If error rate is such a simple concept, why don't I have one for my forensic tool yet?

DFRWS 2010 Annual Conference

Volumn 7, Issue , 2010, Pages

  Lyle, James R ^a  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER CRIME; ELECTRONIC CRIME COUNTERMEASURES; MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS; RANDOM ERRORS; SOIL TESTING; SOILS; SYSTEMATIC ERRORS;

DIGITAL ACQUISITION; FALSE NEGATIVES; FALSE POSITIVE; FORENSIC ACQUISITION; FORENSIC TOOLS; FURTHER WORKS; RANDOM COMPONENTS; RANDOM DISTRIBUTION;

DIGITAL FORENSICS;

EID: 79961091386     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (3)

1. Allchin D. Error types. Perspect Sci Spring 2001;9(No.1):38-58.
2. Garfinkel S. Carving contiguous and fragmented files with fast object validation. Proceedings of the 2007 digital forensics research workshop, DFRWS, August 2007.
3. Lyle J, Wozar M. Issues with imaging drives containing faulty sectors. Proceedings of the 2007 digital forensics research workshop, DFRWS, August 2007.