SWGDE Myths and Facts about Accreditation for Digital and Multimedia Evidence Labs

As a condition to the use of this document and the information contained therein, the SWGDE requests notification by e-mail before or contemporaneous to the introduction of this document, or any portion thereof, as a marked exhibit offered for or moved into evidence in any judicial, administrative, legislative or adjudicatory hearing or other proceeding (including discovery proceedings) in the United States or any Foreign country. Such notification shall include: 1) The formal name of the proceeding, including docket number or similar identifier; 2) the name and location of the body conducting the hearing or proceeding; 3) subsequent to the use of this document in a formal proceeding please notify SWGDE as to its use and outcome; 4) the name, mailing address (if available) and contact information of the party offering or moving the document into evidence. Notifications should be sent to secretary@swgde.org.

It is the reader’s responsibility to ensure they have the most current version of this document. It is recommended that previous versions be archived.

MYTH: “Accreditation will require more personnel resources.”

FACT: Personnel involved in quality assurance procedures will vary based upon the size of the laboratory. Larger laboratories may require personnel dedicated to working within a quality system, whereas smaller laboratories may not require dedicated personnel. Even in larger laboratories, some personnel may perform multiple roles. This does not necessarily create a conflict of interest. The personnel resources for maintaining accreditation are less than the initial investment of obtaining accreditation. There are successful approaches for small and one-person laboratories to implement quality systems.

MYTH: “The accreditation process can be completed within a few months.”

FACT: Implementing a quality management system is a process intended to provide a foundation for competency and continuous improvement. The process of developing and implementing a quality management system by a laboratory that can meet accreditation requirements may take 1- 3 years depending on the size and resources of the laboratory.

Additionally, accrediting bodies may require laboratories to operate under their quality management system for one year before applying for accreditation.

MYTH: “Accreditation means a laboratory or work product is perfect.”

FACT: Accreditation ensures that laboratories are competent to perform examinations. It provides a consistent baseline for how laboratories should operate. It also provides a structure for accountability and process improvement. The work product produced by non-accredited laboratories may be as good or better than accredited laboratories. Factors, such as human error or faulty equipment, exist regardless of whether a laboratory is accredited. Accreditation requires that laboratories have processes to document, address, and correct problems.

MYTH: “Accreditation will limit the organization’s capabilities.”

FACT: Accreditation, in itself, does not define the technical procedures that a laboratory must use. New and novel techniques are often required to meet customer needs. When established methods are insufficient to conduct an exam, accreditation standards permit the use of documented deviations.

MYTH: “Accreditation is a one-time event.”

FACT: Accreditation is an on-going process. When a laboratory is seeking initial accreditation they will undergo a full accreditation assessment. After a laboratory has achieved accreditation, the accrediting body may have on-going self-reporting requirements. Further, the accrediting body may conduct onsite visits to asses continuing performance. Continuous improvement, such as reviewing the relevancy of policy and procedures, is a foundation of accreditation.

MYTH: “It is impossible for a one-person laboratory to be accredited because of the peer review requirement.”

FACT: Accreditation does require a sub-set of casework to be reviewed by another trained and knowledgeable individual with similar casework experience. This requirement can be met through cooperation with other laboratories or through consultants.

MYTH: “To become accredited, a laboratory must start from scratch without any assistance.”

FACT: Assistance with accreditation is available in multiple forms. There are accredited digital laboratories of all sizes, and many of these laboratories are willing to share their experience and resources. Accrediting bodies may be able to direct you to laboratories that are willing to assist. SWGDE’s website has resources available to assist with the process.

MYTH: “Accreditation and certification are the same thing.”

FACT: Accreditation assesses the competence of the laboratory; certification assesses the competence of the examiner. Accreditation and certification both promote work product quality.

MYTH: “Accreditation creates unnecessary work.”

FACT: While there is work involved in obtaining and maintaining accreditation, the work can be valuable and the return on investment can be substantial. The accreditation process can identify areas for increased efficiencies, quality control, and promote consistency within the laboratory. Additional documentation that is required in accredited laboratories can improve repeatability and reproducibility within the laboratory and foster communication across laboratories.

MYTH: “Digital and multimedia evidence does not fit existing accreditation standards.”

FACT: Accreditation standards accommodate multiple forensic science disciplines, including digital and multimedia evidence. There are currently many accredited digital and multimedia forensic laboratories of various sizes. ISO 17025/17020 are intended to establish a common foundation for a quality management system and have been successfully applied to a wide range of forensic science and other disciplines.

MYTH: “The accreditation assessor may impose requirements that aren’t real requirements and the laboratory will have to do what they say.”

FACT: While there may be instances of assessors overstepping their boundaries based on personal experience or lack of knowledge of the field, there are multiple processes for seeking redress should the situation arise. In the past, these instances may have resulted from a lack of trained digital and multimedia assessors. As the digital and multimedia discipline has matured, this problem has lessened as the number of experienced assessors has increased. Prior to the assessment, there is a process for ensuring your technical assessor is qualified and acceptable for your discipline.

MYTH: “The laboratory will need to calibrate equipment.”

FACT: Most digital forensic equipment cannot be calibrated and, as such, calibration is not a requirement for accreditation. However, some equipment that is analog in nature may need calibration. Equipment must be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications.

MYTH: “My laboratory will need to have a sampling plan, defined error rates, and measurement uncertainty.”

FACT: These requirements do not apply to digital evidence and are often misunderstood. SWGDE has a paper on error mitigation that includes a discussion on error rates and will also be addressing sampling and measurement uncertainty in future papers.

MYTH: “Digital forensics laboratories need to be accredited separately from other forensic disciplines.”

FACT: Quality management systems are discipline agnostic. Digital forensic labs can operate under quality management systems established for other forensic disciplines and operating units such as in police departments.

MYTH: “Accreditation only means say what you do, do what you say.”

FACT: While correct documentation is essential, accreditation is primarily focused on laboratory competence. Accredited laboratories must use techniques that are appropriate (e.g., techniques that have been validated, accepted for use in the DME community, based on sound scientific principles). In addition, results must be reported correctly and accurately.