Seven out of ten judicial cases put the procedure at risk due to vulnerabilities in the chain of custody of the evidence, either because of the challenges involved in their acquisition, transfer or by the multiplicity of processes and responsible responsible. This is what he points out Lazarus Technologyglobal cybersecurity provider and digital forensic analysis in Europe that has managed more than 700 cases and research.
The company warns – in any case – that the alteration or artificial generation of tests is a more common practice in the litigation of what can be expected. This requires that contextualization processes must be increasingly rigorous and safe. Especially when 99% of cases have research approaches that could be optimized, need for greater contextualization, advice that can be strengthened or reports that require greater precision.
In order to ensure the chain of custody and avoid contamination of evidence and, by extension, of judicial cases, Lazarus has just released in San Sebastián de los Reyes a unique integrated center in Europe, which includes the largest forensic laboratory in the Continent, a SOC security operations center for cybersecurity and a legal area.
Without great forensic laboratories: not even Big Four
The industry, even the Big Four, lacks an adequate infrastructure to process large volumes of evidence with guarantees. This is one of the main reasons that hides behind these deficiencies in the qualities of the expertise, increasingly complex due to the huge amount of data that are handled in a judicial case. The average is 2.5 million files analyzed by device.
However, the question is to know which are those that contain relevant and useful information for the scenario to be analyzed, how they interrelate with each other, and how all these metadata are generated. All this is only possible with a great forensic laboratory with technology designed to guarantee the chain of custody, the integrity of the information and traceability of each intervention in a device. This allows processing with forensic standards, ensuring its admissibility in trial.
“Automated” expert reports but with many shortcomings
The automation of processes for the use of technological tools has made the analytical criteria and the depth in the interpretation of the evidence in many expert documents. The paradox is given that, although technology improves, most reports are getting worse.
In this context, according to Lazarus Technology, it is essential to hybridize the latest technology with forensic analysis and Expertise of judicial experts and multidisciplinary analysts that understand the context of each case; ensuring that each report is understandable, solid and defensible before a court.
Dispersed research: everything that does not contribute
An effective and efficient analysis does not consist in extracting all the content of a device, but also focusing on the research on the relevant data in the case and solving doubts regarding the reason why it has been required. Excess information can generate confusion or even weaken the test, falling into the most common error of forensic computer science: uselessly fattening reports.
For Lazarus Technology, this requires applying criteria for relevance and forensic relevance to rule out irrelevant data and focus on what really provides probative value.
A bad advice: lawyers who ask for unassumable or disproportionate measures
The advice of an expert must focus on the facts to be analyzed. Many judicial procedures are hindered by unfeasible technical requests, either because they are disproportionate, either because data is requested that cannot be recovered or that are not relevant to the case. This, in law, is considered as ‘diabolical test’.
Lazarus defends the need to work hand in hand with law firms and prosecutors, helping them correctly focus their requests, avoiding ineffective, reckless requests and optimizing the use of the digital evidence to strengthen their legal strategy.
The incorrect identification of the scenarios leads to error
It is very important to correctly identify the origins of information. A common error in digital expertise is not to understand the context in which the data were generated and stored. Not all digital records are equal or have the same probative weight.
According to Lazarus Technology criteria, it is essential to carry out an exhaustive work of identification and contextualization of digital evidence, ensuring that the source of the data is legitimate, verifiable and useful for research, discarding any attempt at manipulation or decontextualization. This issue is common in communications certification or analysis processes via mail or WhatsApp.
The CEO of Lazarus Technology, Manuel Huerta, comments that “what differentiates us from Europe is our capacity for technological and analytical integration, with a predictive forensic and preventive forensic approach in the market. Our laboratories are equipped with advanced technology in recovery and analysis and analysis of data, allowing our customers to detect, prevent and act before any digital threat more quickly and precision. “
#judicial #cases #errors #chain #custody #tests
