Network Working Group                                       D. Brezinski
Request for Comments: 3227                                      In-Q-Tel
BCP: 55                                                      T. Killalea
Category: Best Current Practice                                neart.org
                                                          February 2002


           Guidelines for Evidence Collection and Archiving

Status of this Memo

  This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
  Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
  improvements.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

  A "security incident" as defined in the "Internet Security Glossary",
  RFC 2828, is a security-relevant system event in which the system's
  security policy is disobeyed or otherwise breached.  The purpose of
  this document is to provide System Administrators with guidelines on
  the collection and archiving of evidence relevant to such a security
  incident.

  If evidence collection is done correctly, it is much more useful in
  apprehending the attacker, and stands a much greater chance of being
  admissible in the event of a prosecution.

Table of Contents

  1 Introduction.................................................... 2
    1.1 Conventions Used in this Document........................... 2
  2 Guiding Principles during Evidence Collection................... 3
    2.1 Order of Volatility......................................... 4
    2.2 Things to avoid............................................. 4
    2.3 Privacy Considerations...................................... 5
    2.4 Legal Considerations........................................ 5
  3 The Collection Procedure........................................ 6
    3.1 Transparency................................................ 6
    3.2 Collection Steps............................................ 6
  4 The Archiving Procedure......................................... 7
    4.1 Chain of Custody............................................ 7
    4.2 The Archive................................................. 7
  5 Tools you'll need............................................... 7



Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 1]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


  6 References...................................................... 8
  7 Acknowledgements................................................ 8
  8 Security Considerations......................................... 8
  9 Authors' Addresses.............................................. 9
  10 Full Copyright Statement.......................................10

1 Introduction

  A "security incident" as defined in [RFC2828] is a security-relevant
  system event in which the system's security policy is disobeyed or
  otherwise breached.  The purpose of this document is to provide
  System Administrators with guidelines on the collection and archiving
  of evidence relevant to such a security incident.  It's not our
  intention to insist that all System Administrators rigidly follow
  these guidelines every time they have a security incident.  Rather,
  we want to provide guidance on what they should do if they elect to
  collect and protect information relating to an intrusion.

  Such collection represents a considerable effort on the part of the
  System Administrator.  Great progress has been made in recent years
  to speed up the re-installation of the Operating System and to
  facilitate the reversion of a system to a 'known' state, thus making
  the 'easy option' even more attractive.  Meanwhile little has been
  done to provide easy ways of archiving evidence (the difficult
  option).  Further, increasing disk and memory capacities and the more
  widespread use of stealth and cover-your-tracks tactics by attackers
  have exacerbated the problem.

  If evidence collection is done correctly, it is much more useful in
  apprehending the attacker, and stands a much greater chance of being
  admissible in the event of a prosecution.

  You should use these guidelines as a basis for formulating your
  site's evidence collection procedures, and should incorporate your
  site's procedures into your Incident Handling documentation.  The
  guidelines in this document may not be appropriate under all
  jurisdictions.  Once you've formulated your site's evidence
  collection procedures, you should have law enforcement for your
  jurisdiction confirm that they're adequate.

1.1 Conventions Used in this Document

  The key words "REQUIRED", "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT",
  and "MAY" in this document are to be interpreted as described in "Key
  words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels" [RFC2119].






Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 2]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


2 Guiding Principles during Evidence Collection

     -  Adhere to your site's Security Policy and engage the
        appropriate Incident Handling and Law Enforcement personnel.

     -  Capture as accurate a picture of the system as possible.

     -  Keep detailed notes.  These should include dates and times.  If
        possible generate an automatic transcript.  (e.g., On Unix
        systems the 'script' program can be used, however the output
        file it generates should not be to media that is part of the
        evidence).  Notes and print-outs should be signed and dated.

     -  Note the difference between the system clock and UTC.  For each
        timestamp provided, indicate whether UTC or local time is used.

     -  Be prepared to testify (perhaps years later) outlining all
        actions you took and at what times.  Detailed notes will be
        vital.

     -  Minimise changes to the data as you are collecting it.  This is
        not limited to content changes; you should avoid updating file
        or directory access times.

     -  Remove external avenues for change.

     -  When confronted with a choice between collection and analysis
        you should do collection first and analysis later.

     -  Though it hardly needs stating, your procedures should be
        implementable.  As with any aspect of an incident response
        policy, procedures should be tested to ensure feasibility,
        particularly in a crisis.  If possible procedures should be
        automated for reasons of speed and accuracy.  Be methodical.

     -  For each device, a methodical approach should be adopted which
        follows the guidelines laid down in your collection procedure.
        Speed will often be critical so where there are a number of
        devices requiring examination it may be appropriate to spread
        the work among your team to collect the evidence in parallel.
        However on a single given system collection should be done step
        by step.

     -  Proceed from the volatile to the less volatile (see the Order
        of Volatility below).






Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 3]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


     -  You should make a bit-level copy of the system's media.  If you
        wish to do forensics analysis you should make a bit-level copy
        of your evidence copy for that purpose, as your analysis will
        almost certainly alter file access times.  Avoid doing
        forensics on the evidence copy.

2.1 Order of Volatility

  When collecting evidence you should proceed from the volatile to the
  less volatile.  Here is an example order of volatility for a typical
  system.

     -  registers, cache

     -  routing table, arp cache, process table, kernel statistics,
        memory

     -  temporary file systems

     -  disk

     -  remote logging and monitoring data that is relevant to the
        system in question

     -  physical configuration, network topology

     -  archival media

2.2 Things to avoid

  It's all too easy to destroy evidence, however inadvertently.

     -  Don't shutdown until you've completed evidence collection.
        Much evidence may be lost and the attacker may have altered the
        startup/shutdown scripts/services to destroy evidence.

     -  Don't trust the programs on the system.  Run your evidence
        gathering programs from appropriately protected media (see
        below).

     -  Don't run programs that modify the access time of all files on
        the system (e.g., 'tar' or 'xcopy').









Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 4]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


     -  When removing external avenues for change note that simply
        disconnecting or filtering from the network may trigger
        "deadman switches" that detect when they're off the net and
        wipe evidence.

2.3 Privacy Considerations

     -  Respect the privacy rules and guidelines of your company and
        your legal jurisdiction.  In particular, make sure no
        information collected along with the evidence you are searching
        for is available to anyone who would not normally have access
        to this information.  This includes access to log files (which
        may reveal patterns of user behaviour) as well as personal data
        files.

     -  Do not intrude on people's privacy without strong
        justification.  In particular, do not collect information from
        areas you do not normally have reason to access (such as
        personal file stores) unless you have sufficient indication
        that there is a real incident.

     -  Make sure you have the backing of your company's established
        procedures in taking the steps you do to collect evidence of an
        incident.

2.4 Legal Considerations

  Computer evidence needs to be

     -  Admissible:  It must conform to certain legal rules before it
        can be put before a court.

     -  Authentic:  It must be possible to positively tie evidentiary
        material to the incident.

     -  Complete:  It must tell the whole story and not just a
        particular perspective.

     -  Reliable:  There must be nothing about how the evidence was
        collected and subsequently handled that casts doubt about its
        authenticity and veracity.

     -  Believable:  It must be readily believable and understandable
        by a court.







Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 5]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


3 The Collection Procedure

  Your collection procedures should be as detailed as possible.  As is
  the case with your overall Incident Handling procedures, they should
  be unambiguous, and should minimise the amount of decision-making
  needed during the collection process.

3.1 Transparency

  The methods used to collect evidence should be transparent and
  reproducible.  You should be prepared to reproduce precisely the
  methods you used, and have those methods tested by independent
  experts.

3.2 Collection Steps

     -  Where is the evidence?  List what systems were involved in the
        incident and from which evidence will be collected.

     -  Establish what is likely to be relevant and admissible.  When
        in doubt err on the side of collecting too much rather than not
        enough.

     -  For each system, obtain the relevant order of volatility.

     -  Remove external avenues for change.

     -  Following the order of volatility, collect the evidence with
        tools as discussed in Section 5.

     -  Record the extent of the system's clock drift.

