Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Behind the (Digital Crime) Scenes: An MSC Model (2403.16196v1)

Published 24 Mar 2024 in cs.CR

Abstract: Criminal investigations are inherently complex as they typically involve interactions among various actors like investigators, prosecutors, and defendants. The pervasive integration of technology in daily life adds an extra layer of complexity, especially in crimes that involve a digital element. The establishment of digital forensics as a foundational discipline for extracting digital evidence further exacerbates the complex nature of criminal investigations, leading to the proliferation of multiple scenarios. Recognising the need to structure standard operating procedures for the handling of digital evidence, the representation of digital forensics as a protocol emerges as a valuable opportunity to identify security and privacy threats. In this paper, we delineate the protocols that compose digital forensics within a criminal case, formalise them as message sequence charts (MSCs), and identify their functional requirements.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (27)
  1. European Commission. Rights of suspects and accused. URL https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/criminal-justice/rights-suspects-and-accused_en.
  2. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. International human rights and cybercrime law. URL https://sherloc.unodc.org/cld/en/education/tertiary/cybercrime/module-3/index.html.
  3. European Parliament. Rights of suspects and accused, 2016. URL https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32016L0680.
  4. Cognitive biases in criminal case evaluation: A review of the research. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 37, 06 2021. doi:10.1007/s11896-020-09425-8.
  5. D Kim Rossmo. Criminal investigative failures. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health, 11(4):281, 2009.
  6. Deciding properties of message sequence charts. In Stefan Leue and Tarja Johanna Systä, editors, Scenarios: Models, Transformations and Tools, pages 43–65, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-540-32032-6.
  7. Formalizing computer forensics process with uml. In Jianhua Yang, Athula Ginige, Heinrich C. Mayr, and Ralf-D. Kutsche, editors, Information Systems: Modeling, Development, and Integration, pages 184–189, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-642-01112-2.
  8. A formalization of digital forensics. Int. J. Digit. EVid., 3, 2004. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:15568461.
  9. Towards a formalization of digital forensics. In Gilbert Peterson and Sujeet Shenoi, editors, Advances in Digital Forensics V, pages 37–47, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-642-04155-6.
  10. A harmonized process model for digital forensic investigation readiness. In Gilbert Peterson and Sujeet Shenoi, editors, Advances in Digital Forensics IX, pages 67–82, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-642-41148-9.
  11. Reza Montasari. A comprehensive digital forensic investigation process model. International Journal of Electronic Security and Digital Forensics, 8:285, 01 2016. doi:10.1504/IJESDF.2016.079430.
  12. The Standardised Digital Forensic Investigation Process Model (SDFIPM), pages 169–209. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2019. ISBN 978-3-030-11289-9. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-11289-9_8. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11289-9_8.
  13. Next generation digital forensic investigation model (ngdfim) - enhanced, time reducing and comprehensive framework. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1767(1):012054, feb 2021. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1767/1/012054. URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1767/1/012054.
  14. Unboxing the digital forensic investigation process. Science & Justice, 62, 01 2022. doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2022.01.002.
  15. Wikipedia. Criminal Procedure. URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_procedure.
  16. US Federal Judicial Center. Comparative Criminal Procedure. URL https://judiciariesworldwide.fjc.gov/comparative-criminal-procedure.
  17. European Commission. Defendants (criminal proceedings), Oct 2017. URL https://e-justice.europa.eu/169/EN/defendants_criminal_proceedings.
  18. Manuale di procedura penale. Giuffrè, 2023. URL https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/sommario/codici/codiceProceduraPenale.
  19. UK Crown Prosecution Service. How a criminal case works. URL https://www.cps.gov.uk/about-cps/how-a-criminal-case-works.
  20. US Department of Justice. Steps in the Federal Criminal Process). URL https://www.justice.gov/usao/justice-101/steps-federal-criminal-process.
  21. Council of Europe. The Budapest Convention (ETS No. 185), 2001. URL https://www.coe.int/en/web/cybercrime/the-budapest-convention.
  22. ISO/IEC. ISO 27037 – Guidelines for identification, collection, acquisition and preservation of digital evidence, 2012.
  23. ISO/IEC. ISO 27043 – Incident investigation principles and processes, 2015.
  24. Council of Europe. Standard Operating Procedures for the collection, analysis and presentation of electronic evidence, 2019. URL https://rm.coe.int/3692-sop-electronic-evidence/168097d7cb.
  25. Council of Europe. Electronic Evidence Guide 3.0, 2022. URL https://www.coe.int/en/web/octopus/training.
  26. European Network of Forensic Science Institutes. Electronic Evidence Guide 3.0, 2015. URL https://enfsi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/1._forensic_examination_of_digital_technology_0.pdf.
  27. G. Palmer. A road map for digital forensic research, 2001.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now