±Forensic Focus Partners

Become an advertising partner

±Your Account


Username
Password

Forgotten password/username?

Site Members:

New Today: 0 Overall: 35390
New Yesterday: 2 Visitors: 135

±Follow Forensic Focus

Forensic Focus Facebook PageForensic Focus on TwitterForensic Focus LinkedIn GroupForensic Focus YouTube Channel

RSS feeds: News Forums Articles

±Latest Articles

±Latest Webinars

MacForensicsLab Field Agent

Computer forensics discussion. Please ensure that your post is not better suited to one of the forums below (if it is, please post it there instead!)
Reply to topicReply to topic Printer Friendly Page
Forum FAQSearchView unanswered posts
Page Previous  1, 2 
  

seanmcl
Senior Member
 

Re: MacForensicsLab Field Agent

Post Posted: Nov 06, 09 12:47

- jwulff
- seanmcl
Another Law Enforcement Only product.


Not true. It is free to Law Enforcement but non-LE can purchase if for $19.95.


When it was first announced in September, there was no mention of a distribution for non-LE in SubRosa Softs press releases. Either that was an oversight or they have updated their licensing practice.  
 
  

Jonathan
Senior Member
 

Re: MacForensicsLab Field Agent

Post Posted: Nov 06, 09 12:59

- neddy
it makes sense for a vendor to apply the restriction in order to appear to LE agencies to be 'pro LE'.


In a fact-seeking exercise such as forensics for a tool or a vendor of a tool to be 'pro' one side or the other wouldn't look too good in court.

- neddy
LE do not like the general community to have access to their methods and tools and go to great lengths in restricting this information in order to thwart 'anti-forensic' activities.


Possibly but that would be counter to Principle 3 of the ACPO guidelines. It would be difficult for an independent third-party to recreate the same results without access to either the tools or methodology used to create the results in the first place.
_________________
Forensic Control
twitter.com/ForensicControl
Studio 314, Vox Studios, 1-45 Durham Street, London, SE11 5JH 
 
  

seanmcl
Senior Member
 

Re: MacForensicsLab Field Agent

Post Posted: Nov 06, 09 15:12

- Jonathan

Possibly but that would be counter to Principle 3 of the ACPO guidelines. It would be difficult for an independent third-party to recreate the same results without access to either the tools or methodology used to create the results in the first place.


I would think that in the US it would violate the confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment.  
 
  

kovar
Senior Member
 

Re: MacForensicsLab Field Agent

Post Posted: Nov 06, 09 15:43

Greetings,

One way around this is to offer tools free or at low cost to LE and at very high price points to the private sector. End result is that LE is still the primary user.

There's also the issue that many of these "LE only" tools end up in private sector hands due to connections. Hardly a level corporate playing field, but that's not surprising.

-David
_________________
CISSP, CCE, EnCE, Licensed Private Investigator (CA) 
 
  

seanmcl
Senior Member
 

Re: MacForensicsLab Field Agent

Post Posted: Nov 06, 09 16:19

- kovar

There's also the issue that many of these "LE only" tools end up in private sector hands due to connections. Hardly a level corporate playing field, but that's not surprising.


I had that very thing happen in a case that I was working on. The other side, a fairly well known digital forensics firm had access to tools from CMU (Aperio) which was restricted to LE. Part of the problem occurs when LE officers leave for the private sector and take the tools with them.

I suppose that I could have challenged the admission of the evidence on the grounds that it was obtained via software that was unlicensed but as it helped my client, that would have been shooting myself in the foot.  
 

Page 2 of 2
Page Previous  1, 2