勇敢的浏览器和谷歌铬法医文物的关键比较

IF 0.6 Q4 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Stuart Berham, Sarah Morris
{"title":"勇敢的浏览器和谷歌铬法医文物的关键比较","authors":"Stuart Berham, Sarah Morris","doi":"10.15394/jdfsl.2022.1752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Digital forensic practitioners are tasked with the identification, recovery, and analysis of Internet browser artefacts which may have been used in the pursuit of committing a civil or criminal offence. This research paper critically compares the most downloaded browser, Google Chrome, against an increasingly popular Chromium browser known as Brave, said to offer privacy-by-default. With increasing forensic caseloads, data complexity, and requirements for method validation to satisfy ISO 17025 accreditation, recognising the similarities and differences between the browsers, developed on the same underlying technology is essential. The paper describes a series of conducted experiments and subsequent analysis to identify artefacts created as part of normal user browsing activity. Analysis of the artefacts found that Brave and Chrome share almost identical data structures, with on-disk artefact recovery successful, even for deleted data. The outcome of this research, based upon the results, serves to enrich understanding and provide best practice for practitioners and software developers, respectively responsible for examining Chromium artefacts for use in evidence production and developing new forensic tools and techniques.","PeriodicalId":43224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A CRITICAL COMPARISON OF BRAVE BROWSER AND GOOGLE CHROME FORENSIC ARTEFACTS\",\"authors\":\"Stuart Berham, Sarah Morris\",\"doi\":\"10.15394/jdfsl.2022.1752\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Digital forensic practitioners are tasked with the identification, recovery, and analysis of Internet browser artefacts which may have been used in the pursuit of committing a civil or criminal offence. This research paper critically compares the most downloaded browser, Google Chrome, against an increasingly popular Chromium browser known as Brave, said to offer privacy-by-default. With increasing forensic caseloads, data complexity, and requirements for method validation to satisfy ISO 17025 accreditation, recognising the similarities and differences between the browsers, developed on the same underlying technology is essential. The paper describes a series of conducted experiments and subsequent analysis to identify artefacts created as part of normal user browsing activity. Analysis of the artefacts found that Brave and Chrome share almost identical data structures, with on-disk artefact recovery successful, even for deleted data. The outcome of this research, based upon the results, serves to enrich understanding and provide best practice for practitioners and software developers, respectively responsible for examining Chromium artefacts for use in evidence production and developing new forensic tools and techniques.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15394/jdfsl.2022.1752\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15394/jdfsl.2022.1752","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

数字法医从业者的任务是识别、恢复和分析可能被用于实施民事或刑事犯罪的互联网浏览器人工制品。这篇研究论文对下载最多的浏览器b谷歌Chrome和日益流行的Chrome浏览器Brave进行了批判性的比较,后者据说提供默认隐私保护。随着越来越多的取证案件、数据复杂性和满足ISO 17025认证的方法验证要求的增加,识别基于相同底层技术开发的浏览器之间的异同是至关重要的。本文描述了一系列进行的实验和随后的分析,以识别作为正常用户浏览活动的一部分创建的人工制品。对伪产物的分析发现,Brave和Chrome共享几乎相同的数据结构,磁盘上的伪产物恢复成功,甚至对于删除的数据也是如此。这项研究的结果,基于结果,有助于丰富理解,并为从业者和软件开发人员提供最佳实践,分别负责检查用于证据生产的Chromium人工制品和开发新的法医工具和技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A CRITICAL COMPARISON OF BRAVE BROWSER AND GOOGLE CHROME FORENSIC ARTEFACTS
Digital forensic practitioners are tasked with the identification, recovery, and analysis of Internet browser artefacts which may have been used in the pursuit of committing a civil or criminal offence. This research paper critically compares the most downloaded browser, Google Chrome, against an increasingly popular Chromium browser known as Brave, said to offer privacy-by-default. With increasing forensic caseloads, data complexity, and requirements for method validation to satisfy ISO 17025 accreditation, recognising the similarities and differences between the browsers, developed on the same underlying technology is essential. The paper describes a series of conducted experiments and subsequent analysis to identify artefacts created as part of normal user browsing activity. Analysis of the artefacts found that Brave and Chrome share almost identical data structures, with on-disk artefact recovery successful, even for deleted data. The outcome of this research, based upon the results, serves to enrich understanding and provide best practice for practitioners and software developers, respectively responsible for examining Chromium artefacts for use in evidence production and developing new forensic tools and techniques.
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
Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law
Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信