Computer Forensics Career - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Computer Forensics Career

  1. #11
    Computer Forensics
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    672
    heh..that's why I am trying to get right in to the labs. I don't want to screw with being a cop. They do have accelerated movement..but you have to show knowledge in said area. he said he might be able to get in to the lab in around a year and a half or so.
    Antionline in a nutshell
    \"You\'re putting the fate of the world in the hands of a bunch of idiots I wouldn\'t trust with a potato gun\"

    Trust your Technolust

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,255
    Originally posted here by JP
    Exactly my point! What in the heck kind of techie would want to play police officer for a few years just to become a forensics "examiner" eventually. I've never understood the mentality of departments that do this.
    I'm certain to an extent there is a mentality of "you should do your time as a newbie to the force", and part of it would be the experience factor. You don't want a geek to go with some uniformed officers to seize computer equipment if it happens to go bad. It could also be a case of they can't justify having someone on full time, but would like someone in the department with the knowledge, so you get to be a cop 90% of the time and a forensics geek 10% of the time.

    I know up here in the great white north the RCMP requires you to do basic Mounty training before placing you with a special division. I'm pretty sure you're just required to go through the training course everyone else is, and then you can go direct to say, their computer crimes division provided you have relevant education and experience (obviously). It's actually kind of weird up here. Because the RCMP is essentially the federal police force as well as the provincial police force for every province except Ontario and Quebec, they have almost exclusivity over computer crime investigations. Do most state police departments invest a lot of money developing a computer crime division, or do they leave that sort of thing up to the FBI?
    Chris Shepherd
    The Nelson-Shepherd cutoff: The point at which you realise someone is an idiot while trying to help them.
    \"Well as far as the spelling, I speak fluently both your native languages. Do you even can try spell mine ?\" -- Failed Insult
    Is your whole family retarded, or did they just catch it from you?

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,100
    Greetings:

    Originally posted here by chsh
    You don't want a geek to go with some uniformed officers to seize computer equipment if it happens to go bad.
    Well, i've been on a few raids, and honestly having me along wasn't a big deal. They gave me a vest to wear, and had me outside waiting behind a patrol car with an uniformed officer until the guys that went in came out and gave us the all clear.

    The uniformed officers on the inside had everyone secured, and I went in with the officer that was "assigned" to me just in case. I felt totally safe the entire time, everything was well under control. I did what I need to do, and the uniformed officers did what they needed to do.

  4. #14
    Computer Forensics
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    672
    chsh: the state police department in NY has a large cybercrime division(as cybercrime divisions go), as do the NYC police. Even the place I live employs 2 full time cybercrime officers(although they are probably as you state..90% cop..10% geek). I think it's based out of neccessity rather than wasting tax payers money. AFAIK The FBI only takes over if someone has caused MAJOR damage, has done things across state lines, or has attacked federal computers.
    Antionline in a nutshell
    \"You\'re putting the fate of the world in the hands of a bunch of idiots I wouldn\'t trust with a potato gun\"

    Trust your Technolust

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,255
    Originally posted here by JP
    Well, i've been on a few raids, and honestly having me along wasn't a big deal. They gave me a vest to wear, and had me outside waiting behind a patrol car with an uniformed officer until the guys that went in came out and gave us the all clear.
    The uniformed officers on the inside had everyone secured, and I went in with the officer that was "assigned" to me just in case. I felt totally safe the entire time, everything was well under control. I did what I need to do, and the uniformed officers did what they needed to do.
    Well damn, just vaporize my misconceptions why don't ya?
    I guess white collar criminals tend not to be the "go out in a hail of gunfire" type. I do tend to envision the worst possible scenario.

    Originally posted here by hogfly
    chsh: the state police department in NY has a large cybercrime division(as cybercrime divisions go), as do the NYC police.
    New York may not be a run of the mill example since it is really the largest financial centre in the country, but I get what you're saying.

    Even the place I live employs 2 full time cybercrime officers(although they are probably as you state..90% cop..10% geek). I think it's based out of neccessity rather than wasting tax payers money.
    That's what I assumed. To have someone in house but idle is useless, but if you can put them to work as cops it can be cheaper than paying consultants all the time. I envision there being a financial pheasibility cutoff point where hiring consultants becomes financially impractical.

    AFAIK The FBI only takes over if someone has caused MAJOR damage, has done things across state lines, or has attacked federal computers.
    Would the FBI have jurisdiction over an investigation if it were an international problem? For instance, if someone in New York were to break into a computer up here in Ontario and steal trade secrets/cause damage, who would handle the case, the state police or the FBI?

