I’ve made several attempts to sound the horn in regard to what I feel is a need to establish a nationally recognized standard in cellular technology training for law enforcement and cell site analysis from historical call detail records for law enforcement and the private sector. Due to competing interests this seems to be a difficult task. There are those that feel we need a standard. There are those that are happy making money training and testifying and there are those that feel parts of this technology shouldn’t be discussed. Without a doubt the technology is changing on a daily basis. In some ways I feel like the industry, or at least those looking for standardization are going through growing pains. One poster on here actually refers to cell site analysis as cell site forensics, which brings me to my question.
If you look back to the beginnings of computer forensics were there similar issues that it experienced as it grew into what it is today? Were the major advancements led by the FBI/Government or did the private sector drive the advancements? How did everyone wind up sitting down at the same table or is that yet to happen? How did computer forensics get to where it is today?
Many thanks!
It was mostly by the private sector that did the research and published their findings.
What do you mean sit down at the table? Forensics is not based on consensus. It is forensic science, based on facts. We do not get the opportunity to 'feel like' the best and most agreeable answer is the good one. Our findings are either true or false. If all the variables are the same, our answers are identical, irrelevant on what was agreed at the table…
Jhup,
Thanks for the reply. I’m not talking about a consensus. I understand it is to present the evidence only. I went to a person’s website the other day and the individual claims he is certified in cell site analysis. I spoke to the individual this person claimed to have received his certification from and he told me he does not offer a certification. I understand that overstating someone’s capabilities or qualifications is not new, but that is a small example of what I am talking about.
There are many out there ( LE specifically ) that believe knowledge is power. You also have a lot of individuals making money off training and testifying that really don't grasp the capabilities or limitations of the technology.
You’ve already indicated the advances in CF were mostly driven by the private sector and that’s good to know. I have a feeling that LE didn’t share much information in the beginning, but showed up later on ready to eat, sort of like the little red hen.
I’m just thinking that as people started to image HD’s there was a call for standardization by some in LE and the private sector. Do you believe the CF process is standardized today?
Maybe I’m trying to mix apples and oranges?