Oddly, he left a message on my site after my last post about forensic spots
in Windows 7. I did not know it was Carvey till I looked up his email
address. Small world.

Adrian




On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Ken Pryor <[email protected]> wrote:

> Also, this was on Harlan Carvey's excellent blog today
> http://windowsir.blogspot.com/2009/08/timeline-creation-tools-posted.html
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Joel Folkerts <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> SANS recently posted an article discussing timeline creation and analysis
>> -
>> https://blogs.sans.org/computer-forensics/2009/08/13/artifact-timeline-creation-and-analysis-tool-release-log2timeline/
>>
>> -Joel
>>
>> "The path to hell is paved with good intentions."
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Nicholas B. <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> While it can create an issue when a user is able to modify timestamps
>>> those that they can't change for last access time can prove useful.
>>> These stamps can yield information on probs of files not actively
>>> looked at by others for evidence of probing for vulnerable
>>> configuration settings by a malicious user where they are unable to
>>> make modifucations to those files, but have read access to them.  This
>>> only works on filesystems that record that stamp and didn't
>>> shortsitedly disable it (ie Vista) for performance reasons and where
>>> automatic processes (indexing, virus scans, etc.) haven't run on them
>>> since the incident in question occurred.
>>>
>>> On 8/12/09, David Kovar <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Greetings,
>>> >
>>> > Timestamps are one clue to a subject's activity but are rarely the
>>> > smoking gun, for many reasons. They can be intentionally modified,
>>> > various automated processes can update them, the system's clock may be
>>> > off (intentionally or accidentally), various actions may not preserve
>>> > them, ....
>>> >
>>> > Used in conjunction with other information, file system or metadata
>>> > timestamps can be very useful. If the physical security log at the
>>> > front desk shows the subject entering the building 15 minutes before
>>> > they log on to the domain server and then the prefetch shows Limewire
>>> > running right after that, leading to files being created shortly after
>>> > that ....
>>> >
>>> > -David
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Jim Halfpenny<[email protected]
>>> >
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> Timestamps may matter a lot if you refute your role in download such
>>> >> niche bedtime reading. The old, "A virus must have downloaded it,"
>>> >> might have less credibillity if timestamps show the files to have been
>>> >> created over a considerable period of time.
>>> >>
>>> >> Remember that evidence in isolation may seem meaningless. If for
>>> >> example you have coroborating evidence from browser history, logs or
>>> >> ISP records timestamps might provide strong evidence.
>>> >>
>>> >> Jim
>>> >>
>>> >> On 12/08/2009, Grymoire <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>As the subject states, how much do file time stamp matter to a
>>> forensics
>>> >>>>case? If some one finds my collection of "Nazi albino midget Eskimo"
>>> >>>> porn,
>>> >>>>does it really mater what the date is?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I'm not a forensic expert, but as I understand it,
>>> >>> Timestamps help paint an accurate recreation of events.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> An expert describes a series of events, such as entries in the log
>>> >>> file, access times, modifications times, etc, registry entries, etc.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Some experts say that you can usually re-create an event even if
>>> >>> someone tries to hide their traces (i,e, modify timestamps). I think
>>> a
>>> >>> lot depends on the OS and logging capability.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> And if the log is stored on a centralized log server, hiding traces
>>> are
>>> >>> more difficult.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>> Pauldotcom mailing list
>>> >>> [email protected]
>>> >>> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>>> >>> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Sent from my mobile device
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Pauldotcom mailing list
>>> >> [email protected]
>>> >> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>>> >> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>>> >>
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Pauldotcom mailing list
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>>> > Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from my mobile device
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pauldotcom mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>>> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pauldotcom mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pauldotcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>
_______________________________________________
Pauldotcom mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com

Reply via email to