    JP, in your work with the military, do they themselves have a computer crime investigation group, or would they rely on civilian authorities like the FBI for such investigations?
    EDIT: I'm asking because I'm trying to envision the lengthy chain of custody involved in international prosecutions.
    Chris Shepherd
    The Nelson-Shepherd cutoff: The point at which you realise someone is an idiot while trying to help them.
    \"Well as far as the spelling, I speak fluently both your native languages. Do you even can try spell mine ?\" -- Failed Insult
    Is your whole family retarded, or did they just catch it from you?

  6. #16
    Computer Forensics
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    672
    Originally posted here by chsh

    Would the FBI have jurisdiction over an investigation if it were an international problem? For instance, if someone in New York were to break into a computer up here in Ontario and steal trade secrets/cause damage, who would handle the case, the state police or the FBI?

    JP, in your work with the military, do they themselves have a computer crime investigation group, or would they rely on civilian authorities like the FBI for such investigations?
    EDIT: I'm asking because I'm trying to envision the lengthy chain of custody involved in international prosecutions. [/B]
    The FBI would take over if it was international. State police have jurisdiction within the state only.
    Antionline in a nutshell
    \"You\'re putting the fate of the world in the hands of a bunch of idiots I wouldn\'t trust with a potato gun\"

    Trust your Technolust

  7. #17
    HeadShot Master N1nja Cybr1d's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    1,836
    Exactly my point! What in the heck kind of techie would want to play police officer for a few years just to become a forensics "examiner" eventually. I've never understood the mentality of departments that do this.
    I would. It would be a good experience. That is why I'll be getting a degree in Criminal Justice as well.

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,100
    Greetings:

    Originally posted here by chsh
    JP, in your work with the military, do they themselves have a computer crime investigation group, or would they rely on civilian authorities like the FBI for such investigations?
    EDIT: I'm asking because I'm trying to envision the lengthy chain of custody involved in international prosecutions.
    Let me start off by saying that my work with the US military did NOT involve any of their criminal investigative arms such as DCIS (Defense Criminal Investigative Service). Although, I have worked with individuals from these organizations on various things in the past.

    To answer your question in relation to them, yes, they have their own forensics teams made up of both enlisted and civilian personnel. This all falls under the DC3 (Department of Defense Cyber Crime Center), which is made up of DCCI (Defense Cyber Crime Institute), and a few other multi-letter abbreviations that I can't remember off the top of my head at the moment (it gets confusing so you tend only to remember organizations from people you have actually worked with/for, haha).

    You really need to remember what the role of the US military is though, and their primary role is NOT that of law enforcement. So while you have to worry about issues of chain of custody and such when you want to PROSECUTE someone (US Nationals, other military personnel), you do NOT need to worry about such things when you want to "Eliminate A Threat".

    My work with the military was the lead of several private contracts to the Air Force's Defensive Information Warfare Unit, as well as a couple of other agencies (nda yada yada). When you're talking about this level, they're worried about determining what foreign country or terrorist cell is attempting to breach critical infrastructures, if this appears to be the case. For SURE this involves a lot of computer forensics work, and beyond (hack backs, etc. etc.) But they really don't give a flying flip about chain of custody, or even laws of foreign nations in some cases (if national security is the issue). All they want to do, is determine the source, determine its motivation, determine what information if any was compromised, and formulate a response if any is required.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,255
    JP, thanks for the info. Part of what I had in mind in terms of "international attacks" was kind of along the lines of both an outside source attacking US Military hardware, but also an inside source performing unsanctioned attacks on outside sources. I find the difference in motivation interesting, especially considering we have the US Military to thank for much of our current technology.

    I wonder if anyone on AO has connections to the Canadian military. I know our military by virtue of its size and tiny budget has nowhere near the number of resources and/or departments the US Military does, but I wonder how they do things nonetheless.
    Chris Shepherd
    The Nelson-Shepherd cutoff: The point at which you realise someone is an idiot while trying to help them.
    \"Well as far as the spelling, I speak fluently both your native languages. Do you even can try spell mine ?\" -- Failed Insult
    Is your whole family retarded, or did they just catch it from you?

  10. #20
    Computer Forensics
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    672
    But they really don't give a flying flip about chain of custody, or even laws of foreign nations in some cases (if national security is the issue). All they want to do, is determine the source, determine its motivation, determine what information if any was compromised, and formulate a response if any is required.
    Funny that you should mention that. The work I am doing right now..they don't really care about forensically sound investigations. They want me find the problem, how it was carried out, how to fix it, and how to prevent it from happening again.
    They said "go through the proper steps for a forensic investigation in case there is sensitive data, but this is what we really want".
    Antionline in a nutshell
    \"You\'re putting the fate of the world in the hands of a bunch of idiots I wouldn\'t trust with a potato gun\"

    Trust your Technolust

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •