2021
DOI: 10.1002/wfs2.1451
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

“Scaffolding” responses to digital forensic inquiries

Abstract: As part of their role, digital forensic practitioners are often faced with casespecific investigative inquiries which they must attempt to address and provide an appropriate answer to their client. Such investigative questions can take many forms wherein every instance, any response they offer must be reliable. To be reliable, any response to an inquiry must be derived from justifiable and robust processes and information, coined here as the underpinning "scaffolding." This work offers a discussion of response… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 25 publications
(39 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Experiential expertise may in some cases be considered the “gold standard” for an expert—that is, knowledge and expertise gained through past experiences, yet some caution must be exercised upon those claiming such routes to being an expert (Horsman, 2021). While in some cases, a practitioner may have carried out hundreds of examinations, building up a portfolio of practice, portions of this past experience may not always be useful when interpreting data in future cases.…”
Section: Knowledgementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Experiential expertise may in some cases be considered the “gold standard” for an expert—that is, knowledge and expertise gained through past experiences, yet some caution must be exercised upon those claiming such routes to being an expert (Horsman, 2021). While in some cases, a practitioner may have carried out hundreds of examinations, building up a portfolio of practice, portions of this past experience may not always be useful when interpreting data in future cases.…”
Section: Knowledgementioning
confidence: 99%