A component of the database, the Interstate Photo System, incorporates facial recognition and search capabilities into a photo database, consisting of photographs of different sources, including both criminal mugshots and noncriminal sources, such as employment records and background check databases. However, when it released NGI, the FBI issued a caveat that the system was to be used for investigatory purposes only, and it could not serve as the sole basis for an arrest.
See Pagliery, supra. The Fourth Amendment prohibits an unlawful search of a place where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. In Katz v. United States , the Supreme Court announced a two-part test to determine whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, which assesses 1 whether the person exhibited an actual, subjective expectation of privacy and 2 whether that expectation is one that society recognizes as reasonable.
The Katz test provides a framework for analyzing Fourth Amendment issues.
United States. Before the Carpenter opinion, government agencies could obtain historical cell phone location records with only a court order by explaining to a judge that the information was necessary to an investigation and that the information was in the possession of a third party.
However, Carpenter ruled that the government must be put to a higher standard and must obtain a judicial search warrant based on sworn facts that probable cause exists to search for the requested items. Thus, law enforcement agencies must now seek a search warrant for individual, personal historical CSLI from phone companies in these specific situations: where no exigent circumstances exist and for date ranges of more than six days.
The Carpenter Court has found that an individual has an expectation of privacy in his or her personal information acquired in large quantities over an extended period of time even when possessed by third parties.
- The Blue Buick: New and Selected Poems.
- Digital Search Warrants.
- Freges Logic.
This ruling will shape how courts view other forms of technology. Katz , U.
Digital Search Warrants - Law Enforcement Cyber Center
Dionisio, U. See, e.
Carpenter, S. See United States v. Jones, U. The Supreme Court declined to address whether short-term, limited, or real-time access had equal concerns under the Fourth Amendment. California, S. Maynard, F. Furthermore, compiling data across various databases whether public or private , throughout multiple locations over a long period, may also implicate the Fourth Amendment. Critics also have argued that FRT may implicate the First Amendment right to freedom of association and right to privacy. Courts have upheld the right to anonymous speech and association.
NAACP v. Alabama, U. California, U.
See The Perpetual Line-Up, supra. Laird v. Tatum, U. Tate, F. Duling, F. On the other hand, specific, targeted surveillance of a group may cross the line and violate First Amendment association protections. For example, the Second Circuit in Hassan v. See F.
Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice
Privacy advocates have been particularly critical of the use of FRT in widespread surveillance. The FRT program that was used to monitor the protestors in Baltimore during the Freddie Gray protests were widely criticized for many reasons, including a fear that African Americans were overrepresented in the facial recognition repository. Under the Katz test, an individual would not have an automatic expectation of privacy with respect to his or her face because it is exposed to the public.
Carpenter v. United States, S. United States, U. Documentation is needed throughout the entire investigative process before, during, and after the evidence has been acquired.
This documentation should include detailed information about the digital devices collected, including the operational state of the device - on, off, standby mode - and its physical characteristics, such as make, model, serial number, connections, and any markings or other damage Casey, ; Sammons, ; Maras, ; Nelson, Phillips, and Steuart, The investigator, or crime scene technician, collects the evidence. The collection procedures vary depending on the type of digital device, and the public and private resources where digital evidence resides e.
Law enforcement agencies have standard operating procedures that detail the steps to be taken when handling digital evidence on mobile devices, Internet-enabled objects e. A standard operating procedure SOP is designed to assist investigators by including the policies and sequential acts that should be followed to investigate cybercrime in a manner that ensures the admissibility of collected evidence in a court of law, as well as the tools and other resources needed to conduct the investigation for example, see the following SOPs: Data Security Council of India, ; Police Service of Scotland, Overall, SOPs include the processes to be followed during an investigation.
Unique constraints that could be encountered during the investigation should be identified. For instance, cybercrime investigators could encounter multiple digital devices, operating systems, and complex network configurations, which will require specialized knowledge, variations in collection procedures, and assistance in identifying connections between systems and devices e. Anti-forensics techniques discussed in Cybercrime Module 4 on Introduction to Digital Forensics , such as steganography i.
Because of this, the investigator should be prepared for these situations and have the necessary human and technical resources needed to deal with these constraints. The actions taken by the investigator in these cases e. Digital forensics tools discussed in Cybercrime Module 4 on Introduction to Digital Forensics can assist in this endeavour by, for example, identifying steganography and decrypting files, as well as perform other critical digital forensics tasks. Along with these resources, a forensic toolkit is needed, which contains the objects needed to document the crime scene, tools need to disassemble devices and remove other forms of evidence from the crime scene, and material needed to label and package evidence e.
The actual collection of the evidence involves the preservation of volatile evidence and the powering down of digital devices. The state of operation of the digital devices encountered will dictate the collection procedures. For instance, if a computer is encountered, if the device is on, volatile evidence e. There are circumstances where digital devices will not and cannot be collected e. In these situations, volatile and non-volatile data are collected through special procedures that require live acquisition SWGDE Capture of Live Systems , Commands can be used to obtain volatile data from live systems.
