Dealing with temporal inconsistency in automated computer forensic profiling

Computer profiling is the automated forensic examination of a computer system in order to provide a human investigator with a characterisation of the activities that have taken place on that system. As part of this process, the logical components of the computer system – components such as users, files and applications - are enumerated and the relationships between them discovered and reported. This information is enriched with traces of historical activity drawn from system logs and from evidence of events found in the computer file system. A potential problem with the use of such information is that some of it may be inconsistent and contradictory thus compromising its value. This work examines the impact of temporal inconsistency in such information and discusses two types of temporal inconsistency that may arise – inconsistency arising out of the normal errant behaviour of a computer system, and inconsistency arising out of deliberate tampering by a suspect – and techniques for dealing with inconsistencies of the latter kind. We examine the impact of deliberate tampering through experiments conducted with prototype computer profiling software. Based on the results of these experiments, we discuss techniques which can be employed in computer profiling to deal with such temporal inconsistencies

Evaluating the role and impact of forensic DNA profiling on key areas of the criminal justice system

University of Technology, Sydney. Faculty of Science.The advent of the modem technique of forensic DNA profiling has resulted in a lively union between one of the more advanced and dynamic disciplines of modern science and what is, arguably, society's most revered, influential and complex institution, the criminal justice system (CJS). The alliance, begun over 20 years ago, has been fruitful in obvious ways. There has been profound technological advancement, and astonishing policing outcomes. But the years have also brought strains, evidenced in the on-going, and sometimes bitter, socio-legal controversy. The sheer pace of the developments surrounding DNA profiling, and the scope of its impact, have meant that the forensic and legal agencies associated with its use have often been able to do little more than fight a rearguard action when it came to handling the pressures and complexities they faced. This has been particularly the case since the use of forensic DNA databases began expanding so notably around the globe. Managing the demand for the forensic technology, and its remarkable potential has required an unprecedented commitment of public funds. Both forensic and police operational practices have had to be modified. And very close attention has been called for on the part of judicial and legislative bodies in states and countries everywhere. Given the circumstances in which this substantial progress has occurred, the capacity of the forensic community to undertake reasoned strategic assessment of the future implications of change has been severely restricted. In fact, there has been a lack of reflection, and far too little evaluation of the outcomes of developmental efforts and achievements. The focus of the forensic community has been consumed with meeting the immediate demands and implementing the next generation of technology. No matter how understandable it might be, this situation is unfortunate. Over recent years the field of forensic DNA profiling has matured from being an obscure, niche discipline to become a mainstream, public-good science. The technological platform for it and its operational scope have both broadened notably; and the socio-legal ramifications of its use have intensified. This vast increase in the scale and complexity of the operational context of the forensic DNA discipline makes it imperative that the forensic community understand its role in a more holistic sense so as to have a greater level of influence over its future impact. Achieving this requires developing a deeper awareness of the contextual environment within which forensic DNA profiling is applied. This research sets out to undertake such an evaluation. Its aim is to take a system-wide view of the role and impact of forensic DNA profiling on key areas of the CJS

Bodies of Science and Law: Forensic DNA Profiling, Biological Bodies, and Biopower

How is jurisdiction transferred from an individual's biological body to agents of power such as the police, public prosecutor and judiciary, and what happens to these biological bodies when transformed from private into public objects? These questions are examined by analyzing bodies situated at the intersection of science and law. More specifically, the transformation of 'private bodies' into 'public bodies' shall be analyzed by going into the details of forensic DNA profiling in the Dutch jurisdiction. It will be argued that various 'forensic genetic practices' enact different 'forensic genetic bodies'. These enacted forensic genetic bodies are connected with various infringements of civil rights, which become articulated in exploring these forensic genetic bodies' 'normative registers'

Trumping communitarianism: crime control and forensic DNA typing and databasing in Singapore

Liberalism and communitarianism have figured prominently in discussions of how to govern forensic DNA practices (forensic DNA typing and databasing). Despite the prominence of these two political philosophies and their underlying values, no studies have looked at the governance of forensic DNA practices in a nondemocratic country governed by a communitarian logic. To fill this lacuna in the literature, this article considers Singapore as an authoritarian state governed by a communitarian philosophy. The article highlights basic innovations and technologies of forensic DNA practices and articulates a liberal democratic version of “biolegality” as described by Michael Lynch and Ruth McNally. It goes on to consider briefly various (political) philosophies (liberalism and communitarianism) and law enforcement models (due process and crime control models). The main part of the article records the trajectory, and hence biolegal progress, of forensic DNA practices in Singapore and compares it with trajectories in England and the United States. The article concludes that Singapore's forensic DNA practices are organized according to the crime control model and therefore safety and the war against crime and terrorism trump individual rights and legal principles such as privacy, bodily integrity, proportionality, presumption of innocence. and onus of proof

Multiplex STR amplification sensitivity in a silicon microchip

The demand for solutions to perform forensic DNA profiling outside of centralized laboratories is increasing. We here demonstrate highly sensitive STR amplification using a silicon micro-PCR (mu PCR) chip. Exploiting industry-standard semiconductor manufacturing processes, a device was fabricated that features a small form factor thanks to an integrated heating element covering three parallel micro-reactors with a reaction volume of 0.5 mu l each. Diluted reference DNA samples (1 ng-31 pg) were amplified on the mu PCR chip using the forensically validated AmpFISTR Identifier Plus kit, followed by conventional capillary electrophoresis. Complete STR profiles were generated with input DNA quantities down to 62 pg. Occasional allelic dropouts were observed from 31 pg downward. On-chip STR profiles were compared with those of identical samples amplified using a conventional thermal cycler for direct comparison of amplification sensitivity in a forensic setting. The observed sensitivity was in line with kit specifications for both mu PCR and conventional PCR. Finally, a rapid amplification protocol was developed. Complete STR profiles could be generated in less than 17 minutes from as little as 125 pg template DNA. Together, our results are an important step towards the development of commercial, mass-produced, relatively cheap, handheld devices for on-site testing in forensic DNA analysis

Performing the Union: the Prüm Decision and the European dream

In 2005, seven European countries signed the so-called Prüm Treaty to increase transnational collaboration in combating international crime, terrorism and illegal immigration. Three years later, the Treaty was adopted into EU law. EU member countries are obliged to have systems in place to allow authorities of other member states access to nationally held data on DNA, fingerprints, and vehicles by August 2011. In this paper, we discuss the conditions of possibility for the Prüm network to emerge, and argue that rather than a linear story of technological and political convergence and harmonisation, the (hi)story of Prüm is heterogeneous and patchy. This is reflected also in the early stages of implementing the Prüm Decision which proves to be more difficult than it was hoped by the drivers of the Prüm process. In this sense, the Prüm network sits uncomfortably with success stories of forensic science (many of which served the goal of justifying the expansion of technological and surveillance systems). Instead of telling a story of heroic science, the story of Prüm articulates the European dream: One in which goods, services, and people live and travel freely and securely