Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines |
|
| Trimester | T2 2018 |
| Unit Code | MN613 |
| Unit Title | Computer Forensics |
| Assessment
Type |
Individual Assignment |
| Assessment
Title |
Validating and Testing Computer Forensics Tools and Evidence |
| Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) | This assignment assesses the following Unit Learning Outcomes; students should be able to demonstrate their achievements in them.
a) Develop and implement computer forensics investigative procedures b) Conduct and evaluate the systematic collection of evidence at private- sector incident scenes c) Discuss and analyse computer forensics findings |
| Weight | 15% |
| Total Marks | 90 |
| Word limit | Max 2000 words |
| Due Date | Friday, 31st Aug, 2018, 11:55 PM. (Week 7) |
| Submission Guidelines | · All work must be submitted on Moodle by the due date along with a title Page.
· The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font and 2.54 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings. · Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using IEEE referencing style. |
| Extension | · If an extension of time to submit work is required, a Special Consideration Application must be submitted directly on AMS. You must submit this application three working days prior to the due date of the assignment. Further information is available at:
http://www.mit.edu.au/about–mit/institute–publications/policies– |
| Academic Misconduct | · Academic Misconduct is a serious offence. Depending on the seriousness of the case, penalties can vary from a written warning or zero marks to exclusion from the course or rescinding the degree. Students should make themselves familiar with the full policy and procedure available at: http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies- procedures-and-guidelines/Plagiarism-Academic-Misconduct-Policy- Procedure. For further information, please refer to the Academic Integrity
Section in your Unit Description. |
The assessment requires the students to acquire data from a drive, perform data recovery using different computer forensics techniques and tools, analysing it and finally performing the validation of acquired data. The students are required to submit a report. Follow the marking guide to prepare your report.
Prepare a report on the following sections. You can use your own USB, create/delete files and perform computer forensics.
The file should also contain the following sentence: “I have enrolled for MN613 Computer Forensic.” followed by your full name and the the date when you registered for this unit.
Section 1: Data Acquisition
Prepare a forensic image (bit stream copy) with the record of data deletion. Explain the method and tool you used for acquiring data. You will need this image to perform the consecutive tasks. Please submit this image with your assignment.
Use ProDiscover basic to recover deleted images. In your report, include screenshot for each steps.
Inspect all files in the USB, use a hex editor and analyse if there is any hidden data in files. Provide screenshots of your analysis.
Explain different methods of data validation and use one of them to validate data on USB.
Case Study II: Investing a Case
You’re investigating a case involving a 2 GB drive that you need to copy at the scene. Write one page description of three options you have to copy the drive accurately. Be sure to include your software and media choices.
Marks are allocated as follows:
| Section to be
included in the report |
Description | Marks |
| Acquiring data using a standard tool | 10 | |
| Explanation of acquisitions and screenshots | 10 | |
| Data recovery from USB and explanation | 10 | |
| Case Study I: | Data recovery from recycle bin and explanation
Data analysis of all file in USB using Hex Editor |
10
10 |
| Data validation with explanation | 10 | |
| Writing quality, Coherence, Report Structure | 10 | |
| 10 | ||
| -Write three options you have to copy the drive accurately. | ||
| Case Study II | ||
| -Write clear conclusion of the case study. | ||
| 10 | ||
| Total | 90 |
Marks are allocated as in the marking criteria but we consider the following.
| Grade Mark | HD 80%+ | D 70%-79% | CR 60%-69% | P 50%-59% | Fail
< 50% |
| Excellent | Very Good | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | |
|
Analysis |
Logic is clear and easy to follow with strong arguments | Consistency logical and convincing | Mostly consistent and convincing | Adequate cohesion and conviction | Argument is confused and disjointed |
|
Effort/Difficult ies/ Challenges |
The presented solution demonstrated an extreme degree of difficulty that would require an expert to implement. |
The presented solution demonstrated a high degree of difficulty that would be an advance professional to implement. | The presented solution demonstrated an average degree of difficulty that would be an average professional to implement. |
The presented solution demonstrated a low degree of difficulty that would be easy to implement. |
The presented solution demonstrated a poor degree of difficulty that would be too easy to implement. |
|
Explanation/ justification |
All elements are present and well integrated. | Components present with good cohesion | Components present and mostly well integrated |
Most components present |
Lacks structure. |
|
Reference style |
Clear styles with excellent source of references. |
Clear referencing/ style |
Generally good referencing/st yle |
Unclear referencing/style |
Lacks consistency with many errors |
|
Presentation |
Proper writing. Professionally presented |
Properly spoken, with some minor deficiencies |
Mostly good, but some structure or presentation problems |
Acceptable presentation |
Poor structure, careless presentation |
Order Now