Understand the discipline
Forensic lifecycle, acquisition, hashing, disk/network/memory/cloud concepts, tool onboarding, the Starter Evidence Pack, investigation-method templates and one complete guided evidence investigation.
Open free reference ↗GNU Legal × Gnu Group Learning Academy · Practitioner Laboratory
Digital & Cyber Forensics Practitioner
Move from a guided free investigation into persistent multi-case practitioner work. Control evidence, document examination methods, build timelines, test competing hypotheses, pass a defensibility gate and produce reviewable investigation reports.
Free → paid progression
Learn and complete a guided investigation for free. Pay for persistent multi-case practitioner work.
The GNU Legal reference now includes a GNU-created Starter Evidence Pack and one guided investigation. The paid Academy layer adds a persistent structured workbench, progressively harder cases, evidence-linked findings, examiner challenge and exportable investigation reports.
Work the investigation
Persistent case intake, evidence inventory, integrity review, working-copy register, examination log, timeline, hypothesis matrix, findings register, defensibility gate, Senior Examiner challenge and JSON/Markdown exports.
Defend what the evidence proves
The workbench separates observation, inference, attribution and conclusion. A valid login, matched IP address or attached device cannot silently become a claim about a specific human actor.
Who this is for
For practitioners who need to reason from evidence.
Prior professional forensic experience is not required, but learners should be comfortable with basic operating-system and network concepts.
IT → DFIR
Linux, Windows, network and platform administrators moving toward incident response, investigations or security engineering.
SOC / Incident Response
Analysts who want stronger timeline correlation, hypothesis testing, evidence selection and reporting discipline.
Legal / Compliance
Advocates, investigators and compliance professionals who need to understand provenance, integrity, technical limitations and defensible digital-evidence reporting.
Prerequisites
Working familiarity with Linux or Windows, TCP/IP/networking and basic security concepts. No commercial forensic suite is required.
Technical environment
Browser-first, with optional local-tool depth.
The core laboratory runs in the browser so learners can focus on evidence reasoning without building a specialist workstation first.
Inside the browser
Synthetic host, identity, filesystem and network artefacts; structured evidence inventory; working-copy register; examination log; Timeline Studio; hypothesis matrix; findings register; report builder; persistent progress.
Optional local analysis
Selected future/advanced exercises may use downloadable PCAPs, logs, filesystem extracts or memory artefacts with open tools such as Wireshark, Autopsy/Sleuth Kit, Volatility and standard Linux utilities. Any local-tool requirement will be identified before the case.
What you export
A structured JSON case record plus an editable Markdown investigation-report draft containing scope, evidence links, methods, timeline, hypotheses, findings, confidence, limitations and requested next evidence.
Access model
The entitlement has no fixed expiry in this release while it remains active. Browser sessions expire for security, and access can be restored with the learner email and issued access code.
Try the method
See the Quality Gate challenge an overreach.
A short public Guided-mode preview demonstrates the reasoning mechanic before purchase. It is not one of the full paid case files.
Guided preview · synthetic Windows evidence
Can you prove data theft from these facts?
E-01USBSTORRemovable device DEV-4421 was enumerated.
E-02MountedDevicesThe volume was mapped to drive E: during the relevant session.
E-03Jump ListA recent-item artefact references E:\\project-export.zip.
Learner draft
“The employee stole the project archive using a USB drive.”
Senior Examiner
Challenge the conclusion.
The laboratory does not score confidence by how strongly a conclusion is worded. It asks whether each proposition is supported by the evidence.
Launch investigations
Three paid cases. One disciplined method.
These cards preview the paid Practitioner investigations. Select any case to jump to Practitioner access. Already purchased? Open the Investigation Laboratory directly.
🔒 PRACTITIONER CASE · CASE 01 · Foundation → Analyst · 70% guidance
Suspicious USB / Data Removal
A project team reports that a confidential design archive may have been copied shortly before an employee left the organisation. A USB device was connected during the relevant period. Determine what the evidence establishes without assuming that device attachment proves data theft.
