•  
  •  
 

Publisher

The Association of Digital Forensics, Security and Law (ADFSL)

Abstract

The proper generation and preservation of digital data from Event Data Recorders (EDRs) can provide invaluable evidence to automobile crash reconstruction investigations. However, data collected from the EDR can be difficult to use and authenticate, complicating the presentation of such information as evidence in legal proceedings. Indeed, current techniques for removing and preserving such data do not meet the court’s standards for electronic evidence. Experimentation with an EDR unit from a 2001 GMC Sierra pickup truck highlighted particular issues with repeatability of results. Fortunately, advances in the digital forensics field and memory technology can be applied to EDR analysis in order to provide more complete and usable data. The presented issues should assist in the identification and development of a model for forensically sound collection and investigation techniques for EDRs.

References

[1] Chidester, A., Hinch, J., Mercer, T.C., Schultz, K.S. (1999), “Recording Automotive Crash Event Data”. International Symposium on Transportation Recorders, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. May 3-5, 1999 Washington D.C.

[2] Code of Federal Regulations 49 Chapter V part 565 Vehicle Identification Number Requirements

[3] Event Data Recorders: A Decade of Innovation (2008): Gabler, H. C., Hinch, J, and Steiner, J., eds., PT-139, SAE International, Warrendale, PA

[4] Collision Data Services (2008). http://www.collisiondataservices.com/CaseLaw.aspx

[5] Fay, R., Robunette, R., Deering, D. Scott, J. (2002), “Using Event Data Recorders in Collision Reconstruction”. Society of Automotive Engineers. Technical Paper 2002-01-0535. Warrendale, PA.

[6] Bachman v. General Motors Corp, Electronic Citation: 2000 FED App. 0039P (6th Cir.)

[7] Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (2007), IEEE Project 1616 Draft Standard Site, http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1616/home.htm, April 9th 2007.

[8] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2007), “Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation, Event Data Recorders”, Docket No. NHSTA- 18029, December 2003, http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf89/283747_web.pdf, April 8th, 2007.

[9] Nilsson, D. K., and Larson, U. E. (2008), “Combining Physical and Digital Evidence in Vehicle Environments”, Third International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering, Berkeley, CA.

[10] West, Orin, Presentation: “Ford EDR: Current and Future”, NHTSA and SAE Highway Event Data Recorder Symposium, Washington D.C., September 2007.

[11] People v. Muscarnera, 2007 NY Slip Op 27224; 2007 N.Y. Misc. (New York – 1st Dist., 2007).

[12] Matos v. State of Florida, 899 So. 2d 403 (Fla. App. – 4th Dist. 2005).

[13] People v. Hopkins, 800 N.Y.S. 2d 353 (New York – Monroe County 2004).

[14] Cansler v. General Motors Corporation, 765 N.E. 2d 698 (Indiana App. – Second Dist. 2002).

[15] Batiste v. General Motors Corporation, 802 So 2d 686 (Louisiana – Fourth Circuit). [16] Sipes v. General Motors Corporation, 946 S.W. 2d 143 (Texas – App 1997).

DOI

https://doi.org/10.15394/jdfsl.2008.1044

 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.