Digital evidence

About: Digital evidence is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1621 publications have been published within this topic receiving 18476 citations.

Digital fingerprint system and method for piracy tracking and digital evidence obtaining

Abstract: A digital fingerprint system used for piracy tracing and digital evidence-collecting comprises: a digital fingerprint generating module, a digital fingerprint storehouse, a digital fingerprint embedding module, a digital fingerprint blind-detection module, a digital fingerprint non-blind detection module and a digital evidence generating module; digital fingerprint method is that: (1) separately normally distributed Gauss signals are adopted as fingerprint signals to construct a digital fingerprint storehouse; (2) a spread spectrum embedding way is adopted to embed the fingerprints into an original copy, which generates a legal copy; (3) the legal copies are distributed and in the distribution process, the legal copies can experience a single copy illegal distribution or encounter a coalition attack, therefore a legal copy is formed; (4) the illegal copies are blindly detected to obtain a suspect copy in a lager scale; (5) the suspect copy obtained after being blindly detected is non-blindly detected; (6) the illegal copy and the original fingerprints obtained in procedure 3 and the coalition information obtained in procedure 5 are submitted as evidence to the court for trial Thedigital fingerprint system has the advantages of higher detection efficiency and detection precision, thus can be widely applied in the tracing of multimedia content and piracy evidence-collecting

AI in the Courtroom: A Comparative Analysis of Machine Evidence in Criminal Trials

Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI) has become more commonplace, the monitoring of human behavior by machines and software bots has created so-called machine evidence. This new type of evidence poses procedural challenges in criminal justice systems across the world due to the fact that they have traditionally been tailored for human testimony. This article’s focus is on information proffered as evidence in criminal trials which has been generated by AI-driven systems that observe and evaluate the behavior of human users to predict future behavior in an attempt to enhance safety. A poignant example of this type of evidence stemming from data generated by a consumer product is automated driving, where driving assistants as safety features, observe and evaluate a driver’s ability to retake control of a vehicle where necessary. In Europe, for instance, new intelligent devices, including drowsiness detection and distraction warning systems, will become mandatory in new cars beginning in 2022. In the event that human-machine interactions cause harm (e.g., an accident involving an automated vehicle), there is likely to be a plethora of machine evidence, or data generated by AI-driven systems, potentially available for use in a criminal trial. It is not yet clear if and how this the data can be used as evidence in criminal fact-finding, and adversarial and inquisitorial systems approach this issue very differently. Adversarial proceedings have the advantage of partisan vetting, which gives both sides the opportunity to challenge consumer products offered as witnesses. By contrast, inquisitorial systems have specific mechanisms in place to introduce expert evidence recorded out-side the courtroom, including to establish facts, which will be necessary to thoroughly test AI. Using the German and the U.S. federal systems as examples, this Article highlights the challenges posed by machine evidence in criminal proceedings. The primary area of comparison is the maintenance of trust in fact-finding as the law evolves to accommodate the use of machine evidence. This comparative perspective illustrates the enigma of AI in the courtroom and foreshadows what will become inevitable problems in the not-too-distant future. The Article con-cludes that, at present, criminal justice systems are not sufficiently equipped to deal with the novel and varied types of information generated by embedded AI in consumer products. It is suggested that we merge the adversarial system’s tools for bipartisan vetting of evidence with the inquisitorial system’s inclusion of out-of-court statements under specific conditions to establish adequate means of testing machine evidence.

Part 2:- Quality assurance mechanisms for digital forensic investigations: knowledge sharing and the Capsule of Digital Evidence (CODE)

Abstract: Despite potential numerous benefits, the field-wide sharing of knowledge in digital forensics is arguably still yet to be attained. Achieving this has attracted much practitioner and academic debate, yet solutions to two fundamental hurdles have yet to arguably be addressed; ‘how do we share knowledge’, and ‘what do we share’. Currently there a few viable protocols in place which tackle either of these issues forming a barrier to field-wide sharing. The focus of this work is to address the latter issue and guide practitioners on what content must be shared for any data to be of value to fellow professionals. This paper proposes the Capsule of Digital Evidence (CODE), a framework designed to set out the required elements for the sharing of reliable digital forensic knowledge. The CODE structure and its requisite contents are examined along with its applicability for supporting field-wide knowledge sharing in digital forensics.

Looking for digital evidence in Windows

Abstract: Digital evidence investigation is concerned with techniques of acquisition and analysis of data pertaining to some event or activity. This paper presents an introduction of this subject and describes various technical aspects of digital evidence techniques relevant to the Windows operating system.

Kedudukan alat bukti digital dalam pembuktian cybercrime di pengadilan

Abstract: Basically every law made by the makers of the Act is the answer to the question of public law at the time of the creation of such laws. Along with the development needs of the people in the world, information technology plays an important role, both in the present and in the future. Information Technology by itself is also changing people's behavior to perform an unlawful act. Tort is called cyber crime. This study uses empirical juridical pendekata, descriptive. Using these types of primary and secondary data. Data collection technique is done by through library research and interviews. By using qualitative data analysis.It can be concluded that the system of proof and evidence based on Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code was able to reach proof of cyber crime crime classified as a new criminal offense. Search for evidence such as witness testimony conventional, and expert witnesses, as well as a shift from conventional letters and instructions to the electronic, digital evidence in this position to influence the course of evidence and the judge's decision. Article 5 paragraph (1) Act No. 11 of 2008 on Information and Electronic Transactions states that "Electronic information is a valid legal evidence