Hi,
I also think this is too large project for one person to do as part of a degree. In terms of inter lab comparisons there are three types of 'product' you might consider producing. These would be -
1. A media device which is used to test only imaging and hashing. You create it and send it to them and they would need to get the right number of sectors and the right hash.
2. A data set containing files including deleted files. This is intended to test a forensic tool in basic data parsing and performing specific automated functions. This could include carving, file signature checks, grouping of file types, unzipping, decoding etc. It's purpose is only to establish if the tool can correctly parse the specific data and report the correct information.
3. A full analysis. You are now potentially doing both of the above, but also looking at the examiner's technical knowledge and investigative skills. This doesn't actually have to incorporate all of item 2, because the examiner might choose to manually decode all of the the data themselves, effectively not using much of the forensic tool's functionality.
Here's the other challenge to doing this project. Would you be considered a reliable cited source of material such that digital units could convince UKAS your 'samples' have been correctly constructed?
Even for the creation of test digital media, UKAS expects highly experienced digital units to use NIST or CAST sets. By using these data sets the unit can then prove their own tools can correctly image and hash digital data. Only once they have done this they can begin to create their own test media.
As a university, UKAS might be happy to recognise them as a reliable source but I cannot imagine they would recognise any individual as a reliable source. As this is your project I would assume they would be your sample sets, not the university's.
Unless the university were willing to put their name to it and give it their guarentee, I don't think digital units would utlise your sample sets.
The other option is to put the cat amongst the pigeons and create data sets intended to test digital forensic tools in a way that you know they cannot parse correctly. No tool can do everything but at least we can manually decde the raw data and validate the results of the tool.
You might instead consider looking at the accreditation issue overall. To write, implement and maintain a quality management system and ISO17025, (and 17020 from next year), takes a lot of work and I think a different skillset to the one most digital examiners have. Whilst many digital units have obtained 17025 for some part of their work, a few units have also lost their accreditation. You could look at this from a resourcing and management point of view. What does it take to deliver and retain the standard?
I think a permanent post for a technical person needs to exist to gain and in the long term, keep accredited status for most units. There's scant training out there so maybe the project could look at how do we train people to be technical leads in this? What natural skillset is needed, what training do they need? Should there be a module in digital forensic degrees and ii there should be, what do you drop off the syllabus to make room for it?
ISO17020 is the next challenge and it will be expected we will have validated processes for live data capture in the field, imaging at crime scenes/customer sites and so on. I don't know of anyone producing any guidance on how units should prepare. Another possible area for you to consider perhaps?
As I have typed this response the scale of the work involved has increased again. This is more than a one person project. I wonder if your university have an interest in being a player in this area of study. It would require a number of people to end up with something that you could publish to a wider audience.
I don't know if any of this helps. If you were leaning towards writing some python scripts for parsing some unusual data as the alternative to this, do that. It will be a much more manageable project with more easily delivered results.
Good luck.
Steve