Forensic reports are the most technically complex of the three main report types. Analysts should be free to be as technically accurate as possible and to not dumb down the reporting for those that may be nontechnical. Analysts should also be aware that the forensic report will be critical to the overall incident reporting if it was able to determine a specific individual, such as a malicious insider.

In cases where a perpetrator has been identified, or where the incident may incur legal ramifications, the forensic report will undergo a great deal of scrutiny. It, therefore, behooves the analyst to take great pains to complete it accurately and thoroughly:

• Examiner bio/background: For audience members such as legal or external auditors, it is critical to have an idea of the background and qualifications of the forensic analysts. This background should include formal education, training, experience, and an overview of an analyst's courtroom experience, which should include whether they were identified as an expert witness. A complete CV can be attached to the forensic report, especially if it is anticipated that the report will be used as part of a court case.
• Tools utilized: The report should include a complete list of hardware and software tools that were utilized in the analysis of evidence. This information should include the make, model, and serial number of hardware, such as a physical write blocker, or the software name and version utilized for any software used. A further detail that can be included in the report is that all tools were up to date prior to use.
• Evidence items: A comprehensive list of the evidence items should include any disk images, memory captures, or log files that were acquired by the analysts during the incident. The date, time, location, and analyst who acquired the evidence should also be included. It may be necessary to include as an attachment the chain of custody forms for physical pieces of evidence. If there are a number of evidence items, this portion of the report can be included as an addendum to allow for a better flow of reading for the reader.
• Forensic analysis: This is where analysts will be very specific with the actions that were taken during the investigation. Details such as dates and times are critical, as well as detailed descriptions of the types of actions that were taken.
• Tool output: During the previous chapters, there have been a great many tools that have been leveraged for investigating an incident. Some of these tools, such as Volatility or Rekall, do not have the ability to generate reports. It is, therefore, incumbent upon the analyst to capture the output of these tools. Analysts can include screen captures or text output from these command-line tools and should incorporate them within the report. This is critical if these tools produce an output that is pertinent to the incident.

Other tools, such as Autopsy, have the ability to output reports for inclusion in the forensic analysis report. For example, to run the report from the analysis conducted in the previous chapter, perform the following steps:

1. 1. 1. Open the case in Autopsy.
      2. Navigate to Tools and then to Generate Report.
      3. Select Results - HTML. Click on Next and then All Results.
2. 1. 4. This produces an HTML report that will open in the default browser:

From here, the analyst can review the information. Other techniques, such as printing to a PDF file, allow analysts to attach the output directly to the report. Analysts should become familiar with their toolset, as having the ability to export a report directly from the tool will reduce errors and can stand up better under scrutiny.

• Conclusions: Conclusions that are derived from the evidence can be included in the report. For example, if an analyst determines that a specific executable is malware by matching the hash with a known strain, and that this malware steals credentials, they are well within their bounds to make that conclusion. However, analysts should be cautious about supposition and making conclusions without the proper evidence to support it. Responders should be careful to never make assumptions or include opinions in the report.
• Definitions: As the forensic report is very technical, it is important to include the necessary definitions. Internal stakeholders, such as legal representatives, will often review the report in the event that legal action is anticipated. They may need further clarification on some of the technical details.
• Exhibits: Output from tools that are too long to include within the body of the report can be included as an addendum. For example, if the output of a Volatility command is several pages long, but the most pertinent data is a single line, the analyst can pull that single line out and include it in the forensic analysis portion while making it clear that the entire output is located as an addendum. It is important to include the entire output of a tool as part of this report to ensure that it will stand up to scrutiny.

One of the key factors of the forensic report is to have a peer-review process before it is issued as part of the incident documentation. This is to ensure that the actions that have been performed, the analysis, and the conclusions match the evidence. This is one of the reasons that analysts should include as much data as possible from the output of tools or through the review. In the event that a forensic report does go to court, understand that an equally or even more qualified forensic analyst may be reviewing the report and critiquing the work. Another responder or analyst should be able to review the report, review the descriptions of the responder's work, and come to the same conclusion. Knowing this may make analysts more focused on preparing their reports.

Whether or not an organization chooses to separate the documentation or prepare a master report, there is certain data that should be captured within the report. Having an idea of what this data is comprised of allows incident response personnel to ensure that they take the proper notes and record their observations while the incident investigation is in progress. Failure to do so may mean that any actions taken, or observations made, are not captured in the report. Furthermore, if the case is going to see the inside of a courtroom, evidence may be excluded. It is better to over document than under document.