Objective: Separate device presence, volume mapping, archive creation, shell interaction and file-operation evidence into distinct propositions; then document what is established about transfer and what remains unresolved about human attribution and intent.
Primary environment: Windows endpoint · Registry, NTFS, Recent Items and endpoint telemetry
Unlock Investigation Lab →🔒 PRACTITIONER CASE · CASE 02 · Analyst · 45% guidanceLinux Server Compromise
A public Linux application server generated an outbound alert after an unusual SSH session. Reconstruct the likely sequence from authentication, process, service and web evidence while preserving uncertainty about initial access.
Objective: Correlate host artifacts into a defensible timeline and identify which statements are observations, which are inferences and which still require corroboration.
Primary environment: Linux server · SSH, sudo, filesystem, process and web evidence
Unlock Investigation Lab →🔒 PRACTITIONER CASE · CASE 03 · Analyst → Examiner · 20% guidanceSuspicious Data Transfer
Network monitoring recorded a large encrypted outbound session from an engineering endpoint after a compressed archive was created. Determine whether the supplied evidence supports exfiltration, and state the attribution limits.
Objective: Correlate endpoint and network evidence without treating encrypted traffic volume or DNS resolution as proof of content or intent.
Primary environment: Enterprise endpoint · filesystem, application, identity, DNS and TLS metadata
Unlock Investigation Lab →All artefacts are synthetic training material. Case previews do not expose paid evidence. Full case files open only inside the entitled Practitioner Laboratory.
Investigation method
From case intake to a defensible report.
The workbench enforces the same method across all three cases while guidance deliberately reduces from Case 01 to Case 03.
Case intake→Evidence inventory→Integrity review→Working copies→Examination log→Timeline→Hypothesis matrix→Findings register→Defensibility gate→Report
Legal & quality framework
Technical findings must survive evidentiary scrutiny.
The programme teaches documentation that supports review and authentication. It does not promise admissibility or replace applicable law, laboratory SOPs, competent legal advice or judicial determination.
Electronic-record foundation
Casework reinforces provenance, integrity, manner of production, device particulars and limitations relevant to electronic-record handling and Section 63 certification where applicable.
India Code ↗Authentication concepts
International comparison introduces authentication under Rule 901 and certified electronic-evidence concepts under Rule 902(13)–(14), without treating those rules as universal requirements.
Federal Rules of Evidence ↗Incident-reporting decision
Cases 02 and 03 include a reporting-decision layer: determine whether the facts fit a reportable category, identify when notice arose, and separate an initial report from later evidentiary supplementation.
CERT-In directions ↗Commencement-aware breach reasoning
Case 03 requires learners to check whether the relevant DPDP provisions are in force for the hypothetical incident date before applying a personal-data-breach analysis. The exercise distinguishes proven transfer from assumptions about content and affected individuals.
Commencement notification ↗Programme roadmap
Three launch cases, with deeper evidence domains next.
Roadmap items are planned learning expansions, not included deliverables for the current purchase.
Windows intrusion / ransomware + memoryM365 / business email compromiseAWS CloudTrail / IAM investigationAndroid artefactsAdvanced memory forensics
Practitioner access
Unlock the Investigation Laboratory.
Introductory access is ₹1,499.00 inclusive of GST. The purchase is for the three-case Investigation Laboratory, persistent structured workbench, progressive guidance, Senior Examiner challenges, defensibility gates and exportable JSON/Markdown investigation records. The GNU Legal reference and Starter Evidence investigation remain free.
Credential clarity: practitioner assessment and certificate are not included in the current release. The Academy Demo Certificate in the site navigation demonstrates the separate Fundamentals certificate system and is not a credential for this programme.
Need seats for a team, college or training cohort? Contact the Academy for institutional access options.
Secure checkout is processed by Razorpay. Access is granted only after server-side verification of a captured payment.
Loading enrolment options…