Anthony's Computer Forensics

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Also, note that Firefox does not use index.dat. It is much easier to erase surfing history with Firefox than with IE. Cawn’s forensic report stated that the last logon to the “owner” account was 07/16/08 04:57:56 AM. Roughly five minutes later we see activity coming from the “casey” account and IE. I speculate that Casey hopped onto the “owner” account quickly in an attempt to cover her tracks – deleting the Firefox history at that time. :eek:

Reading today's discovery I see a report from John Bradley, a computer forensics expert, who took a look at the Firefox search history extracted from the Anthony home computer. The following struck me:

During the time of my stay in Orlando, I had occasions to examine the history in detail and develop a solution within CacheBack to decipher this history file. What was very unusual about this file was the fact that the file size was extraordinarily large. Moreover, it was VERY interesting that a history file such as this was able to be recovered "intact" from Unallocated Space. This suggests that the file itself (that is, the file that once contained the recovered history content) was, or may have been, deleted very close to the time of the date that the host computer system was seized by investigators.

Based on this comment and the things found in the earlier computer forensic report done by CSI Cawn, it is near certain that KC herself did in fact delete those files during the wee hours of July 16. IOW, she was not one to cover her tracks as a practice. This was a rush job.

Can you say busted?? :woohoo:
 
Reading today's discovery I see a report from John Bradley, a computer forensics expert, who took a look at the Firefox search history extracted from the Anthony home computer. The following struck me:



Based on this comment and the things found in the earlier computer forensic report done by CSI Cawn, it is near certain that KC herself did in fact delete those files during the wee hours of July 16. IOW, she was not one to cover her tracks as a practice. This was a rush job.

Can you say busted?? :woohoo:

Thank you JWG - I've been searching for your response since I read your original excellent article on Val's site and here - thank you!

I was pretty clear about Casey's owner account - I just didn't know if it was Casey or Lee who'd done the damage. Only really silly people think delete means gone forever - LOL

Kudos for your outstanding research and work.
 
Thank you JWG - I've been searching for your response since I read your original excellent article on Val's site and here - thank you!

I was pretty clear about Casey's owner account - I just didn't know if it was Casey or Lee who'd done the damage. Only really silly people think delete means gone forever - LOL

Kudos for your outstanding research and work.

I am guessing KC prolly knew she could not permanently erase the items, but she could not exactly replace the hard drive in that period of time-Remember, early on (and maybe still now), KC was of the attitude that they would not stick this on her. She may have figured that it was good enough for the time being, and hopefully LE would not carry it too far, anyway.
 
Reading today's discovery I see a report from John Bradley, a computer forensics expert, who took a look at the Firefox search history extracted from the Anthony home computer. The following struck me:



Based on this comment and the things found in the earlier computer forensic report done by CSI Cawn, it is near certain that KC herself did in fact delete those files during the wee hours of July 16. IOW, she was not one to cover her tracks as a practice. This was a rush job.

Can you say busted?? :woohoo:

JWG, I'm not as astute as you are! :angel: Does what Bradley states, mean that because the large file was totally recoverable, that nothing else had been deleted to fill any of the unallocated space? Sorry, trying to understand here. :)
 
JWG, I'm not as astute as you are! :angel: Does what Bradley states, mean that because the large file was totally recoverable, that nothing else had been deleted to fill any of the unallocated space? Sorry, trying to understand here. :)

You betcha, mitzi. The entire file was recoverable. :thumb:
 
You betcha, mitzi. The entire file was recoverable. :thumb:

So...I wonder if you can use the completeness of this file together with the average rate of "decomposition" of files with known deletion dates to come up with a PMI (post-mortem interval), so to speak, of when the history file "died" (was deleted).
 
