10.1145/3098954.3104053acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaresConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Forensic State Acquisition from Internet of Things (FSAIoT): A general framework and practical approach for IoT forensics through IoT device state acquisition

Authors Info & Claims
Published:29 August 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

IoT device forensics is a difficult problem given that manufactured IoT devices are not standardized, many store little to no historical data, and are always connected; making them extremely volatile. The goal of this paper was to address these challenges by presenting a primary account for a general framework and practical approach we term Forensic State Acquisition from Internet of Things (FSAIoT). We argue that by leveraging the acquisition of the state of IoT devices (e.g. if an IoT lock is open or locked), it becomes possible to paint a clear picture of events that have occurred. To this end, FSAIoT consists of a centralized Forensic State Acquisition Controller (FSAC) employed in three state collection modes: controller to IoT device, controller to cloud, and controller to controller. We present a proof of concept implementation using openHAB -- a device agnostic open source IoT device controller -- and self-created scripts, to resemble a FSAC implementation. Our proof of concept employed an Insteon IP Camera as a controller to device test, an Insteon Hub as a controller to controller test, and a nest thermostat for a a controller to cloud test. Our findings show that it is possible to practically pull forensically relevant state data from IoT devices. Future work and open research problems are shared.

References

  1. Tamas Abraham and Olivier de Vel. 2002. Investigative profiling with computer forensic log data and association rules. In Data Mining, 2002. ICDM 2003. Proceedings. 2002 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 11--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Ibrahim Baggili, Jeff Oduro, Kyle Anthony, Frank Breitinger, and Glenn McGee. 2015. Watch what you wear: preliminary forensic analysis of smart watches. In Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES), 2015 10th International Conference on. IEEE, 303--311. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Konstantia Barmpatsalou, Dimitrios Damopoulos, Georgios Kambourakis, and Vasilios Katos. 2013. A critical review of 7 years of Mobile Device Forensics. Digital Investigation 10, 4 (2013), 323--349. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Simson L Garfinkel. 2010. Digital forensics research: The next 10 years. digital investigation 7 (2010), S64--S73. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Pavel Gladyshev and Ahmed Patel. 2004. Finite state machine approach to digital event reconstruction. Digital Investigation 1, 2 (2004), 130--149. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Sharon P Hall and Eric Anderson. 2009. Operating systems for mobile computing. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges 25, 2 (2009), 64--71. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Vikram S Harichandran, Frank Breitinger, Ibrahim Baggili, and Andrew Marrington. 2016. A cyber forensics needs analysis survey: Revisiting the domain's needs a decade later. Computers & Security 57 (2016), 1--13. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Andrew Marrington, Ibrahim Baggili, George Mohay, and Andrew Clark. 2011. CAT Detect (Computer Activity Timeline Detection): A tool for detecting inconsistency in computer activity timelines. digital investigation 8 (2011), S52--S61. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Edewede Oriwoh, David Jazani, Gregory Epiphaniou, and Paul Sant. 2013. Internet of Things Forensics: Challenges and approaches. In Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (Collaboratecom), 2013 9th International Conference Conference on. IEEE, 608--615.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Edewede Oriwoh and Paul Sant. 2013. The forensics edge management system: A concept and design. In Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, 2013 IEEE 10th International Conference on and 10th International Conference on Autonomic and Trusted Computing (UIC/ATC). IEEE, 544--550. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Joseph Ricci, Ibrahim Baggili, and Frank Breitinger. 2016. Watch What You Wear: Smartwatches and. Managing Security Issues and the Hidden Dangers of Wearable Technologies (2016), 47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Ting Sang. 2013. A log based approach to make digital forensics easier on cloud computing. In Intelligent System Design and Engineering Applications (ISDEA), 2013 Third International Conference on. IEEE, 91--94. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Shams Zawoad and Ragib Hasan. 2015. FAIoT: Towards Building a Forensics Aware Eco System for the Internet of Things. In Services Computing (SCC), 2015 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 279--284. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Ben Zhang, Nitesh Mor, John Kolb, Douglas S Chan, Ken Lutz, Eric Allman, John Wawrzynek, Edward A Lee, and John Kubiatowicz. 2015. The Cloud is Not Enough: Saving IoT from the Cloud. In HotCloud. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader
About Cookies On This Site

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

Learn more

Got it!