If someone uses the PKI infrastructure to send secure emails, what type of forensic evidence will be left behind? If someone uses the Public Key Encryption (PKI) infrastructure, professionals can obtain only digital evidence that reveals encrypted traffic and the public key used by two parties involved in the communication of some data (Tubewar, 2010). However, the private key that allows to find out what information was transferred will not be obtained as it is usually never sent from one person to another and remains hidden (Itfreetraining, 2013a). Still, this information is critical for the professionals as it is the only thing that allows them to find out what was written. If someone accepts or associates a certificate to view a website in a browser, what type of forensic evidence will you find? If someone accepts or associates a certificate to view a website in a browser, forensic investigators get a chance to gather a lot of helpful information. In this way, it will be possible to find out which authority issued it. Moreover, there is an opportunity to get to know who owns this certificate. As a result, the professional can define when it was used and if it was used by the same person to whom the certificate was issued. An expiry date can be found as well as the private code utilized by the user and digital signature (Itfreetraining, 2013b). Can a subject of an investigation be compelled to provide a password for an encrypted file? A subject of an investigation may not be compelled but asked by a professional to provide a password for an encrypted file. Of course, people’s private information is protected by The Fifth Amendment; however, the investigator can ask one to provide not only the passwords but also the keys during the interview. As no key disclosure laws exist in the USA, this information cannot be demanded. As a result, a subject has an opportunity to “forget” to give this data. The court has a right to repeat the request and sometimes even to order one to provide the keys, insisting on incarceration in case of reluctance to obey. Still, such a situation does not appeal to the court, and the forces are often put at “cracking” the code after hearing (Wolfe, 2003). How can a subject of an investigation avoid providing a password? As it was mentioned previously, the subject of the investigation is not obliged to provide a passport if one is not willing to. When having an interview, one rarely refuses to give the information directly; this person can alter the topic of the conversation when being asked about the password and then just do not refer to this question again. It would look as if the subject just forgot that he was asked to reveal this data. The suspect can just say that he/she does not remember the keys at all. One is also able to keep silent and hide information (Wolfe, 2003). What are six alternatives (identified in the Wolfe paper) for obtaining a password without a subject’s cooperation? In his paper, Wolfe (2003) states that the information can be obtained without the subject’s cooperation. He claims that forensic investigators can crack the code if it is weak enough. They have an opportunity to use a dictionary search for the potential key, as a suspect system