On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 11:52:22PM +1100, daniel heinonen wrote: > >2.Should I refer to computer forensics as a science or discipline ? > I believe it has elements of both a science and a discipline as I see there > being a great need for a research element in the community. I do see it > being referred to as a science as well, as the procedures and processes > which are followed are based on those used by scientists. I believe it is > dependant on your document if referring to the study of computer forensics > or the community. I am probably going to get slaughtered for this view but > i would love to know what others thing about this. I recently attended a national computer crime conference where 24 states discussed this very topic... The consensus seemed to be that seizing digital evidence and creating forensic images was more of a science, while the investigation and corresponding computer forensic examination is more of an art... Interestingly, without the human side of the investigation much computer evidence tends to be of minimal value. People have successfully claimed that "I didn't do it, the computer did" or "the computer said click 'yes', so I did..." to get off the hook... Digitial Evidence's strength seems to be primarily in either providing leads for further investigation or corroborating an investigations physical evidence... Hope this helps... Thomas -- Thomas Akin, CISSP Director, Southeast Cybercrime Institute Continuing Education @ Kennesaw State University takinat_private * www.cybercrime.kennesaw.edu ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 : Fri Nov 09 2001 - 05:53:28 PST