The unwanted effects of imprecise language in forensic science standards

Abstract

The author has previously contributed to work on requirements definitions in digital forensic methods, and identified a potential gap which could not be fully explained at the time (Marshall and Paige, 2018). The former Forensic Science Regulator (FSR), with others, commented on this and challenged the finding (Tully et al., 2020). This paper re-addresses this issue and explores the issue of language used in the various standards from ISO/IEC 17 025 (2017) through to the FSR's own guidance on digital forensic method (Forensic Science Regulator, 2020), comparing it with language used in other related standards and in software engineering standards. From this, the author proposes that the language used by the FSR may cause an over-emphasis on establishing requirements for the ultimate end-user, to the detriment of requirements for purely internal use of processes. This can also result in overly complex methods, which are inherently difficult to fully validate, being produced. Furthermore, the use of overloaded terminology may also lead to confusion about some key concepts in the various stages of method validation and re-validation.