Webinar (Mobile Forensics): MPE+ Android Malware Detection

Malware on computers can infect, transmit and “sell” personal data. Malware can also be used to “blame” and cast doubt on collected evidence in a computer examination. If this is the case, why aren’t these items being scanned when conducting a mobile device exam? Join AccessData in this live webinar and take a first look at the malware epidemic on the Android platform and the type of information users could be “giving away.” Additionally, this webinar will review methods of collecting and detecting this type of threat on Android devices during mobile device examinations. After the webinar Lee Reiber will be available in the Forensic Focus webinars forum to answer questions.

Date/Time: Friday Apr 12 2013 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM (CDT)
Duration: 1 hour

Register today at:

http://marketing.accessdata.com/acton/form/4390/008f:d-0003/1/index.htmFor a limited time Forensic Focus readers who register for this webinar can purchase a license of AccessData’s MPE+ software bundled with their MPE+ three day course at the special price of $2995.00 (a 60% discount on the software and 40% off the training price). This includes a three-day training course and a full year of AccessData’s MPE+ software (only $840.00 to maintain the software for subsequent years). To take advantage of this offer contact your AccessData Sales representative, email [email protected] or call (800) 574.5199 (02070107800 in the UK) and use the promotion code ACCESDATA-FF.

Get The Latest DFIR News!

Top DFIR articles in your inbox every month.


Unsubscribe any time. We respect your privacy - read our privacy policy.

Please share this invitation with any friends or colleagues who might also be interested, thank you.

Leave a Comment

Latest Videos

Quantifying Data Volatility for IoT Forensics With Examples From Contiki OS

Forensic Focus 22nd June 2022 5:00 am

File timestamps are used by forensics practitioners as a fundamental artifact. For example, the creation of user files can show traces of user activity, while system files, like configuration and log files, typically reveal when a program was run. 

Despite timestamps being ubiquitous, the understanding of their exact meaning is mostly overlooked in favor of fully-automated, correlation-based approaches. Existing work for practitioners aims at understanding Windows and is not directly applicable to Unix-like systems. 

In this paper, we review how each layer of the software stack (kernel, file system, libraries, application) influences MACB timestamps on Unix systems such as Linux, OpenBSD, FreeBSD and macOS.

We examine how POSIX specifies the timestamp behavior and propose a framework for automatically profiling OS kernels, user mode libraries and applications, including compliance checks against POSIX.

Our implementation covers four different operating systems, the GIO and Qt library, as well as several user mode applications and is released as open-source.

Based on 187 compliance tests and automated profiling covering common file operations, we found multiple unexpected and non-compliant behaviors, both on common operations and in edge cases.

Furthermore, we provide tables summarizing timestamp behavior aimed to be used by practitioners as a quick-reference.

Learn more: https://dfrws.org/presentation/a-systematic-approach-to-understanding-macb-timestamps-on-unixlike-systems/

File timestamps are used by forensics practitioners as a fundamental artifact. For example, the creation of user files can show traces of user activity, while system files, like configuration and log files, typically reveal when a program was run.

Despite timestamps being ubiquitous, the understanding of their exact meaning is mostly overlooked in favor of fully-automated, correlation-based approaches. Existing work for practitioners aims at understanding Windows and is not directly applicable to Unix-like systems.

In this paper, we review how each layer of the software stack (kernel, file system, libraries, application) influences MACB timestamps on Unix systems such as Linux, OpenBSD, FreeBSD and macOS.

We examine how POSIX specifies the timestamp behavior and propose a framework for automatically profiling OS kernels, user mode libraries and applications, including compliance checks against POSIX.

Our implementation covers four different operating systems, the GIO and Qt library, as well as several user mode applications and is released as open-source.

Based on 187 compliance tests and automated profiling covering common file operations, we found multiple unexpected and non-compliant behaviors, both on common operations and in edge cases.

Furthermore, we provide tables summarizing timestamp behavior aimed to be used by practitioners as a quick-reference.

Learn more: https://dfrws.org/presentation/a-systematic-approach-to-understanding-macb-timestamps-on-unixlike-systems/

YouTube Video UCQajlJPesqmyWJDN52AZI4Q_i0zd7HtluzY

A Systematic Approach to Understanding MACB Timestamps on Unixlike Systems

Forensic Focus 21st June 2022 5:00 am

This error message is only visible to WordPress admins

Important: No API Key Entered.

Many features are not available without adding an API Key. Please go to the YouTube Feed settings page to add an API key after following these instructions.

Latest Articles

Share to...