Using Internet Artifacts to Profile a Child Pornography Suspect

Authors

Marcus K. Rogers, Purdue UniversityFollow
Kathryn C. Seigfried-Spellar, University of AlabamaFollow

Prior Publisher

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

Abstract

Digital evidence plays a crucial role in child pornography investigations. However, in the following case study, the authors argue that the behavioral analysis or “profiling” of digital evidence can also play a vital role in child pornography investigations. The following case study assessed the Internet Browsing History (Internet Explorer Bookmarks, Mozilla Bookmarks, and Mozilla History) from a suspected child pornography user’s computer. The suspect in this case claimed to be conducting an ad hoc law enforcement investigation. After the URLs were classified (Neutral; Adult Porn; Child Porn; Adult Dating sites; Pictures from Social Networking Profiles; Chat Sessions; Bestiality; Data Cleaning; Gay Porn), the Internet history files were statistically analyzed to determine prevalence and trends in Internet browsing. First, a frequency analysis was used to determine a baseline of online behavior. Results showed 54% (n = 3205) of the URLs were classified as “neutral” and 38.8% (n = 2265) of the URLs were classified as a porn website. Only 10.8% of the URLs were classified as child pornography websites. However when the IE history file was analyzed by visit, or “hit,” count, the Pictures/Profiles (31.5%) category had the highest visit count followed by Neutral (19.3%), Gay Porn (17%), and Child Porn (16.6%). When comparing the frequency of URLs to the Hit Count for each pornography type, it was noted that the accused was accessing gay porn, child porn, chat rooms, and picture profiles (i.e., from Facebook) more often than adult porn and neutral websites. The authors concluded that the suspect in this case was in fact a child pornography user and not an ad hoc investigator, and the findings from the behavioral analysis were admitted as evidence in the sentencing hearing for this case. The authors believe this case study illustrates the ability to conduct a behavioral analysis of digital evidence. More work is required to further validate the behavioral analysis process described, but the ability to infer the predilection for being a consumer of child pornography based on Internet artifacts may prove to be a powerful tool for investigators.

References

1. Briggs, P., Simon, W.T., & Simonsen, S. (2011). An exploratory study of Internet-initiated sexual offenses and the chat room sex offender: Has the Internet enabled a new typology of sex offender? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23(1), 72-91.

2. Cohen, S. (2010). TimeFlow Analytical Timeline. (Alpha ed.) Retrieved from https://github.com/

3. Cooper, A. (1998). Sexuality and the Internet: Surfing into the new millennium. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 1(2), 187-193.

4. Eke, A.W., Seto, M.C., & Williams, J. (2011). Examining the criminal history and future offending of child pornography offenders: An extended prospective follow-up study. Law and Human Behavior, 35, 466-478.

5. Frei, A., Erenay, N., Dittmann, V., & Graf, M. (2005). Paedophilia on the Internet - A study of 33 convicted offenders in the canton of Lucerne. Swiss Medical Review, 135, 488-494.

6. International Telecommunication Union. (2011). The world in 2011: Facts and figures. Retrieved from www.itu.int/ict

7. Internet Watch Foundation. (2012). IWF Operational Trends 2012. Retrieved from The United Kingdom’s Internet Watch Foundation’s Website www.iwf.org.uk

8. Klain, E.J., Davies, H.J., & Hicks, M.A. (2001). Child Pornography: The Criminal-JusticeSystem Response. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Retrieved from ncmec.org

9. Krone, T. (2005, April). Does thinking make it so? Defining online child pornography possession offenses. Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 299, 1-6.

10. McCarthy, J. A. (2010). Internet sexual activity: A comparison between contact and non-contact child pornography offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 16(2), 181-195.

11. O’leary R., & D’Ovidio R. (2007). Online sexual exploitation of children. The International Association of Computer Investigative Specialists. Retrieved from www.nga.org

12. Quayle, E., & Taylor, M. (2003). Model of problematic Internet use in people with a sexual interest in children. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 6, 93-106.

13. Rogers, M., & Seigfried-Spellar, K. (2009). The future of digital forensics: Merging behavioral science and digital evidence. Position paper presented at the Indo-US Conference and Workshop on Cybersecurity, Cybercrime, and Cyberforensics, Kochi, India, August 2009.

14. Rogers, M.K., & Seigfried-Spellar, K.C. (2011). Internet child pornography: Legal issues and investigative tactics. In T Holt (Ed.), Crime OnLine: Correlates, Causes, and Context. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

15. Rogers, M.K., & Seigfried-Spellar, K.C. (2012). Applied predictive behavioral modeling: The role of behavioral sciences in digital forensics. Presentation at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences 64th Annual Scientific Meeting, Atlanta, GA, February 2012.

16. Seigfried-Spellar, K.C. (2013). Replicating the Seigfried-Spellar and Rogers (2011) Study on deviant pornography use by age of onset and sex. Presentation at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences 65th Annual Scientific Meeting, Washington, D.C, February 2013.

17. Seigfried-Spellar, K., & Rogers, M. (2011). Exploring the progression of nondeviant and deviant pornography use by age of onset and sex. Paper presented at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences 63rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Chicago, IL, February 2011.

18. Seigfried-Spellar, K., & Rogers, M. (2013). Does deviant pornography use follow a Guttman-like progression? Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1997-2003.

19. United States Department of Justice. (2010). National strategy for child exploitation prevention and interdiction. Retrieved from www.justice.gov/psc/docs/natstrategyreport.pdf

20. United States Sentencing Commission. (2012). Federal child pornography offenses. Retrieved from http://www.ussc.gov

21. Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell, K.J. (2009). Law enforcement responses to online child sexual exploitation crimes: The national juvenile victimization study. Retrieved from University of New Hampshire Crimes Against Children Research Center at www.unh.edu/ccrc

22. Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell, K.J. (2011). Child pornography possessors: Trends in offender and case characteristics. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23(1), 22-42.

23. Wortley, R., & Smallbone, S. (2012). Child pornography on the Internet. Problem-Specific Guides Series: Problem-Oriented Guides for Police, 41, 1-48.

Recommended Citation

Rogers, Marcus K. and Seigfried-Spellar, Kathryn C. (2014) "Using Internet Artifacts to Profile a Child Pornography Suspect," Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law: Vol. 9 , Article 4.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15394/jdfsl.2014.1163
Available at: https://commons.erau.edu/jdfsl/vol9/iss1/4