Needs to be about two pages long. 1. Through the use of currently available onli

Question

Needs to be about two pages long.

1. Through the use of currently available online tools and search facilities, ordinary users can easily acquire personal information about us that we ourselves might have had no idea is publicly available there. Does this use of search engines threaten the privacy of ordinary people? Explain.

2. If software is available to create a forensic image of a hard disk or other media, what is the benefit of forensic hardware?

3. Why is important that all the software used by law enforcement officers be licensed and registered? Law enforcement budgets are often tight; why not use freeware as much as possible?

4. What types of evidence can digital forensic tools provide?

Explanation / Answer

Hi ...

Which high school student has not used a Web search engine to query about some topic or subject? Of course, it is quite possibles that many Internet users, both young and old, do not consciously distinguish between the search engines they use and Web browsers that now also typically include search engines as a feature within their user interface. But virtually all Internet users have come to expect and depend on the instantaneous results they receive in response to their various search queries. While there is no shortage of definitions of “search engine,” none has been accepted as the standard or universally agreed upon definition.
For purposes of this entry, however, the definition of a (Web) search engine, put forth by Halavais (2009, 5–6), is “an information retrieval system that allows for keyword searches of distributed digital text.” We note that this definition includes some important technical terms and concepts that, in turn, need defining and further elucidation. Our examination of key technical concepts underlying search engines is intended to provide a useful context for our analysis of the ethical implications. In this sense, Blanke (2005, 34) is correct that an adequate analysis of the ethical aspects of search engines “requires knowledge about the technology and its functioning.”

We begin with a brief sketch of the history and evolution of search engines, from their conception in the pre-Internet era to the development and implementation of contemporary (“Web 2.0” era) search engines such as Google. Our examination of important historical developments of this technology is intended to address our first question, noted above: “What is a search engine?” It also provides a backdrop for analyzing our second major question, “Why are search engines problematic from an ethical perspective?” where a cluster of ethical concerns involving search engine technology is examined.
These include issues ranging from search engine bias and the problem of opacity/non-transparency, to concerns affecting privacy and surveillance,
to a set of issues involving censorship and democracy. Additionally, we question whether search engine companies have any special moral obligations
, e.g., in light of their “privileged” placed in society as “gatekeepers of the Web” (Hinman, 2005, 21), for which they should be held accountable.
We also describe some emerging ethical concerns affecting (cyber)security—at the data, system, and (inter)national levels—generated by the use of “discoverable search engines”
in the context of the Internet of Things.

As a sub-area of applied ethics, and more specifically of information/computer ethics, we note that the work that has been done thus far regarding search engines has been carried out
within a broadly deontological approach. In keeping with this ethical perspective, we limit ourselves mainly to a deontological analysis of the cluster of ethical issues surrounding
search engines, and for the purposes of this entry put aside possibles shortcomings internal to, as well as in the application of, deontology. Finally, in the concluding section,
we briefly mention some impacts that search engines have for broader philosophical issues (especially in the area of epistemology) that may not be solely or mainly ethical in nature.
However, an adequate analysis of these issues is beyond the scope of this entry.

2. If software is available to create a forensic image of a hard disk or other media, what is the benefit of forensic hardware?

The creation of a true forensic hard drive image is a highly detailed process. If you do not have it performed by a trained professional,
you may severely compromise your chances of obtaining admissible evidence as a result of your discovery efforts. Also, to avoid accusations of evidence tampering or spoliation,
it is a recommended best practice that imaging be performed by an objective third party. Suggested protocols for hard drive imaging can be found within guidelines standardized
by institutions and organizations like the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

As you hire a computer forensics expert, know that he or she can choose among a large number of software and hardware to obtain a forensic image.
What is important is that you qualify the expert’s experience and that you ensure a rigid process by asking the right questions. A good start is to always make sure that
the integrity of all evidence is maintained, chain of custody is established, and all relevant hash values are documented.

Once imaging is completed, any good tool should generate a digital fingerprint of the acquired media, otherwise known as a hash.
A hash generation process involves examining all of the 0’s and 1’s that exist across the sectors examined. Altering a single 0 to a
1 will cause the resulting hash value to be different. Both the original and copy of the evidence are analyzed to generate a source and target hash.
Assuming they both match, we can be confident of the authenticity of the copied hard drive or other media.


3.Law enforcement
Central police forces can assist the state's police force, but only if so requested by the state governments. In practice, the central government has largely observed these limits.
During the Emergency of 1975-77, the constitution was amended (effective 1 February 1976) to permit the central government to dispatch and deploy its Central Armed Police forces without
regard to the wishes of the states. This action proved unpopular, and the use of the Central Police Forces was controversial. After the Emergency was lifted, the constitution was
amended in December 1978 to make deployment of central Police forces once again dependent on the consent of the state government.

thanks

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse N
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.