Gengenbach, Martin J. “The Way We Do it Here”: Mapping Digital Forensics Workflows in Collecting Institutions. A Master’s Paper for the M.S. in L.S. degree. August, 2012. 131 pages. Advisor: Christopher A. Lee. School of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

This paper presents the findings of semi-structured interviews with archivists and curators applying digital forensics tools and practices to the management of born-digital content. The interviews were designed to explore which digital forensic tools are in use, how they are implemented within a digital forensics workflow, and what further challenges and opportunities such use may present. Findings indicate that among interview participants these tools are beneficial in the capture and preservation of born-digital content, particularly with digital media such as external hard drives, and optical or floppy disks. However, interviews reveal that metadata generated from the use of such tools is not easily translated into the arrangement, description, and provision of access to born-digital content.

See especially Marty's descriptions and graphical representations of the institutions' workflows (pages 27–69).

Institutional Workflows Mapped in This Study (Pages 27–69)

1. Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University (Figure 1, p. 32)
2. Manuscript and Archives, Yale University Library (Figure 2, p. 36)
3. City of Vancouver Archives (Figure 3, p. 42)
4. Duke University Archives (Figure 4, p. 47)
5. Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities (MITH), University of Maryland (Figure 5, p. 52)
6. National Library of Australia (Figure 6, p. 57)
7. University Archives, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Figure 7, p. 62)
8. University of Virginia Libraries (Figure 8, p. 67)

Table of Contents Overview

• Introduction (p. 3)
• Literature Review (p. 6) — Defining Digital Forensics; Digital Forensics Investigation: Background and Methods; Digital Forensics in Collecting Institutions
• Research Design (p. 21)
• Findings & Workflow Diagrams (p. 27)
• Discussion (p. 70) — Every born-digital content workflow must start somewhere; A workflow is never complete or finalized; Bridging the metadata gap between forensic tools (DFXML) and archival description (EAD/DACS); Privacy and sensitive information screening
• Conclusion & References (pp. 86–99)
• Appendices A–D (pp. 100–131) — Solicitation E-mail, Informed Consent, Interview Protocol, and Digital Preservation Tools and Technologies