Notifications
Clear all

PI licensing

73 Posts
19 Users
0 Likes
231.6 K Views
(@sapounas)
Posts: 5
Active Member
Topic starter
 

With a lot of states jumping on the bandwagon with legislation requiring computer forensics evidence to be obtained by those with a PI License (in order to be admissable), how do you feel this is going to effect the role of the computer forensic examiner. WIll it be harder for a CFE to be hired by an attorney, or do you see ways around this requirment?

Scott

 
Posted : 09/02/2009 5:11 am
(@bithead)
Posts: 1206
Noble Member
 

A possible "way around this requirement" would be to petition your lawmakers to change the license for PIs so that CF is a unique or separate license. But until that is accomplished you have to follow the rules.

 
Posted : 09/02/2009 7:27 am
(@dficsi)
Posts: 283
Reputable Member
 

If you are with a company that already has a license you won't have a problem as you are covered by the company, otherwise you will have to meet your state's requirements as an individual. I've taken the liberty of looking up SC's requirements and they are not as bad as some states that I've seen. There is a link here

http//www.sled.sc.gov/Documents/PI/pilicnew.pdf

In short, in SC you'll need

$10,000 dollar bond
$350 per year
3 year relevant experience
your right arm
your first-born child

(I may have embellished a little on the last two items)

 
Posted : 09/02/2009 1:24 pm
(@infern0)
Posts: 54
Trusted Member
 

Here's a neat site I stumbled on to a few months ago along the same topic. While it's not an official guide, it's a good reference for the point in time, which states are requiring what licensing.

http//www.investigation.com/surveymap/surveymap.html

 
Posted : 09/02/2009 6:58 pm
(@larrydaniel)
Posts: 229
Reputable Member
 

Kessler's map is way out of date.

The only states that I know of that actually require a PI license for computer forensics are Miichigan, Texas, Georgia and South Carolina.

North Carolina will require a Digital Forensic Examiners license next year. It is completely separate from the PI license.

And South Carolina amended theirs to include only people who directly obtain the evidence, i.e. image the hard drives. So if I want to work a case in SC, as long as I get the evidence from LE or from a licensed PI, I can still do my thing.

 
Posted : 01/03/2009 12:18 pm
(@dagardc)
Posts: 3
New Member
 

Has there been any analysis of whether e-discovery collections (collecting files and not a forensic image) falls under this same category since it's still collecting electronic evidence for court?

Also, if my company's PI-licensed in Texas, should we still be able to get licensed in Michigan/SC/Georgia without having a business presence there? (I plan to look it up, just wondering if anyone has already gone down this route).

Thanks

 
Posted : 25/03/2009 3:38 am
(@bithead)
Posts: 1206
Noble Member
 

Michigan has very onerous PI licensing requirements. As I read it, the MI law requires a resident to be the primary PI license holder.

 
Posted : 25/03/2009 4:31 am
(@seanmcl)
Posts: 700
Honorable Member
 

Also, if my company's PI-licensed in Texas, should we still be able to get licensed in Michigan/SC/Georgia without having a business presence there? (I plan to look it up, just wondering if anyone has already gone down this route).

There is no consistency between states regarding PI license requirements and, in most cases, no reciprocity. In some states, if you don't have prior law enforcement experience, it can be nearly impossible. Also, some states exempt lawyers from the requirements. Finally, the state laws typically only apply to evidence to be used in state courts. States have no jurisdiction over evidence gathered for use in Federal Courts.

 
Posted : 25/03/2009 6:31 pm
(@larrydaniel)
Posts: 229
Reputable Member
 

I just updated the NC licensing on my blog.

 
Posted : 25/03/2009 7:18 pm
(@Anonymous)
Posts: 0
Guest
 

Apologies for coming to this thread a bit late.

I sit on the Computer Forensics Advisory Committee of South Carolina's State Law Enforcement Division. We've been wrestling with the issue of CFEs for the past couple of years. It is my firm belief that digital forensic examiners *should* be licensed as PIs.

The nature of the information we glean from digital investigations is as detailed and personal -if not more so- than that obtained via "traditional" investigative techniques.

What can we learn from a Subject's computer or mobile device? Who their friends are. What they like to purchase and with what credit card. What their hobbies/proclivities are. Who there friends and family are. What they do for employment (or not, these days). "What" they're doing. "Who" they're doing. And how they feel about. (Thanks to Steve Rombom for that latter observation!)

Our committee is trying to decide whether to either issue a special endorsement for PIs who perform CFEs or issue a separate license altogether. My leaning is toward the former, as per my aforementioned comments.

Larry, thanks for your blog-posting of the proposed regs for our neighbors to the north. I'll pass these along to the other committee members for review.

-AWTLPI

 
Posted : 01/04/2009 10:03 pm
Page 1 / 8
Share: