An Analysis Of Improved Forensics Design Framework For Cloud Computing In Computer Reliability System Engineering
Keywords:
Cloud Computing, Cloud Forensics, Digital forensics, Cloud Forensics Model, Cloud Forensics Trials, Forensic Explanations, Forensic Tool Kit, Cloud Service Provider
Abstract
The popularity of An Analysis of Improved Forensics design Framework for Cloud Computing in Computer Reliability System Engineering has been growing over the past decade due to the fact that cloud resources can be distributed as needed and are shared by numerous users. According to a recent poll, cybercriminals have been successful in by means of cloud computing skill for fraudulent tasks because of its fundamental features and the dearth of digital forensic methods that are appropriate for the cloud environment. Investigators who handle cloud forensics encounter a number of difficulties and problems while trying to prevent cloud crime. The difficulties that forensic investigators encounter have discussed in this essay. The majority of study work focuses on figuring out the problems with cloud forensics, and the solutions that have been recommended and published in the literature rely on the use of Cloud Service Providers (CSP) for forensic inquiry. Data gathering for the forensics process is one aspect of the reliance on the Cloud Service Provider (CSP), and there's a potential that data manipulation could have an impact on the entire scientific process. To reduce the reliance on CSP, a innovative technique aimed at obtaining forensic indication external of the cloud atmosphere is industrialized.
References
1) Amazon Web Services. AWS import/export. Available at: http://aws. amazon.com/importexport/; 2011.
2) Casey E. Digital evidence and computer crime: forensic science, computers, and the Internet. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press; 2004.
3) Conover M, Chiueh T. Code injection from the hypervisor: removing the need for in-guest agents. In: Proceedings of Blackhat USA; 2008.
4) Dolan-Gabitt B, Payne B, Lee W. Leveraging forensic tools for virtual machine introspection. Technical Report, Georgia Institute of Technology, GT-CS-11-05; 2011.
5) Dykstra J, Sherman AT. Understanding issues in cloud forensics: two hypothetical case studies. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ADFSL conference on digital forensics security and law. ASDFL; 2011a. p. 191–206.
6) Dykstra J, Sherman AT. Understanding issues in cloud forensics: two hypothetical case studies. Journal of Network Forensics 2011b;3(1):19–31. Eucalyptus. Eucalyptus: the open-source cloud platform. Available at: http://open.eucalyptus.com/; 2011
7) Federal CIO Council. Guidelines for the secure use of cloud computing by federal departments and agencies (draft version 0.41); 2011.
8) Garfinkel S. Forensic feature extraction and cross-drive analysis. Digital Investigation 2006; 3:71–81.
9) Garfinkel T, Rosenblum M. A virtual machine introspection-based architecture for intrusion detection. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual symposium on Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS 2003); 2003. p. 191–206.
10) Giobbi R, McCormick J. Vulnerability Note VU#912593: Guidance EnCase Enterprise uses weak authentication to identify target machines. Available at: http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/912593; 2007.
11) Guidance Software. EnCase Legal Journal. Available at: http://www. guidancesoftware.com/DocumentRegistration.aspx? did¼1000017380; 2011.
12) Heiser J. Remote forensics software. Gartner RAS Core Research Note G00171898; 2009.
13) Krautheim FJ. Building trust into utility cloud computing. Ph.D. thesis; Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maryland, Baltimore County; Baltimore, Maryland; 2010.
14) Krautheim FJ, Phatak DS, Sherman AT. Trusted virtual environment module: managing trust in cloud computing. In: 3rd international conference on trust and trustworthy computing; 2010. p. 211–27. Lib VMI. Virtual Machine Introspection (VMI) tools. Available at: http:// vmitools.sandia.gov/; 2011.
15) Nance K, Hay B, Bishop M. Investigating the implications of virtual machine introspection for digital forensics. In: Proceedings of the international conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES ’09); 2009. p. 1024–9.
16) National Institute of Standards and Technology. Computer forensic tool testing (CFTT) project overview. Available at: http://www.cftt.nist. gov/project_overview.htm; 2003.
17) National Institute of Standards and Technology. Digital data acquisition tool specification. Available at: http://www.cftt.nist.gov/Pub-Draft-1- DDA-Require.pdf; 2004.
18) National Institute of Standards and Technology. Test results for digital data acquisition tool: FTK picture 2.5.3.14. Available at: http://www. ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/222982.pdf; 2008.
19) National Institute of Standards and Technology. Test results for digital data acquisition tool: EnCase 6.5. Available at: http://www.ncjrs.gov/ pdffiles1/nij/228226.pdf; 2009.
20) National Institute of Standards and Technology. The NIST definition of cloud computing. Available at: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/ nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145.pdf; 2011.
21) Ruan K, Carthy J, Kechadi T, Crosbie M. Cloud forensics: an overview. In: Advances in digital forensics VII; 2011.
22) Santana M. Cloud security: beyond the buzz. Available at: http://www. linuxworldexpo.com/storage/10/documents/CI7%20Mario% 20Santana.pdf; 2009.
23) Santos N, Gummadi K, Rodrigues R. Towards trusted cloud computing. In: Proceedings of USENIX HotCloud. Available at: http://static.usenix. org/events/hotcloud09/tech/fullpapers/santos.pdf; 2009.
24) Sato H, Kanai A, Tanimoto S. A cloud trust model in a security aware cloud. In: Proceedings of the 2010 10th IEEE/IPSJ international symposium on applications and the Internet. SAINT ’10; 2010. p. 121–4. SCMagazine. Best computer forensic tool. SCMagazine; 2011.
25) Shields C, Frieder O, Maloo M. A system for the proactive, continuous, and efficient collection of digital forensic evidence. In: The proceedings of the eleventh annual DFRWS conference, vol. 8; 2011. p. S3–13.
