±Forensic Focus Partners
New Today: 4
New Yesterday: 7
±Forensic Focus Partner Links
· SQLite Database Forensics – ‘Sleep Cycle’ Case Study
· Data Recovery As A Medium For Email Forensics
· Carving out the Difference between Computer Forensics and E-Discovery
· Forensic Analysis of SQLite Databases: Free Lists, Write Ahead Log, Unallocated Space and Carving
· How Secure Is Your Password? A Friendly Advice from a Company That Breaks Passwords
· Using SQL as a date/time conversion tool
· Forensics and Bitcoin
· Investigation and Intelligence Framework (IIF) – an evidence extraction model for investigation
· Extracting data from dump of mobile devices running Android operating system
Encase naming confusing for overwritten and overwriting file
Do you know why Encase calls a file overwritten while it actually shows the overwriting one? It actually shows you something different from what it says it does.
If it shows me an overwriting file, it should call it the overwriting file, not the overwritten file.
I know that some forensic examiners and newbies may be deceived by this. Would it not be better, if it called the area -rather than the file- overwritten and show the current file as overwriting?
- Senior Member
- yunusDo you know why Encase calls a file overwritten while it actually shows the overwriting one? It actually shows you something different from what it says it does.
What you are seeing is a MFT record of a deleted file where the MFT record has not be overwritten but the file has. EnCase (in fact, no program of which I am aware), can display the contents of a file that has been overwritten. What EnCase is showing you is that the file pointer still exists though the file does not.
If you look at the very bottom of the EnCase Window (what they call the Navigation data or GPS), what is displayed is the path to actual file that now occupies the blocks occupied by the deleted file.
- Senior Member