Multi-Stakeholder Case Prioritization in Digital Investigations

Authors

Joshua I. James, Soon Chun Hyang UniversityFollow

Prior Publisher

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

Abstract

This work examines the problem of case prioritization in digital investigations for better utilization of limited criminal investigation resources. Current methods of case prioritization, as well as observed prioritization methods used in digital forensic investigation laboratories are examined. After, a multi-stakeholder approach to case prioritization is given that may help reduce reputational risk to digital forensic laboratories while improving resource allocation. A survey is given that shows differing opinions of investigation priority between Law Enforcement and the public that is used in the development of a prioritization model. Finally, an example case is given to demonstrate the practicality of the proposed method.

References

Australian Federal Police. (2010). Crime Categorisation and Prioritisation Model (No. May).

Casey, E., Ferraro, M., & Nguyen, L. (2009). Investigation Delayed Is Justice Denied: Proposals for Expediting Forensic Examinations of Digital Evidence. Journal of forensic sciences, 54 (6), 1353–1364. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01150.x

Casey, E., Katz, G., & Lewthwaite, J. (2013, September). Honing digital forensic processes. Digital Investigation, 10 (2), 138–147. doi: 10.1016/j.diin.2013.07.002

Douglas, J., Burgess, A. W., Burgess, A. G., & Ressler, R. K. (2013). Crime Classification Manual: A Standard System for Investigating and Classifying Violent Crime (3rd ed.).

John Wiley & Sons Inc. FBI. (n.d.). FBI - What We Investigate. Retrieved 8 Dec. 2013, from http:// www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate

Fife, R. E. (2010). Criteria for Prosecution of International Crimes: The Importance for States and the International Community of the Quality of the Criminal Justice Process for Atrocities, in Particular of the Exercise of Fundamental Discretion by Key Justice Actors. In M. Bergsmo (Ed.), Criteria for prioritizing and selecting core international crimes cases (2nd ed., pp. 15–25). Olso: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher.

Garfinkel, S. L. (2006, September). Forensic feature extraction and cross-drive analysis. Digital Investigation, 3 , 71–81. doi: 10.1016/j.diin.2006.06.007

Ghernaouti, S. (2013). Cyber Power: Crime, Conflict and Security in Cyberspace (1st ed.). EFPL Press.

Gogolin, G. (2010). The Digital Crime Tsunami. Digital Investigation, 7 (1-2), 3–8. doi: 10.1016/j.diin.2010.07.001

Hancocks, P. (2012). 7-year-old girl abducted and raped in South Korea, police say. James, J. I., & Gladyshev, P. (2013, September). A survey of digital forensic investigator decision processes and measurement of decisions based on enhanced preview. Digital Investigation, 10 (2), 148–157. doi: 10.1016/j.diin.2013.04.005

Jones, A., & Valli, C. (2011). Building a Digital Forensic Laboratory: Establishing and Managing a Successful Facility. Butterworth-Heinemann, Elsevier Inc. Koopmans, M. B., & James, J. I. (2013, April). Automated network triage. Digital Investigation, 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.diin.2013.03.002

Malby, S., Mace, R., Holterhof, A., Brown, C., Kascherus, S., & Ignatuschtschenko, E. (2014). Comprehensive Study on Cybercrime (Tech. Rep. No. February). United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).

Ortmeier, P., & Davis, J. J. (2012). Police Administration: A Leadership Approach. McGraw-Hill. Rauscher, K. F., & Yaschenko, V. (2011). The Russia-US Bilateral on Cybersecurity - Critical Terminology Foundations (Tech. Rep.). East West Institute.

Rogers, M. K., Goldman, J., Mislan, R., Wedge, T., & Debrota, S. (2006). Computer forensics field triage process model. Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 1 (2), 27–40. doi: 10.1.1.169.1878

Rowe, N. C. (2014). Identifying forensically uninteresting files using a large corpus. In Digital forensics and cyber crime. Springer.

Shaw, A., & Browne, A. (2013, April). A practical and robust approach to coping with large volumes of data submitted for digital forensic examination. Digital Investigation, 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.diin.2013.04.003

US Department of Justice. (2013). Smart on Crime: Reforming the Criminal Justice System for the 21st Century (Tech. Rep.). US Department of Justice.

Recommended Citation

James, Joshua I. (2014) "Multi-Stakeholder Case Prioritization in Digital Investigations," Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law: Vol. 9 , Article 6.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15394/jdfsl.2014.1171
Available at: https://commons.erau.edu/jdfsl/vol9/iss2/6