Join Us!

Digital Forensic La...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Digital Forensic Language Study  

  RSS
tootypeg
(@tootypeg)
Active Member

Hi everyone,

I am currently running a study into the standardisation of language used in digital forensic statements/reports. If you can, I would appreciate your input on the following survey:- https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdjiSfvqGhIiBmKP5AcTL0ogxa7ZBqtWzay11Q4ihtmDss5Jw/viewform

It should take about 10 minutes (I know....but I would massively appreciate it 😀 )

Thank you

Quote
Posted : 18/05/2020 8:13 pm
jhup
 jhup
(@jhup)
Community Legend

The problem is not the language.

Language changes over time.

Truly understanding and ability to explain what is presented is the problem.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 18/05/2020 9:32 pm
athulin
(@athulin)
Community Legend
Posted by: @tootypeg

It should take about 10 minutes ...

(Do you keep track of how long it actually took? )

Standardized language in explanation of standard terms ... well, yes.  Some IT experts can't explain their way out of a wet paper bag, and some forensic analysts (mostly beginners) seem to follow the same course. Help is needed to show what acceptable and recommended usage is.

It would probably be of value to identify terms that should *not* be used in haste. Some terminology is close to IT jargon (and work less on denotations than connotations, and so are unsuitable for use outside that community: 'CMOS' and 'RAM' are good examples), or because they are overly specific ('physical memory' or 'unallocated clusters').

So I think of this also as a kind of 'Usage and Abusage' for the DF community, perhaps. (If you don't know that title, you may know 'Dictionary of Modern English Usage'.)

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/05/2020 7:48 am
tootypeg
(@tootypeg)
Active Member
Posted by: @jhup

The problem is not the language.

Language changes over time.

Truly understanding and ability to explain what is presented is the problem.

Hi jhup, I do agree with your point, I think people should understand the language and terms they use. I think here, lack of standardisation is one issue, but I do wonder if it also leads to an issue of incorrect definitions. I wonder if it is possible to have accepted definitions and all use them. Im not saying it is or isnt or we should or shouldnt - Im just curious.

 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/05/2020 8:28 pm
tootypeg
(@tootypeg)
Active Member

@athulin

Hi, yes, the time is an estimate but I realise this wont be always useful.

 

Interesting points on the use of terms which should not be used! Im going to give this some thought.

 

Thanks

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/05/2020 8:30 pm
Rich2005
(@rich2005)
Active Member

I'm with jhup on this, in that I don't think terminology really causes much issue, which is not to say it's never wrong, but I'm struggling to think of where it actually caused a material problem.

Officers frequently call a whole computer a hard drive, or another examiner/"expert" might use a logical offset as a physical one, or just refer to it as an offset, etc. Nearly always you know, or can easily confirm, what they mean.

A far bigger problem, in my view, is the examination/reporting time available to the examiner working a typical case in their particular field flavour of DF (competence levels will always vary but I'd suggest the actual time they can spend working on a case is actually the biggest factor) in a related aspect you could also say the resources available to them too in many instances (software / hardware tools for processing/extracting data perhaps).

ReplyQuote
Posted : 20/05/2020 8:33 am
tootypeg
(@tootypeg)
Active Member

Sure, I understand both aspects. Im curious though whether people correctly defined concepts or whether varying definitions could lead to confusion. Or are people using misleading definitions. This is applied across the board, not just in my basic collection of concepts. 

Shame more people havnt completed an entry to the survey ... 😆 😪 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 21/05/2020 2:04 pm
jhup
 jhup
(@jhup)
Community Legend

@tootypeg over the decades we have had this site up, we have been approached by multitude of reviews.

At first, I contributed without a care.

Then, when I saw no return, I asked, the demanded that if I and peers contribute the results are given back in lieu.  Lot of promises, lot of agreements from those collecting the data.

Yet, I have not see a linked scholarly paper here that was a free to FF members because their contribution.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 22/05/2020 7:29 pm
jaclaz
(@jaclaz)
Community Legend

And - casually (talking of names of things) - I would call what is called here "study" a "survey" or "online questionnaire".

jaclaz

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 23/05/2020 3:46 pm
Share: