Extending digital repository architectures to support disk image preservation and access

ABSTRACT

Disk images (bitstreams extracted from physical media) can play an essential role in the acquisition and management of digital collections by serving as containers that support data integrity and chain of custody, while ensuring continued access to the underlying bits without depending on physical carriers. Widely used today by practitioners of digital forensics, disk images can serve as baselines for comparison for digital preservation activities, as they provide fail-safe mechanisms when curatorial actions make unexpected changes to data; enable access to potentially valuable data that resides below the file system level; and provide options for future analysis. We discuss established digital forensics techniques for acquiring, preserving and annotating disk images, provide examples from both research and educational collections, and describe specific forensic tools and techniques, including an object-oriented data packaging framework called the Advanced Forensic Format (AFF) and the Digital Forensics XML (DFXML) metadata representation.

References

1. Alink, W. 2005. XIRAF: An XML-IR Approach to Digital Forensics. Master's thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands, October 21.
2. Caloyannides, M. A. 2006. Digital 'evidence' is often evidence of nothing. In Digital Crime and Forensic Science in Cyberspace, pages 334--339. Idea Group Pub., Hershey, PA.
3. Caplan, Priscilla. 2009. Understanding PREMIS: an overview of the PREMIS Data Dictionary for Preservation Metadata. Library of Congress. February.
4. Carrier, B. D. 2006. A Hypothesis-Based Approach to Digital Forensic Investigations. Doctoral Thesis. Purdue University.
5. Chaski, C. 2007. The Keyboard Dilemma and Authorship Identification. In P. Craiger and S. Shenoi, editors, Advances in Digital Forensics III: IFIP International Conference on Digital Forensics, National Center for Forensic Science, Orlando, Florida, January 28-January 31. Volume 242 of IFIP International Federation for Information Processing. Springer, New York, NY.
6. Cohen, F. 2008. Metrics for digital forensics. In Mini-MetriCon.
7. Cohen, M.I., Garfinkel, S., and Schatz, B, 2009. Extending the Advanced Forensic Format to Accommodate Multiple Data Sources, Logical Evidence, Arbitrary Information and Forensic Workflow. In Proceedings of DFRWS 2009. Montreal, Canada.
8. Elford D., Pozo, N.D., Mihajlovic, S., Pearson, D., Clifton, G., and Webb, C. 2008. Media matters: developing processes for preserving digital objects on physical carriers at the National Library of Australia. In 74th IFLA General Conference and Council, Quebec, Canada, August 10--14.
9. Entlich, R. and Buckley, E. 2006. Digging up bits of the past: Hands-on with obsolescence. RLG DigiNews, 10(5).
10. Farmer, D. and Venema, W. 2005. Forensic Discovery. Addison-Wesley, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
11. Frohlich, D. and Kraut, R. 2003. The social context of home computing. In,Inside the Smart Home, pages 127--162. Springer, London.
12. Garfinkel, S. and Cox, D. 2009. Finding and archiving the internet footprint. In First Digital Lives Research Conference: Personal Digital Archives for the 21st Century, London, UK, February 9--11.
13. Garfinkel, S., Farrell, P., Roussev, V., and Dinolt, G. 2009. Bringing science to digital forensics with standardized forensic corpora. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual Digital Forensic Research Workshop, Montreal, Canada, August 17--19.
14. Garfinkel, S. L. 2009. Providing cryptographic security and evidentiary chain-of-custody with the advanced forensic format, library, and tools. International Journal of Digital Crime and Forensics, 1(1):1--28, January-March.
15. Garfinkel, S. L. and Shelat, A. 2003. Remembrance of data passed: A study of disk sanitization practices. IEEE Security and Privacy, 1, 1727.
16. Garfinkel, S. 2009. Automating Disk Forensic Processing with SleuthKit, XML and Python, Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensics Engineering (IEEE/SADFE 2009), Oakland, California.
17. Hedstrom, M.L., Lee, C.A., Olson, J.S. and Lampe, C.A. 2006. -The old version flickers more': Digital Preservation from the User's Perspective. American Archivist, 69 (1). 159--187.
18. John, J. L. 2008. Adapting existing technologies for digitally archiving personal lives: Digital forensics, ancestral computing, and evolutionary perspectives and tools. In Proceedings of The Fifth International Conference on Preservation of Digital Objects (iPRES 2008), London, UK, September 29--30.
19. John, J.L., Rowlands, I., Williams, P., and Dean, K. 2010. Digital Lives: Personal Digital Archives for the 21st Century: an Initial Synthesis. 2010.
20. Kirschenbaum, M. G. 2008. Mechanisms: new media and the forensic imagination. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
21. Kirschenbaum, M. G., Ovenden, R. and Redwine, G. 2010. Digital Forensics and Born-Digital Content in Cultural Heritage Collections. Council on Library and Information Resources, Washington, DC.
22. Lavagnino, J. 1996. The analytical bibliography of electronic texts. In Joint annual conference of the Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing and the Association for Computers and the Humanities, pages 180--182, Bergen, Norway.
23. Lee, C. 2011. A conceptual framework for contextual information in digital collections. Journal of Documentation, 67, 1 (2011), 95--143.
24. Lee, C. 2010., Automation in Digital Preservation - Computer-Supported Elicitation of Curatorial Intent., In Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 10291,
25. McDonough, J.P. 2011. Packaging Videogames for Long-Term Preservation: Integrating FRBR and the OAIS Reference Model. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (1). 171--184.
26. Oltmans, E., Van Diessen, R.J. and Wijngaarden, H.V. 2004. Preservation Functionality in a Digital Archive. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL 2004). Tucson, Arizona, June 7--11, 2004, ACM Press, New York, NY, 2004, 279--286.
27. Rosenthal, D.S.H. 2010. Format obsolescence: assessing the threat and the defenses. Library Hi Tech, 28(2), 195--210.
28. Ross, S. and Gow, A. 1999. Digital archaeology: Rescuing neglected and damaged data resources. Technical Report British Library Research and Innovation Report 108, British Library, London, February.
29. Schellenberg, T.R. 1956. The appraisal of modern records. Bulletins of the National Archives, 8, October.
30. Thibodeau, K. 2002. Overview of technological approaches to digital preservation and challenges in coming years. In The State of Digital Preservation: An International Perspective, pages 4--31. Council on Library and Information Resources.
31. Underwood, W.E. and Laib, S.L. 2007. PERPOS: An Electronic Records Repository and Archival Processing System. International Symposium on Digital Curation (DigCCurr 2007), Chapel Hill, NC, April 18--20.
32. Underwood, W., Hayslett, M., Isbell, S., Laib, S., Sherrill, S., and Underwood, M. 2009. Advanced Decision Support for Archival Processing of Presidential Electronic Records: Final Scientific and Technical Report. Technical Report ITTL/CSITD 09-05. October.
33. Woods, K. and Brown, G. 2008. Migration performance for legacy data access. International Journal of Digital Curation, 3(2), 74--88.
34. Woods, K. and Brown, G. 2009. From imaging to access - effective preservation of legacy removable media. In Archiving 2009: Preservation Strategies and Imaging Technologies for Cultural Heritage Institutions and Memory Organizations: Final Program and Proceedings, pages 213--218. Society for Imaging Science and Technology, Springfield, VA.
35. Woodyard, D. 2001. Data recovery and providing access to digital manuscripts. In Information Online 2001 Conference, Syndney, Australia, January 16--18.

Index Terms

• Applied computing

  • Computers in other domains

    • Digital libraries and archives

• Information systems

  • Information retrieval

    • Document representation

      • Document collection models

  • Information systems applications

    • Digital libraries and archives