Table of Contents
Cybercrime is a form of crime conducted by criminals using computer networks, internet or other technological tools and Smart TV is another target of such crimes. These are the vulnerable device as it provides many means of stealing personal information. It has ability to attain the user’s data or information like pictures, videos, personal information etc. So, criminals can access them by many ways and use for illegal activities. Hackers can steal information and can conduct a crime. As it is, consider it a security and privacy threat. It stores the user’s personal information and connects to the internet. As a result, it puts its consumers’ privacy and security at risk (Niemietz et al., 2015). Because of these reasons, there is need to investigate smart TV forensics.
Theft of another’s intellectual property, personal information, or accessing their assets without their consent are examples of such crimes. Smart TVs are also a target of these types of crimes. Because it allows access to the user’s data or information, such as photos, videos, and personal information etc. As a result, criminals can gain access to them in a variety of ways and utilize them for unlawful actions in order to commit a crime (Taylor, 2012; IFA, 2012). Researchers claim that such attacks began with the advent of Smart TV. These are the most susceptible devices since they may be used to steal personal information in a variety of ways (IFA, 2012). For investigating cybercrimes through the smart TVs digital forensics used, which is the process of analyzing, preserving and extracting the electronic evidence
There are four stages of digital forensics such as collection, examination, analysis and reporting.
- Collection is related to acquiring the information form possible sources
- Examination adopt the automated or manual methods for extraction of information.
- Analysis associated with adoption of legal approaches for obtaining the useful data.
- Reporting related to defining the actions and tasks used during the investigation and what tools and approaches adopted to perform such forensic actions
According to digital forensics, collecting refers to obtaining information from many sources while keeping the information’s integrity. The second phase is the examination, which uses automated or manual methods to extract data. Third, analysis in conjunction with the deployment of legal methods for getting meaningful data. The final phase is reporting, which involves defining the actions and tasks carried out during the investigation, as well as the tools and methodologies employed to carry them out. Furthermore, it recommends that manufacturers enhance their privacy policies (Al Falayleh, 2013).
Many misconfigurations are related with a user’s privacy needs, according to the findings of the observed case study. Around two-thirds of Smart TVs require internet access, and internet users face a privacy risk. In a nutshell, the information of the user is not safeguarded within the smart TV.. It was also discovered that 90% of the data gathered was not visible. There are still numerous issues that smart TVs face, such as the fact that most of them are not supported by forensic solutions, that technological advancements have made them more complex, and that we cannot use a single approach to study smart TV forensics (Al Falayleh, 2013).
From the first time when our professor explained the topics of the project, we was attracted to the topic of Smart TV because we wanted to know how television is linked to digital forensic. At the same time, we did not understand how a TV would be used, and what is the benefit of using smart TV. So, these topics we searched for, and we initially felt that there were some challenges and it caused us some concern about whether we would find enough information about TV that is related to forensics. This encouraged us to search more and we were able to obtain much useful information
In addition, we learned what is the need for investigating smart TV forensics, as it can store the user’s personal information and is considered a security and privacy threat. We also learned how does a smart TV use for conducting a crime. We also discovered that some Smart TV companies use a high level of security and some use a low level which makes the Smart TV more vulnerable to crime and people can steal all the data related to the Smart TV.
We encountered some problems such as time constraints due to the short term. We also tried to meet as a group often in our spare time to finish work. In the end, we were able to complete the project on time.
Al Falayleh, M. (2013). A review of Smart TV forensics: Present state & future challenges. In The International Conference on Digital Information Processing, E-Business and Cloud Computing (DIPECC), 50.
Antón, A., (1997). Goal Identification and Refinement in the Specification of Software-Based Information Systems. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
Apple, T., (2015). Apple TV. System, 1, 2.
Hahm, C.H., Lee, S., Lee, T., & Yoo, S., (2016). Memory Access Scheduling for a Smart TV.
IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 26, 399-411.
IFA, (2012): Cyber Criminals Focusing on Smart TVs: G Data.
Irion, K., & Helberger, N., (2017). Smart TV and the online media sector: User privacy in view of changing market realities. Telecommunications Policy, 14, 170-184.
Jang, J., Zhao, D., Hong, W., Park, Y., & Yi, M.Y., (2016). Uncovering the Underlying
Factors of Smart TV UX over Time: A Multi-study, Mixedmethod Approach. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video, 3-12.
Kent, k., Chevalier, S., Grance, T., & Dang, H., (2006): Guide to Integrating Forensic Techniques into Incident Responses: NIST Special Publication, 800- 86.
Michéle, B., & Karpow, A., (2014) “Watch and be watched: Compromising all smart TV generations,” in Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC),IEEE, 351-356.
Niemietz, M., Somorovsky, J., Mainka, C., & Schwenk, J., (2015). Not so smart: On smart TV apps. In Secure Internet of Things (SIoT), 72-81.
Open WebOS. Available from: http:// www.openwebosproject.org.
Otto, P.N., Antón, A.I., & Baumer, D.L., (2007). The ChoicePoint Dilemma: How Data Brokers Should Handle the Privacy of Personal Information. IEEE Security and Privacy, 5(5), 15–23.
Pendlebury T., Asus to release Google TV device. Available from: http://ces.cnet.com/830134451_1- 57562090/asus-to-release-google-tv-device/.
Rutledge, R. L., Massey, A. K., & Antón, A. I. (2016). Privacy impacts of IoT devices: A SmartTV case study. In 2016 IEEE 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW). 261-270. IEEE.
Sutherland, I., Read, H., & Xynos, K. (2014). Forensic analysis of smart TV: A current issue and call to arms. Digital Investigation, 11(3), 175–178.
Swinburn, B., & Shelly, A., (2008). Effects of TV time and other sedentary pursuit.
International journal of obesity, 32, 132.
Taylor, A., (2012): Smart TV hack highlights risk of ‘The Internet of Everything’: TechHive.
All papers are written by ENL (US, UK, AUSTRALIA) writers with vast experience in the field. We perform a quality assessment on all orders before submitting them.
We provide plagiarism reports for all our custom written papers. All papers are written from scratch.
Contact us anytime, any day, via any means if you need any help. You can use the Live Chat, email, or our provided phone number anytime.
Get your money back if your paper is not delivered on time or if your instructions are not followed.