skip to main content
10.1145/3407023.3409213acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaresConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

4P based forensics investigation framework for smart connected toys

Published:25 August 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Smart Connected Toys (SCTs) have the potential to collect terabytes of sensitive personal, contextual, and usage information which may be a subject of cybercrime or used as a conduit for cybercrime resulting in a digital forensic investigation which requires the examination of the digital artifact stored, processed or transmitted by the SCT. SCT forensics is challenging in most cases due to non-availability of specialized forensics tools and standardized evidence acquisition interface port. We explore the various privacy and security challenges plaguing the SCT industry and the possible safety risk SCT poses to children as a result of a lack of serious consideration technical controls surrounding the collection, processing, and storage of children's information and possible exposure to crime which will require digital forensic investigation. As a result of this gap in research and industry, we investigate current digital forensic solutions for SCTs and present an abstract forensics investigation framework with the focus on using non-conventional means which allow Investigators to successfully "Plan," "Preserve" "Process" and "Present" (4P) as a systematic means to conduct digital forensic analysis on an SCT in a situation where SCT is complicit in a criminal investigation or a subject of crime.

References

  1. Marketwatch.com, "Connected Toys Market 2018-2026 with data by product types, applications, and regional analysis", MarketWatch, 2019. [Online]. Available:https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/connected-toys-market-2018-2026-with-data-by-product-types-applications-and-regional-analysis-2019-01-31. [Accessed: 18-Jun-2019].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. N. Bill, "Guide to Computer Forensics and Investigations." 5th Edition. Published by Thomson Course Technology, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M. Martinez, "FBI: New Barbie 'Video Girl' doll could be used for child porn." 2010. [Online]. Available:http://newsroom.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/06/fbi-new-barbie-video-girl-doll-could-be-used-for-child-porn-2/ [Accessed : 31-Jul. -2019]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. P. C. K. Hung, "Children Privacy Protection Engine for Smart Anthropomorphic Toys Proposal." 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. Chakraborty, K. R. Raghavan, M. P. Johnson, and M. B. Srivastava, "A Framework for Context-Aware Privacy of Sensor Data on Mobile Systems," the Fourteenth Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, pp. 6. 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. H. Haifa, M. Yousef, S. Shaima & F. Iqbal, "State of the Art in Digital Forensics for Small Scale Digital Devices". 11th International Conference on Information and Communication Systems (ICICS), 2020Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. G. Tsakalidis, and K. Vergidis "A Systematic Approach Toward Description and Classification of Cybercrime Incidents," IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems. 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. FBI and NW3C, "2014 Internet Crime Report". 2015. [Online]. Available:https://pdf.ic3.gov/2014_IC3Report.pdf [Accessed on July 21, 2017].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Council of Europe, "Convention on Cybercrime." Nov. 23, 2001. [Online]. Available: http://www.coe.int/el/web/conventions/full-list/-/. [Accessed: Jul. 21, 2017].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. "Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) | Search." [Online]. Available:https://www.ic3.gov/search.aspx?q="personal_choice_outfitters"&p=4. [Accessed: 22-May-2020].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. P. C. K. Hung, "Children Privacy Protection Engine for Smart Anthropomorphic Toys Proposal." 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. J. McLaughlin, "New Court Filing Reveals Apple Faces 12 Other Requests to Break Into Locked iPhones". The Intercept. February 23, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. PricewaterhouseCoopers, "The Global State of Information Security_Survey 2015---Managing Cyber Risks in an Interconnected World". Sep. 30, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.pwccn.com/webmedia/doc/635527689739110925_rcs_info_security_2015.pdf. [Accessed: Jul. 21, 2017].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. F. Howard, "Exploring the Blackhole exploit kit: 2.3.4 Payload". March 29, 2012. [Online]. Available:https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/exploringthe-blackhole-exploitkit14/. [Accessed: 31-Jul-2019].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. D. L. Shinder and M. Cross, Scene of the Cybercrime. Burlington, MA, USA: Syngress, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. P. C. K. Hung, M. Fantinato, and L. Rafferty, "A Study of Privacy Requirements for Smart Toys," The 20th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS 2016), Chiayi, Taiwan, June 27 - July 1, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. D. Forbrukerra, "Investigation of privacy and security issues with smart toys," Available:https://fil.forbrukerradet.no/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/2016-11-technical-analysis-of-the-dolls-bouvet.pdf, Nov.2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. V. Verdoodt and E. Lievens, "Toying with children's emotions, the new game in town? The legality of advergames in the EU." Computer Law & Security Review vol. 32, no. 4, 599--614. 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. B. Yankson, F. Iqbal, and P. C. K. Hung, "Privacy Preservation Framework for Smart Connected Toys." Computing in Smart Toys, pp. 149--164. 2017Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. L. G. de Carvalho and M. M. Eler, "Security Tests for Smart Toys." ICEIS (2). pp.111. 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. B. Yankson, "PDCA Based Privacy Preservation Framework." International Journal of Information Security, SpringerGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Rapid7. HACKING IoT: A Case Study on Baby Monitor Exposures and Vulnerabilities. https://www.rapid7.com/docs/Hacking-IoT-A-Case-Study-on-Baby-Monitor-Exposures-and-Vulnerabilities.pdf, Sept. 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. E. Taylor and K. Michael, "Smart Toys that are the Stuff of Nightmares." IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 35(1). pp.8--10. 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Inc. Somerset Recon, "Hello Barbie Initial Security Analysis," Jan. 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. T. Denning, C. Matuszek, K. Koscher, J. R. Smith, and T. Kohno, "A spotlight on security and privacy risks with future household robots: attacks and lessons." The ACM international conference on Ubiquitous computing pp. 105--114. 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. M. Dhanhani, B. AlRasebi, A. Nuaimi, and F. Iqbal, "Forensics of "Hello Barbie" Smart Toy," Student Paper, Zayed University College of Technological InnovationGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Barbiemedia.com, "Mattel Focuses on Dad with New Campaign." Jan 23, 2017. [Online]. Available:http://www.barbiemedia.com/news/detail/150.html. /. [Accessed: 31-Jul-2019].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. B. Yankson, F. Iqbal, S. Aleem, B. Shah, P. C. K. Hung and A. P. de Albuquerque, "A Privacy-Preserving Context Ontology (PPCO) for Smart Connected Toys," 2019 12th CMI Conference on Cybersecurity and Privacy (CMI), Copenhagen, Denmark, 2019, pp. 1--6 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. B. Yankson, F. Iqbal, Z. Lu, X. Wang, and P.C.K Hung, P. "Modelling Privacy Preservation in Smart Connected Toys by Petri-Nets," Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1696--1705, January 8 - 12, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. A. Hilts, C. Parsons, and J. Knockel, "Every step you fake: A comparative analysis of fitness tracker privacy and security," 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  1. 4P based forensics investigation framework for smart connected toys

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ARES '20: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security
      August 2020
      1073 pages
      ISBN:9781450388337
      DOI:10.1145/3407023
      • Program Chairs:
      • Melanie Volkamer,
      • Christian Wressnegger

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 25 August 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate228of451submissions,51%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader