XRY v6.16

v6.16 of XRY the leading mobile forensic solution from MSAB has been released; with support for 17,301 support profiles including 980 Apps!

With the majority of data on smartphones being transmitted via apps these days, we are confident that XRY is the best performing tool for the recovery of smartphone app related data on the market.

XRY is a complete solution to help you secure what you need. Our intuitive software guides you through the process step by step to make it as easy as possible. Learn more about XRY here.

XRY is now compatible with Windows 10 operating systems and there is a huge increase in support for Android based devices.Full details from the release notes can be downloaded here

Get The Latest DFIR News!

Top DFIR articles in your inbox every month.


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

================
NEW FEATURES
»» 17,301 Mobile Forensic Profiles now supported
»» Built in Rooting of Android OS version 4.3 – 5.0.1
»» Unified Tagging in XRY with new tag icons available
»» PDF exporting in XRY Viewer
»» New Infineon chipset NOR Flash Translation Layer Decoding
»» Decoding of FFS Partitions
»» New USB Type-C Cable coming soon

IMPROVEMENTS
»» Improved decoding of deleted files in EXT3/EXT4 file systems
»» Improved support for full disk encryption on Android
»» Improved logical support for Android
»» Improved iOS device and operating system identification
»» 980 Smartphone app profiles now included
»» XRY now officially compatible with Windows 10

For more information about XRY please watch the video here

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...