Csol 590 Computer Forensic Examination Report
Csol 590 Computer Forensic Examination Report
Csol 590 Computer Forensic Examination Report
BIZ
COMPUTER FORENSIC
EXAMINATION REPORT
WAYNE FISCHER
DECEMBER 7, 2018
UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO
1
COMPUTER FORENSIC EXAMINATION REPORT: M57.BIZ
Abstract
This forensic examination report details the forensic examination in a case of spear phishing which was created
by Dr. Simson Garfinkel and outlined by the Infosec Institute (Infosec Institute, 2016). In this case, we are acting in the
role of a forensic analyst. We are given a forensic image file of a laptop hard disk and asked to determine whether an
employee leaked sensitive information. The employee, Jean, is the Chief Financial Officer of M57dotBIZ, a fictional web
Jean is suspected of leaking confidential information about the company but believes she was “hacked”. She
states that the CEO, Alison, requested a spreadsheet of social security numbers, names, and salaries and that is why she
has a spreadsheet “m57.xls” which contains the information which was posted to a competitor’s web site chat forums.
Alison states she did not ever request the information Jean assembled. We are asked to find any evidence of the
spreadsheet, as well as to determine whether Jean leaked the information and how this was done.
2
COMPUTER FORENSIC EXAMINATION REPORT: M57.BIZ
Search and Seizure and Chain of Custody
A digital copy of Jean’s laptop computer hard drive was provided, as authorized by corporate policy. In this case,
we are working under the presumption that m57dotBIZ is a private employer, not a government agency, and that the
employee gave consent and provided the laptop to our forensic analyst. Barbara Repa, a lawyer and journalist
specializing in workplace rights, shares that “the law considers whether the employee had reasonable expectations of
privacy. A worker who legitimately expects, based on the employer's policies, past practice, and common sense, that
the employer will not search certain areas has as strong case that there was a violation of privacy (Repa, 2016). In this
case, we assume Jean has willingly provided her laptop as the company policies are written so that she does not have an
expectation of privacy and therefore we are not violating her expectation of privacy.
In order to ensure that evidence collected maintains authenticity and integrity, the collection of the laptop hard
drive data is assumed to have been performed with the use of a device known as a write-blocker and the program FTK
Imager. Using FTK Imager and this device an exact forensic copy of the hard drive data is created without any means of
changing any data copied. The digital copy was saved as nps-2008-jean with a unique volume MD5 hash value of
78a52b5bac78f4e711607707ac0e3f93
onto a new 128 Gigabyte USB Flash Drive. The drive was placed in a sealed chain of custody bag and labeled with the
investigation number, date, location, collectors name, file sizes, and hash value of the collected image files. This bag was
then taken by Mr. Fischer and placed and stored in our media safe until it was analyzed.
The following recordings and transports of the examination data occurred to ensure an unbroken chain of
custody. A Chain of Custody Tracking Form was used for all items and evidence collected, transported, stored, analyzed,
and accessed for reporting. The following actions took place with the data and items involved in this case.
• Forensic Analyst Wayne Fischer used Property Record Number M57-001 for two items involved in this case, a
Laptop by Jean, and a new USB Drive which was obtained by our evidence custodian Joe Smith.
3
COMPUTER FORENSIC EXAMINATION REPORT: M57.BIZ
• Mr. Fischer notated his collection of the laptop being investigated and the name and hash of the image being
captured.
• Mr. Fischer noted the transportation and storage of the image in media storage as well as the removal of the
forensic image for analysis and finally redepositing the forensic image into digital media storage with Mr. Smith.
• This form is available for presentation in court or during arbitration to demonstrate an intact chain of custody.
received the laptop a in question from Jean. The laptop hard drive was removed and connected to a Digital Intelligence
UltraKit IDE/SATA write-blocker kit’s IDE/SATA write-blocker in preparation for copying data. A forensic system was
used with the write-blocker and FTK Imager 4.2.0 to create a forensically sound copy (e.g. image) of Jean’s laptop hard
drive. During the image creation a new 128 GB USB Flash Drive was used to store the image from FTK Imager 4.2.0
Autopsy 4.9.1 was used to analyze a copy of the forensic image after validating the volume hash (Figure 1).
Autopsy has included tools (i.e. ingestion modules) to identify hashes of files, deleted files, email conversations,
messaging app conversations, and encrypted or hidden files. Forensic Analysts used Microsoft Windows 10 as a working
workstation operating system used to analyze the forensically sound image of Jean’s laptop hard drive. Forensic
analysts use the most recent version of Autopsy (at time of analysis v4.9.1) to analyze a copy of the laptop forensic
image collected. Each analyst system uses a fresh installation of Windows 10 which is up-to-date with the tools required
for each analysis. Forensic images and/or data are signed out and removed from secure media vaults using chain of
1. Data is copied to the analyst machine using write a blocker to ensure it will not be altered when copied.
2. Hashes of forensic images/data are confirmed immediately when forensic images are loaded into Autopsy.
3. Figure 1 row labeled MD5 Hash shows that the forensic volume hash matched that of the collected image on the
Figure 1. Table from Autopsy v4.9.1 validating authenticity of volume hash for Jean’s laptop’s forensic image.
