Hello there,
I graduated with Bsc Computer Forensics in 2011 and immediately after that I took a gap year to Australia! The time didn't right to commit to a full time position right off the bat after graduation, but I have done a fair bit of soul searching, traveling and feel my time has come to jump into a career.
My particular interest is with PwC, I know people there in different roles, none in forensics unfortunately but a few in other areas. Anyway, having been out of the loop for a while my intention is too give myself a refresher and study in my own time some forensics techniques and tools that the likes of PwC would use regularly. Having a good knowledge of their tools and set up will give me quite an advantage in the interview stages, if I get there that is.
So my questions are as follows;
A) What 5 tools would you say are essential for an investigator at PwC?
B) Are Linux and Mac forensics a big focus in there firm?
C) What 3 books could you recommend reading to bring me up to speed with the industry?
D) Can you recommend anything else I should do to aid my job chances and increase my knowledge?
E) I enjoy writing, should I start a personal forensics blog? Post test scenarios I completed, how I completed them etc.
I understand I am asking quite a bit here and I apologize for firing on all cylinders. Any help is greatly appreciated. Flying home very soon, excited to start learning again, working and making a career for myself.
Thank you,
Iain
My particular interest is with PwC, I know people there in different roles, none in forensics unfortunately but a few in other areas.
IMHO a good start would be to expand the acronym, not everyone would know at first glance what you mean by it
http//
jaclaz
I would think that the original post was actually well written…if you don't know PwC is, then it's likely that you don't have anything of value to add to the discussion…it would all be speculation.
Someone who knows what the acronym means is more likely to be able to provide information that would be of value to the OP.
I would think that the original post was actually well written…if you don't know PwC is, then it's likely that you don't have anything of value to add to the discussion…it would all be speculation.
Someone who knows what the acronym means is more likely to be able to provide information that would be of value to the OP.
Hmmm, Pratt & Whitney Canada would be a good candidate as well.
The reference was just part of my personal campaign against the use of (out of context or not unique/univocal) acronyms, see
http//www.forensicfocus.com/Forums/viewtopic/p=6561872/
http//
jaclaz
Hmmm, Pratt & Whitney Canada would be a good candidate as well.
You're right. But then, I never assumed that there was one right answer. It could very well be Pratt & Whitney.
From where I sit, I have no knowledge of the tools specifically used by any organization but my own, and since my organization does not use the acronym "PWC" in anyway, I'm not going to respond.
This place is getting painfully pedantic - 99% of people on this forum would associate PwC (particularly with that capitalisation) with Price Waterh… actually with PwC )
We need to play nicely otherwise people, including me, will depart and go elsewhere.
We need to play nicely otherwise people, including me, will depart and go elsewhere.
Well, I will plead guilty of five-zero-seven if that would help convincing you to stay.
jaclaz
Just wanted to add to the other helpful posts -
A) I'm guessing on your BSc you had some exposure to forensic tools such as EnCase. FTK, Xways maybe? As you know these are probably industry standards for forensics, but someone like PwC (whoever they are!!) will undoubtedly be using e-Discovery tools as well as others, so a bit of research about those might come in handy, e-Discovery isn't my area so I wouldn't know a top 5 tools for it.
You could think of it another way for an interview process, maybe your top 5 tools are things like your approach, your mindset, ability to think outside the box, flexibility etc etc etc, all personal traits that combined with knowledge of the software tools give you the edge over someone else.
B) Don't know - but if you're going to be going out into corporate environments you are likely to encounter all sorts. Knowledge of file systems may be better than knowledge of operating systems. There's plenty of information out there about file systems and artifacts, Google is your friend.
C) None, if you're looking short term. Google, people's blogs, the blogs they read, and the links from the blogs will give you a flavour of what's current. I've got loads of books that I never look at or refer to, and, no disrespect to any authors out there, things move so quickly that six months after the author wrote it, it might be out of date. That's not to say there aren't good books out there though, can't remember the names of anyone who wrote one, if only the author's mentioned them every so often.
D) Find out from the people you know in that company what they're all about, try and get a contact in the area you want to work in and approach them. Get on the internet and read current information about that company and the area you want to work in.
E) Yes, why not. There's plenty of people who are always encouraging others to contribute to the forensics community, I'm surprised they haven't jumped up to encourage you, perhaps they only got to the first bit of your post that annoyed them. Ok, so I don't blog, my preference, but if you like writing and want to post your thoughts, why not? People have a choice as to whether to read or not, you never know, you might find something that someone else didn't know. They also have a choice as to whether to comment or not, some just comment for the sake of it, not because it's useful. Don't be discouraged by those that pick fault at minutiae.
I hope you get back and find something
Oh, and I'm with Paul!!
Perhaps Iain may wish to consider the following to assist his investigation
Accountancy
http//
Law Firms
http//
Investment Banks
http//
A mate of mine works at pwc.
There was a big push in the last couple of years to rebrand the company from "price Waterhouse coopers" to pwc. It now says pwc on everything from their building (which formerly had price Waterhouse coopers blazaned on the top" to their letterheads and business cards.
I think that using the acronym in that instance was actually in the correct context, much like it would be saying kpmg.
Jaclaz was just trolling.