During a project to examine the potential usefulness of evidence of tool verification as part of method validation for ISO 17025 accreditation, the authors have examined requirements statements in several digital forensic method descriptions and tools. They have identified that there is an absence of clear requirements statements in the methods and a reluctance or inability to disclose requirements on the part of tool producers. This leads to a break in evidence of correctness for both tools and methods, resulting in incomplete validation. They compare the digital forensics situation with other ISO 17025 accredited organisations, both forensic and non-forensic, and propose a means to close the gap and improve validation. They also review existing projects which may assist with their proposed solution.