Cranfield University, College Rd, Cranfield, Wharley End, Bedford MK43 0AL, England.
Sci Justice. 2022 Sep;62(5):515-519. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2022.07.006. Epub 2022 Jul 21.
Digital forensic practitioners often utilise a range of tools throughout their casework in order to access, identify and analyse relevant data, making them a vital part of conducting thorough, efficient and accurate digital examinations of device content and datasets. Whilst their importance cannot be understated, there is also no guarantee that their functionality is free from error, where similarly, no practitioner can 100% assure that their performance is flawless. Should an error occur during an investigation, assuming that it has been identified, then determining the cause of it is important for the purposes of ensuring quality control in both the immediate investigation and for longer-term practice improvements. Perhaps anecdotally, a starting position in any postmortem review of an error may be to suspect that any tools used may be at fault, where recent narratives and initiatives have enforced the need to evaluate all tools prior to them being used in any live investigation. Yet, in addition, an error may occur as a result of a practitioner's investigative conduct. This work discusses the concept of 'fault-attribution', focusing on the roles of the forensic tool and practitioner, and proposes a series of principles for determining responsibility for an investigative error.
数字取证从业者在其案件工作中经常使用一系列工具，以便访问、识别和分析相关数据，因此他们是进行设备内容和数据集全面、高效和准确数字检查的重要组成部分。虽然不能低估他们的重要性，但也不能保证他们的功能没有错误，同样，也没有从业者可以 100%保证他们的表现是完美无缺的。如果在调查过程中出现错误，假设已经确定，那么确定错误的原因对于确保即时调查和长期实践改进的质量控制都很重要。也许从轶事的角度来看，对错误进行任何事后审查的起点可能是怀疑所使用的任何工具都可能有故障，最近的叙述和倡议强调了在将任何工具用于任何实时调查之前对其进行评估的必要性。然而，除此之外，错误也可能是由于从业者的调查行为导致的。这项工作讨论了“故障归因”的概念，重点关注取证工具和从业者的角色，并提出了一系列确定调查错误责任的原则。