The spreadsheet containing the data the investigation was inquiring about was found on Jean’s desktop and in
the Jean’s email client list of files. This prompted a review of email activity around the dates of the file creation to
Timeline
Email request July 19, 2008 @ 1639 PDT received by Jean for a list of salaries and social security numbers from
spoofed email [email protected] to appear from [email protected]
A reply from Jean to [email protected] was sent July 19, 2008 @ 1644 PDT acknowledging the request with “Sure
thing.”.
Alison responded July 19, 2008 @ 1650 PDT asking “What’s a ‘sure thing.’?”
A second spoofed email request urging Jean to action was received July 19, 2008 @1822 PDT which is from
[email protected] and [email protected]
Data file “m57biz.xls” was created July 19, 2008 @ 1828 PDT and saved to Desktop of user Jean (Figure 2).
5
COMPUTER FORENSIC EXAMINATION REPORT: M57.BIZ
Jean sends an email with the “m57biz.xls” data to the spoofed email sent July 19, 2008 @ 1828 PDT
A response was sent by spoofed “Alison” thanking Jean for the requested information July 19, 2008 @ 2203 PDT
Jean’s inbox begins receiving various emails from peers asking why sensitive information was posted began
being received by Jean on July 20, 2008.
Analysis Results
The forensic analysis of the laptop image was able to produce evidence of the exfiltration of sensitive data (the
spreadsheet in question). A timeline was established of the data exfiltration based on the email program Outlooks
default outlook.pst file in user Jean’s folders, as well as an excel spreadsheet on user Jean’s desktop. The analysis also
determined that, it is highly likely, that Jean was targeted and manipulated into providing sensitive data to an attacker
posing as another legitimate employee in an attack known as a “Spear Phishing” attack. In this attack an email is sent
requesting data which appears to be from a trusted person, but is in fact a person masquerading as a trusted individual.
Examination Conclusion
The findings from this investigation identified spear phishing using an altered “From” field in the email headers.
Email headers include information about email and some of these can be changed to user preferred settings
(Mediatemplate.net, n.d.). This is a common technique used by bad actors to trick and deceive ignorant victims into
believing they are someone other than they truly are. The following findings and recommendation are below.
• A person (the attacker) spoofed Alison’s email address in the From field of the email header to appear it was
from ([email protected]) so that unknowing victims would see “[email protected]”.
• The spoofed email address was determined to have originated from [email protected] as
identified by the “Return-Path” email header field.
6
COMPUTER FORENSIC EXAMINATION REPORT: M57.BIZ
• When Jean responded “Sure thing.”, her email response went to the correct email address of “Alison” who was
unaware of the original email and questioned the email. Jean did not respond to her response.
• The attacker sent a follow-up email urging Jean to send the requested data using the email
[email protected] based on the Return-Path email header field, to which Jean responds and sends the
requested data.
• Recommendations for m57.biz are to provide user security-awareness training, install and run an email filtering
program, and to add procedures to verify sensitive information requests in person before sending data.
• Recommendations to the court are to recognize that this may not have been intentional exfiltration. The
Forensic analysis suggests additional subpoenas for additional evidence from other email systems involved in
the incident for forensic analysis to determine the identity of the attacker if m57.biz desires this action.
7
COMPUTER FORENSIC EXAMINATION REPORT: M57.BIZ
References
Infosec Institute. (2016, October 04). Forensics Investigation of Document Exfiltration involving Spear Phishing: The M57
Jean Case. Retrieved December 7, 2018, from https://resources.infosecinstitute.com/forensics-investigation-
document-exfiltration-involving-spear-phishing-m57-jean-case/ Courtesy of Dr. Simson Garfinkel
Mediatemplate.net. (n.d.). Understanding an email header. Retrieved December 10, 2018, from
https://mediatemple.net/community/products/dv/204643950/understanding-an-email-header
Microsoft Support. (n.d.). Find and transfer Outlook data files from one computer to another. Retrieved December 10,
2018, from https://support.office.com/en-us/article/find-and-transfer-outlook-data-files-from-one-computer-
to-another-0996ece3-57c6-49bc-977b-0d1892e2aacc
Repa, B. K. (2012, March 28). Employer Searches and Seizures: What Are Your Rights? Retrieved December 7, 2018, from
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/employee-rights-book/chapter5-5.html