Article Sidebar

Download
Statistic
Read Counter : 23

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Purpose: this study determines how the digital forensics laboratory (DFL) is used to assist investigative audit.
Method: this study adopts a descriptive qualitative research design.
Results: the use of BPKP’s Digital Forensics Laboratory (DFL) complies with international standards, which have been codified in BPKP rules and SOPs.
Novelty: the author examines the use of the DFL, both the concept and the actual practices.
Contribution: this study enriches the literature on digital forensics and serve as a reference for BPKP's Deputy for Investigation in enhancing the effectiveness of digital forensics laboratory utilization.


Abstrak: Merekonstruksi Integritas Bukti Audit melalui Forensik Digital
Tujuan: untuk mengetahui bagaimana laboratorium forensik digital (DFL) digunakan dalam membantu audit investigatif.
Metode: penelitian ini menggunakan desain penelitian deskriptif kualitatif.
Hasil: penggunaan laboratorium forensik digital BPKP telah mematuhi standar internasional yang telah dikodifikasi ke dalam peraturan dan SOP BPKP.
Kebaruan: penulis menguji penggunaan DFL, baik dari sisi konsep maupun praktik aktual di lapangan.
Kontribusi: penelitian ini memperkaya literatur mengenai forensik digital dan menjadi referensi bagi Deputi Bidang Investigasi BPKP dalam meningkatkan efektivitas pemanfaatan laboratorium forensik digital.

Keywords

Certification Digital Evidence Digital Forensic Digital Forensic Laboratory (DFL) Licensing Training

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Naela Zaqiyatul Misqiyah, Sopian

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

References

  1. Rosyadi CF, Budding T. The Effectiveness of BPKP Fraud Audit Finding on Determining the Level of Corruption in Indonesian Provinces. Journal of Society and Governance 2017;1:88–109.
  2. BPKP. Peraturan Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan Republik Indonesia Nomor 17 Tahun 2017 tentang Pedoman Pengelolaan Kegiatan Bidang Investigasi. BPKP 2017.
  3. Sinosi SM, Moerdianto R, Pontoh GT, Mediaty. Implementasi Big Data Analytics dalam Praktik Audit pada Perusahaan: Literature Review. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis 2022;11:195–203.
  4. Machrusy MM Al, Dewi MA. Terungkapnya Kasus Korupsi melalui Bukti Audit. Kultura: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Sosial Dan Humaniora 2023;1:100–7.
  5. Fadhli MS. Kedudukan UU ITE dalam Ketentuan Alat Bukti Elektronik sebagai Alat Bukti Tambahan Kejahatan Siber. Jurnal Hukum Dan Kewarganegaraan 2024;5.
  6. Salih K, Dabagh N. Digital Forensic Tools: A Literature Review. Journal of Education and Science 2023;32:109–24. https://doi.org/10.33899/edusj.2023.137420.1304.
  7. K. Sindhu K, B. Meshram B. Digital Forensics and Cyber Crime Datamining. Journal of Information Security 2012;03:196–201. https://doi.org/10.4236/jis.2012.33024.
  8. Casino F, Dasaklis TK, Spathoulas GP, Anagnostopoulos M, Ghosal A, Borocz I, et al. Research Trends, Challenges, and Emerging Topics in Digital Forensics: A Review of Reviews. IEEE Access 2022;10:25464–93. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3154059.
  9. Anggraini Y. Kekuatan Hukum Alat Bukti Elektronik dan Kredibilitasnya dalam Pembuktian Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Hukum Dan Kewarganegaraan 2024;6.
  10. Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approachs. 5th ed. California: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2018.
  11. Saunders M, Lewis P, Thornhill A. Research Methods for Business Students: Fifth Edition. 5th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education; 2009.
  12. Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, DiCenso A, Blythe J, Neville AJ. The Use of Triangulation in Qualitative Research. Oncol Nurs Forum 2014;41:545–7. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547.
  13. Fernando D, Heniarti DD, Firman Zakaria CA. Transformasi Alat Bukti Elektronik Menggunakan Digital Forensik dalam Pembaharuan Hukum Acara Pidana . Journal Justiciabelen (JJ) 2025;5:60. https://doi.org/10.35194/jj.v5i01.5506.
  14. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). ISO/IEC 27037:2012 Information Technology - Security Techniques - Guidelines for Identification, Collection, Acquisition. and Preservation of Digital Evidence 2012:1–48.
  15. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). ISO/IEC 27042:2015 Information Technology - Security Techniques - Guidelines for The Analysis and Interpretation of Digital Evidence 2015:1–11.
  16. Chamberlain RT. Chain of Custody: Its Importance and Requirements for Clinical Laboratory Specimens. Lab Med 1989;20:477–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/20.7.477.
  17. Benner J. Establish a Transparent Chain-of-Custody to Mitigate Risk and Ensure Quality of Specialized Samples. Biopreserv Biobank 2009;7:151–3. https://doi.org/10.1089/bio.2010.0002.
  18. Al-Khafaji NYH, Noori MI, Abbas ZM, Sharif SJ. Review safety and security of scientific in laboratories (S3IL). American Journal of Applied Science and Technology 2025;05:5–8. https://doi.org/10.37547/ajast/Volume05Issue01-02.
  19. Chesnokova E V. On the Development of Working with Personnel in Forensic Organizations under the Requirements of the International Standard ISO/IEC 17025:2017. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science 2020;15:75–83. https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2020-1-75-83.
  20. Craiger P. Training and Education in Digital Evidence. Handbook of Digital and Multimedia Forensic Evidence, Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; n.d., p. 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-577-0_2.
  21. Villar-Vega HF, Perez-Lopez LF, Moreno-Sanchez J. Computer forensic analysis protocols review focused on digital evidence recovery in hard disks devices. J Phys Conf Ser 2019;1418:012008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1418/1/012008.
  22. Hershensohn J. I.T. Forensics: The Collection and Presentation of Digital Evidence. US Department of Justice FBI 2005:1–14.
  23. Bulbul HI, Yavuzcan HG, Ozel M. Digital forensics: An Analytical Crime Scene Procedure Model (ACSPM). Forensic Sci Int 2013;233:244–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2013.09.007.
  24. Yudha F. Perancangan Nenggala Disk Duplicator (NDD) untuk Mendukung Proses Investigasi Forensik Digital. Teknoin 2018;24:29–40. https://doi.org/10.20885/teknoin.vol24.iss1.art4.
  25. Akbal E, Dogan S. Forensics Image Acquisition Process of Digital Evidence. International Journal of Computer Network and Information Security 2018;10:1–8. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijcnis.2018.05.01.
  26. Horsman G. An “order of data acquisition” for digital forensic investigations. J Forensic Sci 2022;67:1215–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14979.
  27. a Abdul–Samad A, Md Siraj M, Hajar Othman S, Hafiz Rahman M, Zaharudin Ahmad Darus M. Comprehensive Review on Data Preservation Models and Standards in Digital Forensic. 2024 International Conference on Data Science and Its Applications (ICoDSA), IEEE; 2024, p. 277–82. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICoDSA62899.2024.10651616.
  28. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). ISO/IEC 27043:2015 Information Technology - Security Techniques - Incident Investigation Principles and Processes 2015:1–42.
  29. Botha JG, Leenen L. Cryptocurrency-crime Investigation: Fraudulent use of Bitcoin in a Divorce Case. International Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security 2024;19:34–42. https://doi.org/10.34190/iccws.19.1.2050.