CASE 01

The NIST CFReDS Data Leakage Investigation

Topics: Forensic Stages · Investigation Tools · Anti-Forensics · Evidence Reconstruction

A corporate employee was suspected of systematically leaking confidential company data to a competitor. Over a three-day period, the suspect conducted a carefully planned operation that involved research, data exfiltration across multiple media, and active anti-forensic measures to hide their tracks.

"The suspect searched the web for data-leakage methods, connected an authorised USB, searched for confidential files, copied them, renamed them, and emailed a sample. The next day, they copied files to a second USB, quick-formatted it, and burned data to a CD. On the final day, they installed Eraser and CCleaner, wiped files, and removed all software."

Despite these countermeasures, investigators were able to reconstruct the full chain of events using digital artefacts that remained on the system — including file-system metadata, browser history, email artefacts, cloud logs, removable media traces, and Windows Search data.

This case is based on the NIST CFReDS Data Leakage scenario and illustrates how the five stages of digital forensics (Identification, Preservation, Analysis, Documentation, Presentation) apply to a real investigation.

Forensic StageSuspect ToolsInvestigator Tools
IdentificationIE, Chrome, Google, Bing, OutlookWrite blockers
PreservationFTK Imager 3.4.0.1, EnCase Imager
AnalysisWindows Search, USB RM#1PhotoRec
ExfiltrationOutlook, Google Drive, USB RM#2, CD-RFTK Imager, EnCase
Anti-ForensicsCCleaner, EraserFTK Imager (artefact traces)
QUESTIONS — CASE STUDY 01 0 / 20 answered
⚠ Please answer all 20 questions before checking results.

📊 Case Study 01 — Results

Correct
Wrong
Score %
CASE 02

Digital Evidence Classification & Data Acquisition

Topics: Evidence Types · Acquisition Methods · Chain of Custody · Volatile Data · Write Blockers

A company reports that confidential files were stolen from its office. Investigators arrive on scene and must classify the evidence they find, choose appropriate acquisition methods, and ensure that every piece of evidence is properly preserved for court.

Evidence FoundClassification
A damaged office doorPhysical Evidence
The employee's laptop (powered on)Real Evidence + Volatile Data
An email warning about suspicious activityDocumentary Evidence
Login logs, CCTV footage, file access recordsDigital Evidence
CCTV showing employee entering at midnightDirect Evidence
Browser history — searches on file copyingIndirect/Circumstantial Evidence
"The most important category in digital forensics is digital evidence, but the strongest investigations combine multiple evidence types together. When a laptop is still powered on, investigators must first photograph the screen and capture RAM before making any shutdown decision."

This case study covers the full data acquisition process: how investigators image drives (physical, logical, file-system, and live acquisition), why write blockers are essential, how hash values prove integrity, and what the order of volatility means for live systems. Understanding these principles is critical to producing court-admissible evidence.

QUESTIONS — CASE STUDY 02 0 / 20 answered
⚠ Please answer all 20 questions before checking results.

📊 Case Study 02 — Results

Correct
Wrong
Score %
CASE 03

Operation DataBreach — NovaTech Solutions Pty Ltd

Topics: Investigation Phases · Legal Framework · Chain of Custody · Insider Threat · Australian Law

NovaTech Solutions Pty Ltd is a Brisbane-based software company with 120 employees. On 10 March 2026, the Head of IT Security flagged a DLP alert: user account jthompson had accessed 847 files on the file server between 22:00 and 23:45 — outside business hours.

James Thompson, a Senior Software Engineer serving his notice period, was suspected of exfiltrating proprietary source code before resigning. CyberTrace Forensics was engaged to conduct an independent investigation across nine structured phases.

"The investigation was authorised under written consent from NovaTech as device owner, Section 477.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), and the company's signed Acceptable Use Policy. No AFP warrant was issued — this was a civil/corporate investigation."
Evidence ItemDescriptionLocation
E-001Desktop PC — Dell OptiPlex 7090Desk 14, powered off
E-002Laptop — Lenovo ThinkPad T490Lid closed, possibly in sleep
E-00332 GB SanDisk USB driveDesk drawer, unlabelled
E-004DLP system alert logsServer NOVA-DLP-01
E-005Active Directory / Windows Event LogsDomain controller NOVA-DC-01
QUESTIONS — CASE STUDY 03 0 / 20 answered
⚠ Please answer all 20 questions before checking results.

📊 Case Study 03 — Results

Correct
Wrong
Score %