JWG, I'm not as astute as you are! :angel: Does what Bradley states, mean that because the large file was totally recoverable, that nothing else had been deleted to fill any of the unallocated space? Sorry, trying to understand here. :)

ohhh i got so excited when i read this because it means, not just deleted, mitzi, but any activity what so ever. the large deleted file would have been available for anything from txt files, to pics, videos, music, and would likely be overwritten in a very short time. this tells me that the deletion was the last thing "somebody" did on this computer before turning it over to LE. very telling. jmo
 
So...I wonder if you can use the completeness of this file together with the average rate of "decomposition" of files with known deletion dates to come up with a PMI (post-mortem interval), so to speak, of when the history file "died" (was deleted).

interesting choice of words AZlawyer :) deleted files begin to decompose immediately. the rate of decomp depends on the amount of free space available. imo each computer use after deletion would likely deposit some bit of info into the deleted file and each time afterward. imo according to the report, i feel safe to say no pmi exists, if i understood you correctly, i believe the computer was given to LE right after these files were deleted. jmo
 
Posted something similar on Val's blog and thought it would be worth putting out here. Of course, what I think might have value could very well differ from everyone else's opinion. :bang:

Val's blog post dealt with the question as to when the "zenaida" searches were done on the Anthony home computer. I think there is enough evidence (to convince a simpleton like me, anyways) to implicate George as conducting the searches on July 16.

In the process of looking at this issue once again, I gleaned some insight into the online behavior of the Anthony's and drew some conclusions that might - just might :crossfingers: - be interesting to others looking through this thread.

First, it is important to realize that on the desktop computer there are two Windows accounts in use: "casey" and "owner". Contrary to common logic, "casey" was used by George and Cindy, while "owner" was used by KC. I won't go into it here but there is plenty of evidence out there to prove the above. :thumb:

The internet history files containing "zenaida" searches belonged to the "casey" account. Time stamps show the searches were done on the 16th of July. It makes sense that if Casey were searching for ZFG with one of her parents the day of the 16th that she would NOT use her private account so as to prevent her parents from seeing what was there. IIRC, BTW, George said in either an early OCSO or FBI interview that he conducted those searches that day. With KC's help? Not clear. :waitasec:

KC was using the “owner” account at least as far back as 5/14 (when the password was changed), but who knows prior to that. I’m guessing she used it for quite some time.

Why do I believe that? :waitasec:

If you look back at the unfiltered internet history files released in September 2009, :sleuth: two files are from the laptop (the ones with “bobby” in the file name) and two are from the desktop ("Unfiltered Temporary Internet History for Casey Profile.csv", and "Internet History unfiltered.csv"). The internals of the last two files indicate that the information was pulled from the "casey" account. No information was pulled from the "owner" account. (This means there is a potential wealth of information that we have not seen. :applause:)

If you then look at the history before Cindy grabbed Casey on the 15th, you will notice the desktop activity does not reflect the websites Casey is likely to visit, such as Myspace, Facebook, Photobucket, etc. Instead, it reflects mostly George activity with a little Cindy sprinkled in. Also, all of the history reflects the use of the Internet Explorer browser.

One can selectively delete history from a browser, but it is a pain and a whole lot easier to just delete all of it. So thinking of Casey taking the simple approach :idea:, if she surfed the web using IE on the “casey” account and deleted her history, the surfing history of George and Cindy would be gone as well. So in a round-about way I can bolster my conclusion that Casey was not using that account. (Missing KC websites but lots of GA / CA websites).

Now let's look further at the Google searches :sleuth:. Melich said in his report that he asked Sandra Cawn to look for the keyword “chloroform”, and a few days later she came back with the results. Because it took "a few days", she probably found the information in deleted history files. And sure enough, the file name used by Ms. Cawn to record the searches is “Firefox from Unallocated Space HP Desktop Google Searches.xls”. If the file name Ms. Cawn used has meaning, she found deleted history from the Firefox browser. :thumb:

Now, what about the search for a flea remedy? :waitasec: Looking back at the IE history you will notice an absence of the use of Google to perform searches (prior to the evening of the 15th). It would seem George and Cindy were not hip to using Google. I therefore speculate that Casey is the one who searched for the flea remedy, and she did it on behalf of her mother. I’m pretty convinced that is the case, because from 8:33 AM to 8:40 AM on 3/8 we see Google searches from the Firefox browser, and then starting at 9:18 AM to 9:45 AM we see a whole slew of activity on IE from the “casey” account.

