Multimedia Forensics Is Not Computer Forensics
Multimedia Forensics Is Not Computer Forensics
复制标题
多媒体取证不是计算机取证
DOI：
10.1007/978-3-642-03521-0_9
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
6.8
通讯作者：
Matthias Kirchner
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rainer Böhme;F. Freiling;Thomas Gloe;Matthias Kirchner
最近关于多媒体取证主题的研究的流行证明了对该领域定义的思考是合理的。本文设计了一个本体论，它根据法医学科的主要证据领域来构建它们。从这个意义上说，多媒体取证和计算机取证都属于数字取证的类别，但它们在定义法医调查员对现实(部分)的看法的基本观察者模型方面有显著不同，而现实本身并不完全可认知。关于现有的反法医技术，证据事实的可靠性出现了重要的后果：虽然计算机取证可以完美地隐藏痕迹，但对传感器数据的操纵不能期望这种程度的确定性。我们引用具体的例子并引用既定的技术来支持我们的论点。
The recent popularity of research on topics of multimedia forensics justifies reflections on the definition of the field. This paper devises an ontology that structures forensic disciplines by their primary domain of evidence. In this sense, both multimedia forensics and computer forensics belong to the class of digital forensics, but they differ notably in the underlying observer model that defines the forensic investigator's view on (parts of) reality, which itself is not fully cognizable. Important consequences on the reliability of probative facts emerge with regard to available counter-forensic techniques: while perfect concealment of traces is possible for computer forensics, this level of certainty cannot be expected for manipulations of sensor data. We cite concrete examples and refer to established techniques to support our arguments.