     -  Question what else may be evidence as you work through the
        collection steps.

     -  Document each step.

     -  Don't forget the people involved.  Make notes of who was there
        and what were they doing, what they observed and how they
        reacted.

  Where feasible you should consider generating checksums and
  cryptographically signing the collected evidence, as this may make it
  easier to preserve a strong chain of evidence.  In doing so you must
  not alter the evidence.






Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 6]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


4 The Archiving Procedure

  Evidence must be strictly secured.  In addition, the Chain of Custody
  needs to be clearly documented.

4.1 Chain of Custody

  You should be able to clearly describe how the evidence was found,
  how it was handled and everything that happened to it.

  The following need to be documented

     -  Where, when, and by whom was the evidence discovered and
        collected.

     -  Where, when and by whom was the evidence handled or examined.

     -  Who had custody of the evidence, during what period.  How was
        it stored.

     -  When the evidence changed custody, when and how did the
        transfer occur (include shipping numbers, etc.).

4.2 Where and how to Archive

  If possible commonly used media (rather than some obscure storage
  media) should be used for archiving.

  Access to evidence should be extremely restricted, and should be
  clearly documented.  It should be possible to detect unauthorised
  access.

5 Tools you'll need

  You should have the programs you need to do evidence collection and
  forensics on read-only media (e.g., a CD).  You should have prepared
  such a set of tools for each of the Operating Systems that you manage
  in advance of having to use it.

  Your set of tools should include the following:

     -  a program for examining processes (e.g., 'ps').

     -  programs for examining system state (e.g., 'showrev',
        'ifconfig', 'netstat', 'arp').

     -  a program for doing bit-to-bit copies (e.g., 'dd', 'SafeBack').




Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 7]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


     -  programs for generating checksums and signatures (e.g.,
        'sha1sum', a checksum-enabled 'dd', 'SafeBack', 'pgp').

     -  programs for generating core images and for examining them
        (e.g., 'gcore', 'gdb').

     -  scripts to automate evidence collection (e.g., The Coroner's
        Toolkit [FAR1999]).

  The programs in your set of tools should be statically linked, and
  should not require the use of any libraries other than those on the
  read-only media.  Even then, since modern rootkits may be installed
  through loadable kernel modules, you should consider that your tools
  might not be giving you a full picture of the system.

  You should be prepared to testify to the authenticity and reliability
  of the tools that you use.

6 References

  [FAR1999]   Farmer, D., and W Venema, "Computer Forensics Analysis
              Class Handouts", http://www.fish.com/forensics/

  [RFC2119]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

  [RFC2196]   Fraser, B., "Site Security Handbook", FYI 8, RFC 2196,
              September 1997.

  [RFC2350]   Brownlee, N. and  E. Guttman, "Expectations for Computer
              Security Incident Response", FYI 8, RFC 2350, June 1998.

  [RFC2828]   Shirey, R., "Internet Security Glossary", FYI 36, RFC
              2828, May 2000.

7 Acknowledgements

  We gratefully acknowledge the constructive comments received from
  Harald Alvestrand, Byron Collie, Barbara Y. Fraser, Gordon Lennox,
  Andrew Rees, Steve Romig and Floyd Short.

8 Security Considerations

  This entire document discuses security issues.







Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 8]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


9 Authors' Addresses

  Dominique Brezinski
  In-Q-Tel
  1000 Wilson Blvd., Ste. 2900
  Arlington, VA 22209
  USA

  EMail: [email protected]


  Tom Killalea
  Lisi/n na Bro/n
  Be/al A/tha na Muice
  Co. Mhaigh Eo
  IRELAND

  Phone: +1 206 266-2196
  EMail: [email protected]
































Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                  [Page 9]

RFC 3227           Evidence Collection and Archiving       February 2002


10.  Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002).  All Rights Reserved.

  This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
  others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
  or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
  and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
  kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
  included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
  document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
  the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
  Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
  developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
  copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
  followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
  English.

  The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
  revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

  This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
  "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
  TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
  BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
  HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
  MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgement

  Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
  Internet Society.



















Brezinski & Killalea     Best Current Practice                 [Page 10]