A CRITICAL COMPARISON OF BRAVE BROWSER AND GOOGLE CHROME FORENSIC ARTEFACTS

IF 0.6 Q4 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.15394/jdfsl.2022.1752
Stuart Berham, Sarah Morris
{"title":"A CRITICAL COMPARISON OF BRAVE BROWSER AND GOOGLE CHROME FORENSIC ARTEFACTS","authors":"Stuart Berham, Sarah Morris","doi":"10.15394/jdfsl.2022.1752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Digital forensic practitioners are tasked with the identification, recovery, and analysis of Internet browser artefacts which may have been used in the pursuit of committing a civil or criminal offence. This research paper critically compares the most downloaded browser, Google Chrome, against an increasingly popular Chromium browser known as Brave, said to offer privacy-by-default. With increasing forensic caseloads, data complexity, and requirements for method validation to satisfy ISO 17025 accreditation, recognising the similarities and differences between the browsers, developed on the same underlying technology is essential. The paper describes a series of conducted experiments and subsequent analysis to identify artefacts created as part of normal user browsing activity. Analysis of the artefacts found that Brave and Chrome share almost identical data structures, with on-disk artefact recovery successful, even for deleted data. The outcome of this research, based upon the results, serves to enrich understanding and provide best practice for practitioners and software developers, respectively responsible for examining Chromium artefacts for use in evidence production and developing new forensic tools and techniques.","PeriodicalId":43224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15394/jdfsl.2022.1752","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Digital forensic practitioners are tasked with the identification, recovery, and analysis of Internet browser artefacts which may have been used in the pursuit of committing a civil or criminal offence. This research paper critically compares the most downloaded browser, Google Chrome, against an increasingly popular Chromium browser known as Brave, said to offer privacy-by-default. With increasing forensic caseloads, data complexity, and requirements for method validation to satisfy ISO 17025 accreditation, recognising the similarities and differences between the browsers, developed on the same underlying technology is essential. The paper describes a series of conducted experiments and subsequent analysis to identify artefacts created as part of normal user browsing activity. Analysis of the artefacts found that Brave and Chrome share almost identical data structures, with on-disk artefact recovery successful, even for deleted data. The outcome of this research, based upon the results, serves to enrich understanding and provide best practice for practitioners and software developers, respectively responsible for examining Chromium artefacts for use in evidence production and developing new forensic tools and techniques.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
勇敢的浏览器和谷歌铬法医文物的关键比较
数字法医从业者的任务是识别、恢复和分析可能被用于实施民事或刑事犯罪的互联网浏览器人工制品。这篇研究论文对下载最多的浏览器b谷歌Chrome和日益流行的Chrome浏览器Brave进行了批判性的比较,后者据说提供默认隐私保护。随着越来越多的取证案件、数据复杂性和满足ISO 17025认证的方法验证要求的增加,识别基于相同底层技术开发的浏览器之间的异同是至关重要的。本文描述了一系列进行的实验和随后的分析,以识别作为正常用户浏览活动的一部分创建的人工制品。对伪产物的分析发现,Brave和Chrome共享几乎相同的数据结构,磁盘上的伪产物恢复成功,甚至对于删除的数据也是如此。这项研究的结果,基于结果,有助于丰富理解,并为从业者和软件开发人员提供最佳实践,分别负责检查用于证据生产的Chromium人工制品和开发新的法医工具和技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law
Journal of Digital Forensics Security and Law COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
A CRITICAL COMPARISON OF BRAVE BROWSER AND GOOGLE CHROME FORENSIC ARTEFACTS Fault Lines In The Application Of International Humanitarian Law To Cyberwarfare To License or Not to License Reexamined: An Updated Report on Licensing of Digital Examiners Under State Private Investigator Statutes Forensic Discoverability of iOS Vault Applications A Combined Approach For Private Indexing Mechanism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1