Computer Forensics has grown rapidly in recent years. The current computer forensic investigation paradigm is laborious and requires significant expertise on the part of the investigators. This paper proposes a highly automatic and efficient framework to provide the Case-Relevance information, by binding computer intelligence technology to the current computer forensic framework. Computer intelligence is expected to offer more assistance in the investigation procedures and better knowledge reuse and sharing in computer forensics. Background Cybercrime is a mirror of the dark side of human society in the cyberworld. Its countermeasure, Computer Forensics, also referred as Digital Forensic Science, has been explicitly defined as, The use of scientifically derived and proven methods toward the preservation, collection, validation, identification, analysis, interpretation, documentation and presentation of digital evidence derived from digital sources for the purpose of facilitating or furthering the reconstruction of events found to be criminal, or helping to anticipate unauthorized actions shown to be disruptive to planned operations. [14] The process of "identifying, preserving, analyzing, and presenting digital evidence in a manner that is legally acceptable via the application of computer technology to the investigation of computer based crime" is called Forensic Computing [11] or Digital Evidence Investigation. As almost every piece of digital evidence could be challenged, computer forensic investigators are required to follow a rigorous process path. The work of the First Digital Forensics Research Workshop (DFRWS) [14] established a solid ground and allowed
[1]
Mattia Monga,et al.
How to Reuse Knowledge about Forensic Investigations
,
2004
.
[2]
R.K. Cunningham,et al.
Evaluating intrusion detection systems: the 1998 DARPA off-line intrusion detection evaluation
,
2000,
Proceedings DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition. DISCEX'00.
[3]
Broucek,et al.
Developing a Conceptual Approach for an Emerging Academic Discipline
,
2001
.
[4]
Eugene H. Spafford,et al.
Getting Physical with the Digital Investigation Process
,
2003,
Int. J. Digit. EVid..
[5]
Stephen Northcutt,et al.
Network Intrusion Detection: An Analyst's Hand-book
,
1999
.
[6]
Venansius Baryamureeba,et al.
The Enhanced Digital Investigation Process Model
,
2004
.
[7]
George M. Mohay,et al.
Computer and Intrusion Forensics
,
2003
.
[8]
Richard Lippmann,et al.
Analysis and Results of the 1999 DARPA Off-Line Intrusion Detection Evaluation
,
2000,
Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection.
[9]
Gregg H. Gunsch,et al.
An Examination of Digital Forensic Models
,
2002,
Int. J. Digit. EVid..
[10]
Isij Monitor,et al.
Network Intrusion Detection: An Analyst’s Handbook
,
2000
.
[11]
Nicole Beebe,et al.
A hierarchical, objectives-based framework for the digital investigations process
,
2005,
Digit. Investig..
[12]
M. P. F. C. A. J. Sammes BSc,et al.
Forensic Computing
,
2000,
Practitioner Series.