Social media has become a notable source of potential forensic evidence, with social media giant Facebook being a primary source of interest. With over 1.35 billion monthly active users as of September 30, 2014 , Facebook is considered the largest social networking platform.
Kivu is finding that forensic collection of Facebook (and other sources of social media evidence) can be a significant challenge because of these factors:
1. Facebook content is not a set of static files, but rather a collection of rendered database content and active programmatic scripts. It’s an interactive application delivered to users via a web-browser. Each page of delivered Facebook content is uniquely created for a user on a specific device and browser. Ignoring the authentication and legal evidentiary issues, screen prints or PDF printouts of Facebook web pages often do not suffice for collecting this type of information – they simply miss parts of what would have been visible to the user – including, interestingly the unique ads that were tailored to the specific user because of their preferences and prior viewing habits.
2. Most forensic collection tools have limitations in the capture of active Internet content, and this includes Facebook. Specialized tools, such as X1 Social Discovery and PageFreezer, can record and preserve Internet content, but gaps remain in the use of such tools. The forensic collection process must adapt to address the gaps (e.g., X1 Social Discovery does not capture all forms of video).
Below are guidelines that we at Kivu have developed for collecting Facebook account content as forensic evidence:
1. Identify the account or accounts that will be collected – Determine whether or not the custodian has provided their Facebook account credentials. If no credentials have been provided, the investigation is a “public collection” – that is, the collection needs to be based on what a Facebook user who is not “friends” with the target individual (or friends with any of the target individual’s friends, depending on how the target individual has set up their privacy settings) can access. If credentials have been provided, it is considered a “private collection, ” and the investigator will need to confirm the scope of the collection with attorneys or the client, including what content to collect.
2. Verify the ownership of the account – Verifying an online presence through a collection tool as well as a web browser is a good way to validate the presence of the target account.
3. Identify whether friends’ details will be collected.
4. Determine the scope of collection – (e.g. the entire account or just photos).
5. Determine how to perform the collection – which tool or combination of tools will be most effective? Make sure that that your tool of choice can access and view the target profile. The tool X-1 Social Discovery, for example, uses the Facebool API to collect information from Facebook. The Facebook API is documented and provides a foundation for consistent collection versus a custom-built application that may not be entirely validated. Further, Facebook collections from other sources such as cached Google pages provide a method of cross-validating the data targeted for collection.
6. Identify gaps in the collection methodology.
a. If photos are of importance and there is a large volume of photos to be collected, a batch script that can export all photos of interest can speed up the collection process. One method of doing so is a mouse recording tool.
b. Videos do not render properly while being downloaded for preservation, aeven when using forensic capture tools such as X-1 Social Discovery. If videos are an integral part of an investigation, the investigator will need to capture videos in their native format in addition to testing any forensic collection tool. It should be noted that there are tools such as downvids.net to download the videos, and these tools in combination with forensic collection tools such as X-1 Social Discovery provide the capability to authenticate and preserve video-based evidence.
7. Define the best method to deliver the collection – If there are several hundred photos to collect, determine whether all photos can be collected. Identify whether an automated screen capture method is needed.
8. If the collection is ongoing (e.g., once a week), define the recurring collection parameters.
Kivu is a licensed California private investigations firm, which combines technical and legal expertise to deliver investigative, discovery and forensic solutions worldwide. Author Katherine Delude is a Digital Forensic Analyst in Kivu’s San Francisco office. To learn more about forensically preserving Facebook content, please contact Kivu.
 http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/ Accessed 11 December 2014.
Share This Article