Forensics Specialists May Revisit Umgc Ethical Co

Forensics Specialists May Revisit Umgc Ethical Co

Forensics Specialists May Revisit Umgc Ethical Co

What do you think are the two top ethical concerns in digital forensic investigations and why are these such important concerns?  In addition to sharing your two top ethical concerns, discuss two ethical guidelines you think should be in place regarding recovery and investigation and why

Respond to this post (Gio):  

From my research I believe that there is a potential ethical concern in digital forensics specialists giving their own opinions on case evidence in regards to guilt or innocence.  Though it may seem necessary for digital forensics professional to provide opinions on evidence from a professional and experienced stand point, the forensics specialist has the sole duty of providing full and truthful examination of devices.  Therefore I believe that a forensics investigators should only provide evidence and allow those with legal authority such as judges, lawyers, and the jury to decide on how the evidence should be interpreted.  I also believe that while it is crucial for forensics investigators to maintain personal integrity in expanding their professional knowledge, to continue to be a valuable asset in the court’s investigation, forensics analysts should be tested on an bi-annual basis at the least on new digital developments that may cause challenges in future investigations.  

 Digital forensics specialists encounter challenges in providing testimony to the protection of stored data within network systems. Network providers do not always provide sufficient information about the software and network’s ability to protect an individual or entity’s data, resulting in forensics practitioners being hindered from validating the devices within a time frame that survives legal challenges.  Forensics partitioners face challenges  in determining if computers and network devices are reliable and provide court’s with assurance about examination processes as a result of technical complexities.  There should be a process that is well organized and ordered for the examination process to ensure that no details were overlooked and no steps were neglected to try and speed up the efficacy of the process.  As forensics specialists may revisit preciously investigated digital evidence for validation and determination of consistency with new found evidence, the length of time needed to complete the investigation may become prolonged.  There should be a reasonableness test in concern with the amount of time needed to seize and examine evidence to avoid too much time and resources being devoted to searching for evidence that may be redundant or not necessarily provide value.

 Boddington, Richard (2016) Practical Digital Forensics.  Retrieved: https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook?sid=58d53240-eaf0-4823-a436-c428b2896780%40sdc-v-sessmgr03&ppid=pp_294&vid=0&format=EB

Seigfried-Spellar, Kathryn, Rogers, Marcus, Crimmins, Daniel (2017) Development of A Professional Code of Ethics in Digital Forensics.  Retrieved: https://learn.umgc.edu/content/enforced/544170-027246-01-2212-OL1-6384/CCJS%20321%20Development%20of%20A%20Professional%20Code%20of%20Ethics%20in%20Digital%20Forensics.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=MRIuOrmErtumPR3ey7T8w4h9N&ou=544170