私有云计算中使用ADAM和NIST 800-86方法的云取证调查比较研究

None Reza Febriana, None Ahmad Luthfi
{"title":"私有云计算中使用ADAM和NIST 800-86方法的云取证调查比较研究","authors":"None Reza Febriana, None Ahmad Luthfi","doi":"10.29207/resti.v7i5.5279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As information technology advances, associated risks also increase, particularly in the field of private cloud computing services. These services are subject to potential internal abuse risks, either due to system vulnerabilities or other factors. However, the investigation of these incidents in private cloud computing varies greatly due to the different frameworks and unique characteristics of each cloud service. The lack of a standardized approach to analyzing and assessing investigative processes in cloud computing services has been a persistent problem. This lack of consensus affects the accuracy, efficiency, and data acquisition process when dealing with digital evidence in each method, causing concern among researchers. To overcome this, a comparative study was carried out with a focus on the ADAM (The Advanced Data Acquisition Model) method and the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) method. The goal is to identify the most effective investigative process to deal with cyber attack incidents on both the server and client side of cloud computing services. By testing these methods in a network that is built on private cloud computing services, then the results from this research include the weaknesses and strengths of the ADAM and NIST methods are found when applied to cloud computing case studies and these have not been identified in previous research, then produce recommendations for investigators when conducting investigations on case studies on cloud computing, and in this study managed to find a bug in the ownCloud application version 10.9.1. Then this study also aims to provide researchers with valuable references to carry out analysis and assessment in the investigative process, where standardization is still an unresolved issue.","PeriodicalId":435683,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal RESTI (Rekayasa Sistem dan Teknologi Informasi)","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Study of Cloud Forensic Investigation Using ADAM And NIST 800-86 Methods in Private Cloud Computing\",\"authors\":\"None Reza Febriana, None Ahmad Luthfi\",\"doi\":\"10.29207/resti.v7i5.5279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As information technology advances, associated risks also increase, particularly in the field of private cloud computing services. These services are subject to potential internal abuse risks, either due to system vulnerabilities or other factors. However, the investigation of these incidents in private cloud computing varies greatly due to the different frameworks and unique characteristics of each cloud service. The lack of a standardized approach to analyzing and assessing investigative processes in cloud computing services has been a persistent problem. This lack of consensus affects the accuracy, efficiency, and data acquisition process when dealing with digital evidence in each method, causing concern among researchers. To overcome this, a comparative study was carried out with a focus on the ADAM (The Advanced Data Acquisition Model) method and the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) method. The goal is to identify the most effective investigative process to deal with cyber attack incidents on both the server and client side of cloud computing services. By testing these methods in a network that is built on private cloud computing services, then the results from this research include the weaknesses and strengths of the ADAM and NIST methods are found when applied to cloud computing case studies and these have not been identified in previous research, then produce recommendations for investigators when conducting investigations on case studies on cloud computing, and in this study managed to find a bug in the ownCloud application version 10.9.1. Then this study also aims to provide researchers with valuable references to carry out analysis and assessment in the investigative process, where standardization is still an unresolved issue.\",\"PeriodicalId\":435683,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jurnal RESTI (Rekayasa Sistem dan Teknologi Informasi)\",\"volume\":\"63 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jurnal RESTI (Rekayasa Sistem dan Teknologi Informasi)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29207/resti.v7i5.5279\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal RESTI (Rekayasa Sistem dan Teknologi Informasi)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29207/resti.v7i5.5279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着信息技术的进步,相关风险也在增加,特别是在私有云计算服务领域。由于系统漏洞或其他因素,这些服务存在潜在的内部滥用风险。然而,由于每个云服务的不同框架和独特特征,在私有云计算中对这些事件的调查差异很大。缺乏一种标准化的方法来分析和评估云计算服务中的调查过程,这是一个长期存在的问题。这种缺乏共识影响了每种方法处理数字证据时的准确性、效率和数据采集过程,引起了研究人员的关注。为了克服这一点,进行了一项比较研究,重点是ADAM(先进数据采集模型)方法和NIST(国家标准与技术研究所)方法。目标是确定最有效的调查流程,以处理云计算服务服务器端和客户端上的网络攻击事件。通过在建立在私有云计算服务上的网络中测试这些方法,本研究的结果包括在应用于云计算案例研究时发现ADAM和NIST方法的弱点和优势,这些在以前的研究中未被确定,然后为调查人员在进行云计算案例研究时提出建议。在这项研究中,我们发现了ownCloud应用程序10.9.1版本中的一个bug。然后,本研究也旨在为研究者在调查过程中进行分析和评估提供有价值的参考,其中标准化仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Study of Cloud Forensic Investigation Using ADAM And NIST 800-86 Methods in Private Cloud Computing
As information technology advances, associated risks also increase, particularly in the field of private cloud computing services. These services are subject to potential internal abuse risks, either due to system vulnerabilities or other factors. However, the investigation of these incidents in private cloud computing varies greatly due to the different frameworks and unique characteristics of each cloud service. The lack of a standardized approach to analyzing and assessing investigative processes in cloud computing services has been a persistent problem. This lack of consensus affects the accuracy, efficiency, and data acquisition process when dealing with digital evidence in each method, causing concern among researchers. To overcome this, a comparative study was carried out with a focus on the ADAM (The Advanced Data Acquisition Model) method and the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) method. The goal is to identify the most effective investigative process to deal with cyber attack incidents on both the server and client side of cloud computing services. By testing these methods in a network that is built on private cloud computing services, then the results from this research include the weaknesses and strengths of the ADAM and NIST methods are found when applied to cloud computing case studies and these have not been identified in previous research, then produce recommendations for investigators when conducting investigations on case studies on cloud computing, and in this study managed to find a bug in the ownCloud application version 10.9.1. Then this study also aims to provide researchers with valuable references to carry out analysis and assessment in the investigative process, where standardization is still an unresolved issue.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信