Forensics is the only computing discipline whose output is judged by people outside computing. A compiler is graded by whether the program runs, a protocol by whether the packets arrive, a proof by whether the argument holds. A forensic finding is graded by a judge, a jury, a regulator, or an opposing expert, none of whom will read the source of the tool that produced it. That single fact reorganizes everything: an analysis that is technically correct and procedurally unsound is worthless, so the first arc here is process rather than tooling, and the last arc is testimony.

The middle is artifacts. What a record proves, how it was preserved, what it fails to say, and where two independent records of the same act disagree. The recurring move in every note is to state the claim the artifact actually licenses and refuse the one it does not, because the gap between those two sentences is where an analysis comes apart.

Other sections own the machinery. Security owns the attacks these artifacts record, Systems owns file systems and memory management, Networking owns protocols and capture mechanics, and Law owns the statutes and the Fourth Amendment. These notes link all four and restate none of them.

The discipline and its constraints

Read this arc first, because every later note assumes it. These five settle what the discipline is for, what order to work in, and what makes a copy of a disk admissible rather than merely accurate.

Storage

The largest artifact surface, and the one where deletion turns out to remove almost nothing. Start with the container and its hash, then the structure that indexes the volume, then what is recoverable once that structure no longer points at the data.

Volatile state

Memory holds what the disk never will: running processes, network connections, injected code, and keys. It also cannot be recaptured, which is why acquisition here is a one-shot act performed by a tool running inside the system it measures.

Per-platform artifacts

The same questions, asked of five platforms that answer them with entirely different record-keeping. Each note is organized around who writes the artifact and with what privilege, because that ordering decides how much weight a field carries when someone disputes it.

Beyond the single machine

Once evidence leaves the box, the examiner stops choosing what exists. Capture is sampled, flow records are summaries produced by a timer, cloud data is whatever a provider decided to keep, and an adversary gets a vote in all of it.

Making it hold up

The arc the section exists for. A finding becomes evidence only after somebody characterizes the tool, writes the method down, and states the claim in language that survives an opposing expert reading the same artifacts.


The full file listing follows below, generated automatically by Quartz.

27 items under this folder.