full-disclosure - Re: Disk wiping -- An alternate approach?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:24:02 +0545
From: Bipin Gautam <bipin.gautam@...il.com>
To: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <Thor@...merofgod.com>
Cc: full-disclosure <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Disk wiping -- An alternate approach?

Could DIGITAL FORENSICS be fundamentally FLAWED ( and they dont explain more?)

Think : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_of_custody

Main Point: The keywords and texts found in a suspects harddisk is by
NO guarantee belonging to the OWNER OF THE COMPUTER instead it could
be leftover chunks from the internet written by someone and lands on
your computer's in disk-fragments as found dormant on your free-space
as browser cache is flushed ?

On top of that FAT32/NTFS fs has high fragmentation rate than EXT*.

The problem is: "Possession is 9/10ths of the law" -- but ANY texts
they find, if questionable can also very likely come from the internet
while you browse online and NOT your own possession and someone typed
it from online,webpage you viewed etc and it lands on your disk while
you browse it and is left as fragments?

How does the law sees such a situation?

(and except the possibility of linguistic analysis to prove guilty)

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/