or informally on social media), consider yourself a peer reviewer of tech writings.  That which you say, based on what you read, is a peer review of that material.  Think about that for a second.  If you are in the field of the book you are reviewing, you practically are tech reviewing that book for accuracy (so make sure you are correct!).  That is a good thing for you as it boosts your experience in the field.  Always be the expert on the stand who can say, “I’ve read x number of forensic books and have given x number peer reviews on social media, Amazon, essays, etc….”.  If for nothing else, this shows more than that you just read books.  You read for accuracy and give public review of your findings. Nice.

    There is some stress in writing a peer review because you have to be correct in your claims.  Sure, maybe some things in the book could have been done a different way, but was it the wrong way?  The manner in which you come across in a peer review is important too.  Crass and rude really doesn't make you look great on the stand if you slam a book or paper.  You can get the point across just as well by being professional.

    Writing books takes no back seat to peer review stress, especially when it comes to technical books.  Not only does the grammar get combed by reviewers, but the actual technical details get sliced and diced.  Was the information correct? Was it current and up-to-date?  Is there any other information that negates what was written in the book?

    So, to get any positive reviews makes for a good day.  Not for the sake of ego, but for the sake of having done it right so others can benefit from the information.  Writing is certainly not about making money as  much as it is putting yourself out there to share what you have learned at the risk of having your work examined under a microscope by an unhappy camper.

    b2ap3_thumbnail_HBTK.JPGWhich brings me to my latest reviews for Hiding Behind the Keyboard.  This is my third tech book (more to come in both nonfiction and fiction) and with each book, I have always cautiously looked at Amazon book reviews each time.  Not that I have written anything inaccurate, inappropriate, or misleading, but that I just want to have written something useful in a topic that I wish existed when I started out in the digital forensics field.  My best analogy of what it is like to write a book is to walk outside to your mailbox nude and then check Facebook to see what people say about you…then do it again.  At least I don't have a Facebook account...

    So far, the reviews for my latest book show that I did a good job (my gratitude to the reviewers).

And that brings me to another point of this post. 

    One of the social media reviewers is actually in a case study in the book.  Higinio Ochoa read and reviewed my book in a Tweet (as seen below).   

 

    You will have to check the Internet to get Hig’s story, or read it my book…  Suffice to say he was a hacker who was caught, and then ended up as one of the case studies in my book.  Positive reviews from forensic experts are great, but so are reviews from former hackers that can double-validate the work.  Like I said, it takes a lot of guts to write a book and almost as much guts to peer review it in public.  That’s what we are doing when we write a review of a tech book.  We are all peer reviewers.

 

  1487 Hits
  0 Comments

Bio-hacked humans and digital forensic issues...

Bio-hacked humans and digital forensic issues...

If you thought The Grudge was the scariest thing you’ve seen on screen, you must have not yet watched Showtime’s ‘The Dark Net’.  In short, the series show how humans are procreating less and merging digitally into technology with bio-hacks. That makes for a bad combination on a few different levels.

Without getting into non-techical issues (such as moral, ethical, or legal), I have a technical question: How the heck are we going to going to do a forensic analysis of a bio-hacked…human?

Before the human race ends up looking like robots, we are already in the era of implanting electronic data devices in our bodies.  Check out http://dangerousthings.com to find how you too can jab an injection device into your hand and shoot a RFID under your skin…all by doing it yourself. As for me, I don't think I'll be joining in that movement anytime soon.

RFID (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-frequency_identification) tags store data. Data such as medical, financial, personal, or any type of information can be stored on a RFID tag, although the amount is quite limited currently (2-10 kilobytes?).  That's not much data, but depending on the content, it may be more than enough to cause a war or bankrupt a company.

But even at that low amount of storage, it can raise suspicions in theft of intellectual property, trade secrets, or national security information.  Imagine the use of implanted RFID chips by criminals, terrorists, and corporate spies to exfiltrate and transport sensitive data.  Just when you thought the MicroSD cards presented a threat because of their small sizes, the RFID is even an even bigger problem.  We can find a USB since we can see it. RFID chips implanted under the skin…not so easy.

b2ap3_thumbnail_implant.JPG

Now back to my first question of how we will be doing forensic analysis on a bio-hacked human. When the time arrives where humans are embedded with multiple types of technology and devices, where and how do we start the data acquisition process?   Depending on how much technology is embedded, where it is embedded, and what it is connected to, forensic imaging takes on a whole new world.  

And what if the person (or man-machine cyborg…) doesn’t want to be forensically analyzed? 

b2ap3_thumbnail_robocop.JPG

Maybe for imaging software, we can try Robocopy (looks like the software is already here….).

b2ap3_thumbnail_header.JPGb2ap3_thumbnail_robocopy.JPGhttp://sourceforge.net/projects/robocoprobocopy/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  2287 Hits
  1 Comment