26) Taylor M, Haggerty J, Gresty D, Lamb D. Forensic investigation of cloud computing systems. Network Security 2011;2011(3):4–10.
27) Terremark. Secure information services. Available at: http://www. terremark.com/uploadedFiles/Services/Security_Services/TMRK_SIS_Gatefold2_4pagelayout_Screen.pdf; 2009 [accessed 01.11.11].
28) United States Code. Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). 47 USC 1001-1010; 1994.
2) Casey E. Digital evidence and computer crime: forensic science, computers, and the Internet. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press; 2004.
3) Conover M, Chiueh T. Code injection from the hypervisor: removing the need for in-guest agents. In: Proceedings of Blackhat USA; 2008.
4) Dolan-Gabitt B, Payne B, Lee W. Leveraging forensic tools for virtual machine introspection. Technical Report, Georgia Institute of Technology, GT-CS-11-05; 2011.
5) Dykstra J, Sherman AT. Understanding issues in cloud forensics: two hypothetical case studies. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ADFSL conference on digital forensics security and law. ASDFL; 2011a. p. 191–206.
6) Dykstra J, Sherman AT. Understanding issues in cloud forensics: two hypothetical case studies. Journal of Network Forensics 2011b;3(1):19–31. Eucalyptus. Eucalyptus: the open-source cloud platform. Available at: http://open.eucalyptus.com/; 2011
7) Federal CIO Council. Guidelines for the secure use of cloud computing by federal departments and agencies (draft version 0.41); 2011.
8) Garfinkel S. Forensic feature extraction and cross-drive analysis. Digital Investigation 2006; 3:71–81.
9) Garfinkel T, Rosenblum M. A virtual machine introspection-based architecture for intrusion detection. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual symposium on Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS 2003); 2003. p. 191–206.
10) Giobbi R, McCormick J. Vulnerability Note VU#912593: Guidance EnCase Enterprise uses weak authentication to identify target machines. Available at: http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/912593; 2007.
11) Guidance Software. EnCase Legal Journal. Available at: http://www. guidancesoftware.com/DocumentRegistration.aspx? did¼1000017380; 2011.
12) Heiser J. Remote forensics software. Gartner RAS Core Research Note G00171898; 2009.
13) Krautheim FJ. Building trust into utility cloud computing. Ph.D. thesis; Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maryland, Baltimore County; Baltimore, Maryland; 2010.
14) Krautheim FJ, Phatak DS, Sherman AT. Trusted virtual environment module: managing trust in cloud computing. In: 3rd international conference on trust and trustworthy computing; 2010. p. 211–27. Lib VMI. Virtual Machine Introspection (VMI) tools. Available at: http:// vmitools.sandia.gov/; 2011.
15) Nance K, Hay B, Bishop M. Investigating the implications of virtual machine introspection for digital forensics. In: Proceedings of the international conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES ’09); 2009. p. 1024–9.
16) National Institute of Standards and Technology. Computer forensic tool testing (CFTT) project overview. Available at: http://www.cftt.nist. gov/project_overview.htm; 2003.
17) National Institute of Standards and Technology. Digital data acquisition tool specification. Available at: http://www.cftt.nist.gov/Pub-Draft-1- DDA-Require.pdf; 2004.
18) National Institute of Standards and Technology. Test results for digital data acquisition tool: FTK picture 2.5.3.14. Available at: http://www. ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/222982.pdf; 2008.
19) National Institute of Standards and Technology. Test results for digital data acquisition tool: EnCase 6.5. Available at: http://www.ncjrs.gov/ pdffiles1/nij/228226.pdf; 2009.
20) National Institute of Standards and Technology. The NIST definition of cloud computing. Available at: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/ nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145.pdf; 2011.
21) Ruan K, Carthy J, Kechadi T, Crosbie M. Cloud forensics: an overview. In: Advances in digital forensics VII; 2011.
22) Santana M. Cloud security: beyond the buzz. Available at: http://www. linuxworldexpo.com/storage/10/documents/CI7%20Mario% 20Santana.pdf; 2009.
23) Santos N, Gummadi K, Rodrigues R. Towards trusted cloud computing. In: Proceedings of USENIX HotCloud. Available at: http://static.usenix. org/events/hotcloud09/tech/fullpapers/santos.pdf; 2009.
24) Sato H, Kanai A, Tanimoto S. A cloud trust model in a security aware cloud. In: Proceedings of the 2010 10th IEEE/IPSJ international symposium on applications and the Internet. SAINT ’10; 2010. p. 121–4. SCMagazine. Best computer forensic tool. SCMagazine; 2011.
25) Shields C, Frieder O, Maloo M. A system for the proactive, continuous, and efficient collection of digital forensic evidence. In: The proceedings of the eleventh annual DFRWS conference, vol. 8; 2011. p. S3–13.
26) Taylor M, Haggerty J, Gresty D, Lamb D. Forensic investigation of cloud computing systems. Network Security 2011;2011(3):4–10.
27) Terremark. Secure information services. Available at: http://www. terremark.com/uploadedFiles/Services/Security_Services/TMRK_SIS_Gatefold2_4pagelayout_Screen.pdf; 2009 [accessed 01.11.11].
28) United States Code. Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). 47 USC 1001-1010; 1994.
Published
2024-06-25
How to Cite
Chaudhary Ashish, & Milind. (2024). An Analysis Of Improved Forensics Design Framework For Cloud Computing In Computer Reliability System Engineering. Revista Electronica De Veterinaria, 25(1S), 43-51. Retrieved from https://veterinaria.org/index.php/REDVET/article/view/557
Section
Articles