I believe there was not just a switch of browsers going on, but also a switch of user accounts.

So, I believe Casey was on the computer and Cindy asked her for some help looking for a flea solution, they did some searching together, and shortly after Casey finished, she logged off her “owner” account and Cindy hopped on the “casey” account and used the Yahoo and MSN search capabilities to continue looking for a flea remedy. After a while Caylee came by and she and Cindy looked at the cute pictures on http://www.babyanimalz.com.

Now, there is nothing about the computer forensics showing the chloroform, etc. searches being tied to the "owner" account and not the "casey" account. They were found in unallocated space. So they MAY have been done from the “casey” account using Firefox, but I find it more likely they were done from “owner” using Firefox. I conclude this by looking at the standard operating procedure of GA / CA versus KC. GA / CA used MSN and Yahoo to search with Internet Explorer while logged into the casey account. KC used Google to search with Firefox while logged into the owner account.

Also, note that Firefox does not use index.dat. It is much easier to erase surfing history with Firefox than with IE. Cawn’s forensic report stated that the last logon to the “owner” account was 07/16/08 04:57:56 AM. Roughly five minutes later we see activity coming from the “casey” account and IE. I speculate that Casey hopped onto the “owner” account quickly in an attempt to cover her tracks – deleting the Firefox history at that time. :eek:

this is WONDERFUL! i have been most interested in the computer forensics side of this case as i believe kc lived her life online. JWG you have made it very easy for me to be a lazy sleuther :blushing: your work is beyond brilliant. thank you for doing it for us, i cant begin to keep up as it is and you make it a lot easier! you rock!:rocker:
 
I am guessing KC prolly knew she could not permanently erase the items, but she could not exactly replace the hard drive in that period of time-Remember, early on (and maybe still now), KC was of the attitude that they would not stick this on her. She may have figured that it was good enough for the time being, and hopefully LE would not carry it too far, anyway.

I wonder if she was even thinking of LE, but more of her parents - if indeed she was planning on leaving her parents for good - Casey may have been concerned they may figure out she had been using the owner account and be able to access all her files. I don't think it ever occurred to her at that point someone would be forensically looking at her hard drive.

This is the 10-minute girl, remember?
 
OK...I see what's happening now. For kinda obvious reasons, we've got discussions running parallel on Ricardo's interview thread and the Computer Forensics thread regarding the computer forensics on Ricardo's computer released 2010.03.23.

Let's keep this thread focused on the Anthony's laptop & desktop computer forensics.

New thread :eek:nline: focused on Ricardo's Computer Forensics thread here:
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98864"]Ricardo's Computer Forensics - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
 
Reading today's discovery I see a report from John Bradley, a computer forensics expert, who took a look at the Firefox search history extracted from the Anthony home computer. The following struck me:



Based on this comment and the things found in the earlier computer forensic report done by CSI Cawn, it is near certain that KC herself did in fact delete those files during the wee hours of July 16. IOW, she was not one to cover her tracks as a practice. This was a rush job.

Can you say busted?? :woohoo:

Hi JWG... computer forensics is not my forte' :waitasec:

Question: Are you saying she was deleting the google searches for chloroform ingredients (alcohol, acetone, peroxide) and the search for 'how to make chloroform/chloraform' along with other deletions, close in time to when the computer was seized by investigators?

page 99

http://media2.myfoxorlando.com/documents/032310-anthony1.pdf

TIA
 
Not JWG, but, I did a quick read, Harmony. I don't have the report in front of me so JWG etc can correct/add details (e.g. Iexplorer and/or Firefox inet browsers involved and which account owner(s) involved...in the meantime...

First - you need to understand that a computer doesn't actually remove data when you delete a file. It just allow you to write new data over the old.

Basically, what the report says is that the allocated space on the hard drive that stored the cache (stored web browsing data) files had very little, if any, new files overwritten on them - which made it very easy to recover the files intact. :thumb:

The simplest explanation for this not-overwritten situation is that the "deletion" was recent and all at once.