For example, for Windows operating systems the command ipconfig is used to obtain network information, whereas for Unix operating systems, the command ifconfig is used. For both Windows and Unix, the command netstat is used to obtain information about active network connections. In addition to digital devices, other relevant items e. The actions taken by the investigator during the collection of evidence should be documented.
Each device should be labelled along with its connecting cables and power cords , packaged, and transported back to a digital forensics laboratory US National Institute of Justice; b; US National Institute of Justice, Once the items are transported to the laboratory, they are "inventoried, recorded, and secured in a locked room…away from extreme temperatures, humidity, dust, and other possible contaminants" Maras, , p. Different approaches to performing acquisition exist. The approach taken depends on the type of digital device.
For example, the procedure for acquiring evidence from a computer hard drive is different from the procedure required to obtain digital evidence from mobile devices, such as smartphones. Unless live acquisition is performed, evidence is extracted from the seized digital devices at the forensic laboratory i.
At the forensics laboratory, digital evidence should be acquired in a manner that preserves the integrity of the evidence i. To achieve this, the tools and techniques used to acquire digital evidence must prevent alterations to the data or when this is not possible, at the very least minimize them SWGDE Best Practices for Computer Forensic Acquisitions , The tools and techniques used should be valid and reliable NIST, n.
The US National Institute of Standards and Technology has a searchable digital forensics tools database with tools with various functionalities e. Triage, the "reviewing of the attributes and contents of potential data" sources, may be conducted "prior to acquisition to reduce the amount of data acquired, avoid acquitting irrelevant information, or comply with restrictions on search authority" SWGDE Focused Collection and Examination of Digital Evidence. The seized digital devices are considered as the primary source of evidence. The digital forensics analyst does not acquire data from the primary source.
Instead, a duplicate is made of the contents of that device and the analyst works on the copy.
This duplicate copy of the content of the digital device imaging is created before a static acquisition is conducted to maintain the integrity of digital evidence see Cybercrime Module 4 on Introduction to Digital Forensics. To verify whether the duplicate is an exact copy of the original, a cryptographic hash value is calculated for the original and duplicate using mathematical computations; if they match, the copy's contents are a mirror image i.
A write blocker , which is designed to prevent the alteration of data during the copying process Cybercrime Module 4 on Introduction to Digital Forensics , should be used before extraction whenever possible in order to prevent the modification of data during the copying process SWGDE Best Practices for Computer Forensic Acquisitions , It is important to note that the acquisition process described above applies mainly to computers. There are two types of extraction performed: physical and logical.
Physical extraction involves the search for and acquisition of evidence from the location within a digital device where the evidence resides, such as the hard drive of a computer Maras, A physical extraction may be conducted using keyword searches based on terms provided by the investigator , file carving i. Logical extraction involves the search for and acquisition of evidence from the location it "resides relative to the file system of a computer operating system, which is used to keep track of the names and locations of files that are stored on a storage medium such as a hard disk" Maras, , p.
The type of logical extraction conducted depends on the digital device, file system, applications on the device, and operating system. A logical extraction involves the acquisition of data from active and deleted files, file systems, unallocated and unused space, and compressed, encrypted, and password protected data Nelson, Phillips, and Steuart, ; SWGDE Best Practices for Digital Evidence Collection , A logical extraction of files may result in a loss of metadata i.
The entire acquisition process should be documented. This documentation should include detailed information about the digital devices from which evidence was extracted, the hardware and software used to acquire the evidence, the manner in which the evidence was acquired i. Evidence preservation seeks to protect digital evidence from modification.
To demonstrate this, a chain of custody must be maintained. The chain of custody is "the process by which investigators preserve the crime or incident scene and evidence throughout the life cycle of a case. It includes information about who collected the evidence, where and how the evidence was collected, which individuals took possession of the evidence, and when they took possession of it" Maras, , ; Cybercrime Module 4 on Introduction to Digital Forensics.
In the chain of custody, the names, titles, and contact information of the individuals who identified, collected, and acquired the evidence should be documented, as well as any other individuals the evidence was transferred to, details about the evidence that was transferred, the time and date of transfer, and the purpose of the transfer. In addition to the handling of digital evidence, the digital forensics process also involves the examination and interpretation of digital evidence analysis phase , and the communication of the findings of the analysis reporting phase.
During the analysis phase, digital evidence is extracted from the device, data is analysed, and events are reconstructed. Before the analysis of the digital evidence, the digital forensics analyst in the laboratory must be informed of the objectives of the search, and provided with some background knowledge of the case and any other information that was obtained during the investigation that can assist the forensics analyst in this phase e.
Various forms of analyses are performed depending on the type of digital evidence sought, such as network, file system, application, video, image, and media analysis i. Files are analysed to determine their origin, and when and where the data was created, modified, accessed, downloaded, or uploaded, and the potential connection of these files on storage devices to, for example, remote storage, such as cloud-based storage Carrier, The type of digital evidence e.
Generally, there are four types of analyses that can be performed on computers: time-frame analysis; ownership and possession analysis; application and file analysis; and data hiding analysis. CRJ Criminal Law. Elective Career Elective. This course meets the General Education requirement for Research Writing.
Prerequisite: ENG Choose one course from Community and Cultural Contexts menu.