Re: Network Forensics vs Data/Computer Forensics

From: Bill Pennington (billpat_private)
Date: Sun Aug 19 2001 - 21:42:12 PDT

  • Next message: phzyat_private: "Fw: Re: Network Forensics vs Data/Computer Forensics"

    I would shy away from the data vs. network debate as well. I mean if you
    have a client that buys "data" forensics and you find he compromise
    happened over the network, are you going to stop and say "Please give me
    more money because now this is a network forensics gig." I would hope
    not because you most likely won't be around very long. :-)
    
    There is no difference in the thought process when dealing with a data
    (really should be static) forensics or network forensics. Things that
    happen on a network are generally generated and terminated on static
    devices. this traffic is recorded to static media. 
    
    I would recommend following the practice of pairing investigators with
    techs, it has worked very well in my experience.
    
    daniel heinonen wrote:
    > 
    > Hi Filip,
    > 
    > I believe this is a great question and I will give my opinion, but in no
    > way will this be an definitive answer to your question.
    > 
    > Incident response is in relation to obtaining an acceptable outcome for the
    > victim.  In many cases this would be to isolate the extent of the damage,
    > examine to see the intrusion point and get the compromised machine back to
    > working order..  They would need to keep in mind appropriate computer
    > evidence practices as some of the information collected may be used as
    > evidence..
    > 
    > In the case of forensic computing I would see the work of an examiner to be
    > slightly different as they usually deal with the offenders computer as well
    > as the victims.
    > 
    > I would not try to put a distinction on Network/computer forensics as I
    > believe any forensics involving digital evidence would be classed as
    > forensic computing?  I mean does it matter that the data is from a
    > photocopier or a palm pilot if it has evidence we need to examine it.  I
    > mean where do you draw the line if a stalker uses email this is over the
    > network and you may need to liaise with a number of ISP's and authorities
    > to obtain logs and so forth.  However no one has had an Incident.
    > 
    > I would just like to add to the confusion and state that it may be
    > necessary for forensic computer examiners to do similar tasks as personnel
    > on Incident response teams such as piece together a time line of events to
    > create a larger picture of the crime scene, this may be through the use of
    > log files and so forth.
    > 
    > I hope this helps and I would love to know if my views are totally screwed
    > up.  Also is forensic computing the appropriate name for this?
    > 
    > Daniel Heinonen
    > 
    > [below is stuff i started writing but was kinda bored so i started again
    > hence above]
    > 
    > I find the field of forensic computing as being broad with many different
    > positions within the field.  With this being said I do not believe Incident
    > Response would definitely be part of this list of positions.  These two are
    > however very closely tied and may do the same tasks.
    > 
    > Some police departments break up the computer forensics team even more into
    > an investigative team and an examining team.  The Investigative team would
    > do pre work, obtain warrants and so forth as well as arrest and seize,
    > these would all be sworn personnel.  A examining team would consist of
    > people who image the computer on site, and examine the computer and the
    > evidence found would be given to the Investigative team to either use this
    > evidence as leads or to pursue with charges.
    > 
    > A Computer Search Warrant Team may consist of "Sketch Preparer,
    > Photographer, Evidence Recorder, Person-In-Charge" or "Technical Evidence
    > Seizure and Logging Team, Security and Arrest Team, Physical Search Team,
    > Sketch and Photo Team, Interview Team, Case Supervisor" [1]
    > 
    > Of course this would be in the case if we are talking about the authorities
    > but in the case of the private sector you would be required to obtain data
    > from effected computers incase they may be used later as evidence.  Also
    > some authorities may not have the expertise to examine computers so then
    > private sector people may consult these departments.
    > 
    > I would see the role of an Incident Response team to work closely with
    > forensic computing staff in the private sector as well as with the
    > authorities.
    > 
    > [1]  http://www.securityfocus.org/focus/ih/articles/crimeguide4.html
    > 
    > At 05:03 PM 18/08/01 +0200, you wrote:
    > >Hi all,
    > >
    > >Talking to alot of persons in the field lately, I don't seem to be able
    > >to find a satisfying answer on the following question. " Topic: Digital
    > >Forensics -- Where is the line drawn between Network Forensics; which is
    > >related to Incident Response, thus focussing on a more IT Security
    > >related domain; and the Data/Computer Forensics terrain; which is more
    > >focussing on finding / recovering and detecting traces of lost files,
    > >... quite often in fraudulent activity?  To me, there is a distinct
    > >technical difference, but 'businesswise' and practical this difference
    > >seems very thin.  Specific situation: imagine, a cracker penetrates the
    > >network.  The Incident Response team wants to react quickly by
    > >identifying the security breach and the result of this incident.  This
    > >involves a post-mortem analysis of the data/logs/...  Is this a 100%
    > >Data/Computer Forensics mission or rather a Network Forensics mission? "
    > >
    > >I know, this is more 'philosophy rather than technics', but ... do share
    > >your opinion in public as well as in private.  If not all, at least I
    > >could get a more clear view on this matter :-)
    > >
    > >
    > >Thanks!
    > >Filip
    > >
    > >
    > >-----------------------------------------------------------------
    > >This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
    > >For more information on this free incident handling, management
    > >and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
    > 
    > -----------------------------------------------------------------
    > This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
    > For more information on this free incident handling, management
    > and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
    
    -- 
    
    
    Bill Pennington - CISSP
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
    For more information on this free incident handling, management 
    and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Aug 20 2001 - 08:31:28 PDT