http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2007/05/cellphone_forensics

Courts Cast Wary Eye on Evidence Gleaned From Cell Phones
Annalee Newitz Email 05.10.07 | 2:00 AM

The afternoon of Sept. 18, 1993, someone set fire to a notorious Los
Angeles drug house near the University of Southern California, killing an
addict. Four years later, R&B singer Waymond Anderson was convicted of the
murder, based on the shaky testimony of two eyewitnesses, and on a third,
silent witness whose implacable digital testimony the defense didn't dare
challenge: Anderson's cell phone.

A police forensics expert told the jury that call logs proved Anderson was
in the neighborhood at the time of the murder, and that he even made a
phone call through a cell tower located just a quarter-mile from the
blaze. Anderson's lawyer didn't attempt to question what was then
bleeding-edge scientific evidence. "Nobody challenged the officer in the
investigation," says David Bernstein, Anderson's new attorney. "Probably
because cell phones were such a new technology."

Now down 13 years on a life sentence, Anderson has his first shot at
freedom. The two eyewitnesses have recanted. And using information about
cell-phone tower locations with some sleuthing on MapQuest, Bernstein
recently showed an appeals court that Anderson's cell phone was in a car
driving away from the site of the crime at the time the arsonist was
splashing gasoline around the converted garage. The closest transmitter
the phone passed was a mile away from the crime, not a quarter-mile as the
police claimed; and by the time the fire was hurling black smoke into the
south Los Angeles sky, Anderson's phone was linking with a different
transmitter six miles away, in Chinatown.

Based on this new information, a three-judge panel of the California 2nd
District Court of Appeal ordered the case reopened last month, and gave
the Los Angeles court that convicted Anderson until August to hold
hearings on the new evidence, or release Anderson.

The Anderson appeal may be the first chink in the formerly invincible
armor of cell-phone forensics at trial. Over the past decade, law
enforcement at all levels has been turning to mobile gear for crucial
evidence in criminal and civil investigations. "One of the first things
that's looked at is a cell phone now," explained National Institute of
Standards and Technology researcher Wayne Jansen. But with unclear
forensic standards for gathering such evidence, and investigators often
resorting to ad hoc tools and procedures, cell data seems likely to face
new hurdles in the courtroom.

It's easy to see the appeal of cell-phone evidence. The memory cards in
the phones are packed with useful information: everything from contact
lists and SMS messages -- including deleted text -- to call logs, and data
about locations where the phone has been, all of which can be readily
accessed with the right software and a court order. And with the advent of
camera phones capable of snapping photos and saving short video snippets,
the cell phone is morphing into a one-stop multimedia evidence kit.

"People seem to take joy in recording their crimes to their mobiles," said
Lester Wilson, managing director of Crownhill, a company that makes a
forensic tool for snarfing evidence off SIM cards in cell phones.
"Anything you can think of -- street robbery, kidnapping, sex crimes --
they're taking pictures," said Wilson, whose work for the London police
has required him to extract data from SIM cards "covered in blood, or
bitten."

In 2005, two high-profile murder cases were solved with cell evidence.
Piper Roundtree was convicted of killing her ex-husband after examination
of her phone placed her in his vicinity at the time of the murder; and
Daryl Littlejohn, a New York City bouncer, was convicted of murdering
student Imette St. Guillen after his cell showed that he'd made a call on
the night of the murder near the spot where police later located the body.
And it's not always the perp whose phone holds the evidence, said Wilson.
"Say you find a dead body in a river. Using forensic techniques on their
mobile, you can locate where they were thrown in the water, because that's
probably the moment the phone stopped working."

According to the GfK Group, an international market-research organization,
1 billion cell phones were sold worldwide in 2006 -- up from 812 million
in 2005. Shadowing that growth is a niche industry specializing in selling
mobile-forensics tools to police and others. Amber Schroader, CEO and
chief architect at Utah-based Paragen said her company's most popular
product is such a tool, called Device Seizure. "We sell hundreds of units
per month, mostly to law enforcement," she said. Using Device Seizure, or
dozens of other software packages like it, law enforcement officers can
instantly drag and drop data from phones into tamper-proof evidence files.

But many of the tools that investigators use to extract evidence are not
designed to be forensically sound; put simply, they don't always have
built-in features to prevent evidence tampering. Oxygen's Mobile Phone
Manager is a phone-syncing tool that was used for at least two years by
law enforcement to gather evidence. But it wasn't until April that the
company released a tamper-resistant "forensic" version of the software
that saves a cryptographic hash of the data it sucks from a cell phone,
allowing investigators to later verify that nothing's changed.

How did Oxygen's law enforcement users secure the chain of custody in data
before Oxygen Forensic? Company spokesman Oleg Fedorov wrote in e-mail, "I
can't say precisely how they protected data from tampering. I can only
suggest they didn't change any information and didn't press the 'Write'
button."

Another problem is that the market is glutted with so many different types
of cell phones, so there will always be some models for which no existing
forensic tools work. In that case, "Sometimes the best tools are hacker
tools, as long as they've been thoroughly examined and
reverse-engineered," said Jansen, who helped write NIST's official
recommendations (.pdf) for documenting the chain of evidence and creating
tamper-proof files when searching a cell phone.

Even the best forensic practices will face a daunting challenge as more
complex mobiles become vulnerable to tampering before they're seized as
evidence. It's relatively easy for an adversary with a bluetooth device to
plant new addresses in a bluetooth-enabled phone's contact list, or even
place bogus calls from the phone. Keith Thomas, a cell-phone forensics
expert with First Advantage Litigation-Consulting, said this is where the
real problem for investigators will begin -- when courts start to realize
that evidence from cell phones isn't any more foolproof than what's found
on computers.

"There is always a question about who put stuff on your computer," Thomas
said. "But on a cell, it's nothing but personalized -- you can get the
telephone numbers the person called and verify when that person was on the
phone. For right now there are less questions about who had access to the
phone." But, he acknowledged, there will be more, "as soon as people
realize there are other means of putting data on the phone."

 Barry Wellman
 _____________________________________________________________________

  Barry Wellman   S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology   NetLab Director
  Centre for Urban & Community Studies          University of Toronto
  455 Spadina Avenue    Toronto Canada M5S 2G8    fax:+1-416-978-7162
  wellman at chass.utoronto.ca  http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
            For fun -- updating songs, movies and history:
            http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php
            Elvis wouldn't be singing Return to Sender now
 _____________________________________________________________________



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"mobile-society" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/mobile-society?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to