The next generation for the forensic extraction of electronic evidence from mobile telephones

Electronic evidence extracted from a mobile telephone provide a wealth of information about the user. Before a court allows the trier of fact to consider the electronic evidence, the court must ensure that the subject matter, testimony of which is to be given, is scientific. Therefore, regard must, at the investigation stage, be given to fulfill the requirements of science and law, including international standards. Such compliance also moves the extraction of electronic evidence from mobile telephones into the next generation, a more rigorous position as a forensic science, by being able to give in court well- reasoned and concrete claims about the accuracy and validity of conclusions.

[1]  Zoe L. Jiang,et al.  Forensic Analysis of Pirated Chinese Shanzhai Mobile Phones , 2012, IFIP Int. Conf. Digital Forensics.

[2]  Judy Pearsall,et al.  Oxford Dictionary of English , 2010 .

[3]  Farkhund Iqbal,et al.  Speaker verification from partially encrypted compressed speech for forensic investigation , 2010, Digit. Investig..

[4]  Michael J. Saks,et al.  Convergent evolution in law and science: the structure of decision-making under uncertainty , 2011 .

[5]  Chris K. Ridder.  Evidentiary Implications of Potential Security Weaknesses in Forensic Software , 2009, Int. J. Digit. Crime Forensics.

[6]  Simson L. Garfinkel,et al.  Digital forensics research: The next 10 years , 2010, Digit. Investig..

[7]  Zainuddin Hassan,et al.  COMMON PHASES OF COMPUTER FORENSICS INVESTIGATION MODELS , 2011 .

[8]  Lynn Margaret Batten,et al.  Robust performance testing for digital forensic tools , 2009, Digit. Investig..

[9]  Paul Hunton,et al.  The stages of cybercrime investigations: Bridging the gap between technology examination and law enforcement investigation , 2011, Comput. Law Secur. Rev..

[10]  V. Caron,et al.  United states. , 2018, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[11]  Paula Thomas,et al.  An analysis of digital forensic examinations: Mobile devices versus hard disk drives utilising ACPO & NIST guidelines , 2011, Digit. Investig..

[12]  Marthie Grobler.  The Need for Digital Evidence Standardisation , 2012, Int. J. Digit. Crime Forensics.

[13]  Richard Mislan,et al.  Mobile Device Analysis , 2008 .

[14]  Guillermo A. Francia,et al.  Computer forensics laboratory and tools , 2005 .

[15]  Law. Policy.  Executive Summary of the National Academies of Science Reports, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward , 2009 .

[16]  C. Barden,et al.  Proficiency Testing Trends Following the 2009 National Academy of Sciences Report, “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward” , 2016 .

[17]  Harold Feder,et al.  Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , 2008 .

[18]  Keith Marzullo,et al.  Computer Forensics in Forensis , 2008, 2008 Third International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering.

[19]  Jill Slay,et al.  Scientific underpinnings and background to standards and accreditation in digital forensics , 2011, Digit. Investig..

[20]  Leonard Steinborn,et al.  International Organization for Standardization ISO/IEC 17025 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories , 2004 .

[21]  Kathryn B. Laskey,et al.  Computational Inference for Evidential Reasoning in Support of Judicial Proof , 2002 .

[22]  Vrizlynn L. L. Thing,et al.  Live memory forensics of mobile phones , 2010, Digit. Investig..

[23]  Kevin Curran,et al.  Mobile Phone Forensic Analysis , 2010, Int. J. Digit. Crime Forensics.

[24]  Ankit Agarwal,et al.  Smartphone Forensic Investigation Process Model , 2012 .