HOW YOU WOULD ORGANISE AN INVESTIGATION FOR A POTENTIAL FRAUD CASE

The primary theme of the paper is HOW YOU WOULD ORGANISE AN INVESTIGATION FOR A POTENTIAL FRAUD CASE in which you are required to emphasize its aspects in detail. The cost of the paper starts from $109 and it has been purchased and rated 4.9 points on the scale of 5 points by the students. To gain deeper insights into the paper and achieve fresh information, kindly contact our support.

Task 2: Case Project (5 Marks)

A distressed employee calls you because she has accidentally deleted crucial files from her hard drive and can’t retrieve them from the Recycle Bin. Describe the options or methods that you believe might be used to recover the files. Your solution may contain a list of questions to ask her about her system before you carry out your methods.

Deliverable: Write a 300-500 word report outlining the OS that the employee may be using, formulate interview questions that may help you to recover data, and highlight the possibility of data recovery in the report.

Task 3: Research Project (5 Marks)

As part of the duties of a digital forensics examiner, creating an investigation plan is a standard practice. Write a paper that describes how you would organise an investigation for a potential fraud case. Also, list the methods that you plan to use to validate collected data from storage devices such as MS Word, MS Excel and emails, with hashes. Specify the hash algorithm you plan to use, such as MD5 or SHA1.

Deliverable: Write a 300-500 word report that outlines standard investigation management and data validation methods.

Rationale

This assessment task covers digital crime, forensic process and procedures, data acquisition and validation, e-evidence, e-discovery tools and equipment. This assessment has been designed to ensure that you are engaging with the subject content on a regular basis. More specifically it seeks to assess your ability to:

determine the legal and ethical considerations for investigating and prosecuting digital crimes
formulate a digital forensics process
evaluate the technology in digital forensics to detect, prevent and recover from digital crimes
analyse data on storage media and various file systems
collect electronic evidence without compromising the original data
evaluate the functions and features of digital forensics equipment, the environment and the tools for a digital forensics lab

Task 2: Case Project (5 Marks)

Criteria

100% - 85%

84% - 75%

74% - 65%

64% - 50%

49% - 0

300-500 word Report on case project

Report on OS, interview questions and the possibility of file recovery with excellent explanations and justifications.

Report on OS, interview questions and the possibility of file recovery with reasonable explanations and justifications.

Report on OS, interview questions and the possibility of file recovery with some minor errors in explanations and justifications.

Report on OS, interview questions and the possibility of file recovery provided but it lacks reasoning for the explanations and justifications.

Report is provided but it didn’t address the questions asked.

Possible marks

5.0 – 4.25

4.24 – 3.75

3.74 – 3.25

3.24 – 2.5

2.4 – 0

Task 3: Research Project (5 Marks)

Criteria

100% - 85%

84% - 75%

74% - 65%

64% - 50%

49% - 0

300-500 word Report on investigation and validation methods

Standard practice for potential fraud case(s) investigation and data validation methods excellent explanation, justification with MS Word and Excel hashes snapshots provided, explained and references are provided.

Standard practice for potential fraud case(s) investigation and data validation methods reasonable explanation, justification with MS Word and Excel hashes snapshots provided, explained and references are provided.

Standard practice for potential fraud case(s) investigation and data validation methods some minor errors in explanation, justification with MS Word and Excel hashes snapshots provided, explained and references are provided.

Standard practice for potential fraud case(s) investigation and data validation methods provided but it lacks reasoning for the with MS Word and Excel hashes snapshots provided, explained and references are provided.

Little or no evidence of research conducted.