Hi,
I think the latest one looks very good. I wouldn't have been able to start with a blank page and capture all that information in a flow chart in the first place. Capturing decision making in a flow chart is hard to do.
I suppose the only things I might suggest is the suitability of using the term "Report as Fact", as this might be overstating the strength of certain artefacts. I think there will be measures of confidence for which an examiner may report something. When I report on complex artefacts I may add a weight of certainty. This could include the lack of other artefacts indicating an alternative explanation, but that such artefacts might have existed previously. This leads me onto my second suggestion.
This is around the process for coming to the decision of reporting something. I always cite within my report the artefacts from the device(s) I examined, that lead me to those conclusions, along with any artefacts created during my testing. Perhaps I am reading more into it than was intended, but your flow chart seems to indicate the weight of confidence comes from existing documented material rather than the artefacts seen on the exhibit(s).
Traditionally most examiners gained their knowledge of specific artefacts from training courses and then worked out what had changed in 'newer' versions by reverse engineering the data. In both cases they would comment on the artefacts present on the devices and explain their meaning.
In terms of your flow chart's value, I suppose the question is who is it primarily for? For experienced examiners these steps are intuitive and I would expect examiners at this level to follow this sort of decision making without a flowchart as naturally as they would plan a weekly shop and cook a few meals without a flow chart to help.
For new digital examiners coming into the field, is this beyond their expectation of what the work entails? if so, are there digital units where they are not being shown and taught and need this flow chart to show them how they should work?
If it is to provide information to people outside of our field then it does this job particularly well. Whilst it may look complex, because there are so many parts to it, it is actually simple and straightforward to understand.
My suggestions are more intended if this were primarily to be used as a training tool for digital examiners. You are free to accept of reject my suggestions of course, I just make them because you seem to want opinions and suggestions and that you want to make this flow chart as thorough as possible having considered many views and opinions.
I appreciate what you are doing with this flow chart and as I say at the beginning, I couldn't have started with a blank page and put all this down.
Steve
↧