On the "Post 911 calls..." Thread in the Resource forum we worked out the two likely times the deletion occured 7/15PM and 7/16AM after LE arrived. Only someone with something to hide would undertake this deletion AFTER LE arrived.

HTH.
 
Not JWG, but, I did a quick read, Harmony. I don't have the report in front of me so JWG etc can correct/add details (e.g. Iexplorer and/or Firefox inet browsers involved and which account owner(s) involved...in the meantime...

First - you need to understand that a computer doesn't actually remove data when you delete a file. It just allow you to write new data over the old.

Basically, what the report says is that the allocated space on the hard drive that stored the cache (stored web browsing data) files had very little, if any, new files overwritten on them - which made it very easy to recover the files intact. :thumb:

The simplest explanation for this not-overwritten situation is that the "deletion" was recent and all at once.

On the "Post 911 calls..." Thread in the Resource forum we worked out the two likely times the deletion occured 7/15PM and 7/16AM after LE arrived. Only someone with something to hide would undertake this deletion AFTER LE arrived.

HTH.

Thanks Bond for your reply.... I understand now...
 
Not JWG, but, I did a quick read, Harmony. I don't have the report in front of me so JWG etc can correct/add details (e.g. Iexplorer and/or Firefox inet browsers involved and which account owner(s) involved...in the meantime...

First - you need to understand that a computer doesn't actually remove data when you delete a file. It just allow you to write new data over the old.

Basically, what the report says is that the allocated space on the hard drive that stored the cache (stored web browsing data) files had very little, if any, new files overwritten on them - which made it very easy to recover the files intact. :thumb:

The simplest explanation for this not-overwritten situation is that the "deletion" was recent and all at once.

On the "Post 911 calls..." Thread in the Resource forum we worked out the two likely times the deletion occured 7/15PM and 7/16AM after LE arrived. Only someone with something to hide would undertake this deletion AFTER LE arrived.

HTH.
BJB, did we ever find out what was "deleted"? TIA
 
BJB, did we ever find out what was "deleted"? TIA

Hi RR0004 :wave:

Yes, the file that was deleted was the Firefox browser history. There are several ways this can be done.

Possibly the easiest way :slap: to do this is the following:

  1. Go to the Tools > Options menu at the top, select the Privacy tab, then select the "Clear Browsing History Now" button.
  2. Another simple way is to bring up the History sidebar (Ctrl + H), select all of the items (Ctrl + A) and press delete.
Note that these are relevant to the version of Firefox on the Anthony computer at that time. The first method outlined is changed some in the version I am personally using (3.6.6).
 
Hi RR0004 :wave:

Yes, the file that was deleted was the Firefox browser history. There are several ways this can be done.

Possibly the easiest way :slap: to do this is the following:

  1. Go to the Tools > Options menu at the top, select the Privacy tab, then select the "Clear Browsing History Now" button.
  2. Another simple way is to bring up the History sidebar (Ctrl + H), select all of the items (Ctrl + A) and press delete.
Note that these are relevant to the version of Firefox on the Anthony computer at that time. The first method outlined is changed some in the version I am personally using (3.6.6).
Oh, JWG! You sure are missed!!

But did we see the history of sites visited? Is that what was released?

Please don't be such a stranger. Come and visit more often.
 
Oh, JWG! You sure are missed!!

But did we see the history of sites visited? Is that what was released?

Please don't be such a stranger. Come and visit more often.
Bumping for JWG!

Ollie, Ollie, in come free!
 
Oh, JWG! You sure are missed!!

But did we see the history of sites visited? Is that what was released?

Please don't be such a stranger. Come and visit more often.

Thanks, RR0004.

Unfortunately, no, we have not yet seen the complete history file, only the Google searches done in March, 2008.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
143
Guests online
2,260
Total visitors
2,403

Forum statistics

Threads
603,622
Messages
18,159,663
Members
231,788
Latest member
rowan1978
Back
Top