27.06.2013 Views

6th European Conference - Academic Conferences

6th European Conference - Academic Conferences

6th European Conference - Academic Conferences

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Jose Mas y Rubi et al.<br />

Table 2: Comparative analysis between REN-JIN and CALEA models<br />

In contrast, the main functions of REN-JIN are distributed between different components of the model,<br />

which are mainly controlled by the Network Forensic Server, which has autonomous power to<br />

determine what type of traffic should be captured and analyzed. This allow the tool to collect evidence<br />

in sequential steps, being able to obtain more precise and adequate information, regarding to the<br />

requirements of the judicial entities.<br />

Due to the characteristics of CALEA model, forensic investigators should have action freedom over<br />

the analyzed networks. However, because those networks can be public, there is a potential risk that<br />

interceptions could involve innocent users, violating their privacy rights.<br />

REN-JIN, as CALEA model, requires that forensic investigators have action freedom over the<br />

analyzed network. However, the traffic to be analyze is canalize to a Honeynet used by the model,<br />

preserving the privacy rights of all the user that are not involve in this study.<br />

It can be considered that CALEA performance is reactive, due to the fact that forensic investigators<br />

should identify the suspect and after it, they have to implement the analysis and capture platform<br />

proposed by the model.<br />

On the other hand, REN-JIN performance is also of the reactive type, but instead of previously identify<br />

the suspect, you need to identify the attacked network, which will become our decoy network<br />

(Honeynet), based in the analysis and capture platform proposed by the model.<br />

4.3 Model election<br />

Based on our analysis and after doing a balance between advantages and limitations of the two<br />

studied models, we observed that REN-JIN model has a more adequate architecture that possess the<br />

majority of the functions of the DFRWS general model, and when its limitations are overcome, this<br />

model can be validated as a network forensic model. Also, while REN-JIN is a theoretical model, we<br />

believe that it could be properly implemented.<br />

4.4 Improvements in the chosen model<br />

Considering REN-JIN as the chosen model, we observed that it presents several flaws, so we<br />

propose to correct them through the insertion of new elements that allow us to strengthen the<br />

architecture for a good VoIP forensic analysis.<br />

The identification function could be implemented in a convergence network through technologies like<br />

MEGACO H.248 protocol (ITU 2005) and ENUM (IETF 2004).<br />

165

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!