I don't have a clue what the US laws may be with respect to the use
of logs in court trials. But I do have a brother in law who is a
Judge here in Canada. Last year we were having a beer and I brought
up this topic as well as the more general use of 'electronic'
evidence in trials and how could any court put any significant
weight on it given how easy it is to forge or tamper with, etc.
His reply, after finishing a good chuckle, is that they don't put
all that much weight on it. What they do put weight on is the
character of the individual who is presenting the evidence and
their assurance that the record was accurate. After some reflection
his point was obvious - records were even more easily tampered with
in days gone before systems existed. All that systems have made
easier is generating volumes of it.
In terms of situations where data streams or logs are tampered with
perhaps the question is better put to IT people - how can you/we
testify to the accuracy of something when we know it can be
tampered with and have we taken all steps possible to prevent the
tampering.
Regards
Rick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: loganalysis-unsubscribeat_private
For additional commands, e-mail: loganalysis-helpat_private
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Dec 04 2001 - 16:02:14 PST