School of Computer and Information Science, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia
Existing digital forensics frameworks do not provide clear guidelines for conducting digital forensics investigation. However, had a framework existed, investigations based on known procedures and processes would follow strict prescribed standardisation. This should direct investigations following a set method for comparisons; ensuring future investigation is following one standard. Digital forensics lack confirmed and tested methods; this became obvious when we consider varied interpretations of the same case by participants using different investigation methods. Previous research covered several approaches to setting a forensics framework, which are mere adaptations of previous models. We found that only a few models present a framework that defines or delivers qualified likeness between the different disciplines. From this, possible pattern analysis from different disciplines is possible (Kohn, 2007). This underlines the need to standardise processes, to ensure proven and consistent results. Digital Forensics Science needs a new approach, defining and standardising investigation processes by affirming an investigation framework. Present research does not enough cover how existing forensic frameworks are used as guideline while conduct investigations. As a result, wide general interpretations are possible instead of following a set standard. Investigation processes and in particular how data confirmation is conducted during and after investigation becomes questionable as well. This also challenges data consistency and the legality of investigation processes when a non-standard framework is used without forming a sound theory based on proven models.