Digital Investigations — what happened, and who is likely responsible.
An executive's account starts sending messages they never wrote. A fake profile is soliciting money from your customers using your brand. An employee's inbox shows login activity from a country they have never visited. Someone needs to work out what actually occurred and who is behind it — using the client's own systems, its own accounts, and evidence it lawfully controls. That is the specific, narrow discipline this practice exists for.
Core positioning
The investigative layer between monitoring and evidence.
A digital incident usually triggers two reflexes: watch for what the adversary does next, and lock down the systems that were touched. Both matter, and neither answers the question sitting underneath them — what actually happened here, and who did it. That is a distinct discipline, and it is the one this practice is built around.
Digital Investigations sits between our Threat Intelligence practice and our Digital Forensics practice, and is deliberately distinct from both. Threat Intelligence tracks adversary infrastructure and behaviour on an ongoing basis, before and independent of any specific incident involving this client. Digital Forensics preserves and examines digital evidence to the evidentiary standard a legal or regulatory process requires. This practice is the investigative work in between: taking a specific incident — a compromised account, an impersonation profile, a harassment campaign, a data leak — and establishing what happened and who is likely responsible, drawing on both disciplines without being either one.
The method is lawful by construction, not by disclaimer. We work from the client's own systems and accounts, with client authorisation — authentication logs from the identity provider the client administers, activity history from the platforms the client's own accounts sit on, records the client is legally entitled to request. Where the responsible party operates a third-party account — an impersonation profile, a fraudulent listing, a harassment account — we do not access it; we document it, attribute it through lawful open-source and infrastructure analysis, and pursue it through the channel built for that purpose: the platform's own reporting and trust-and-safety process, or a law-enforcement and legal referral where the conduct is criminal.
What organisations get wrong about digital investigations
Four assumptions that stall a case or put it on the wrong footing
Digital incidents move fast, and the instinct to act immediately is often what makes the investigation harder.
“Just log into their account and see what's there”
We do not access a third party's account without legal authorisation, full stop. Attribution is built from the client's own logs, lawful open-source research, and platform channels — not from accessing accounts that are not the client's to access.
“We're sure it's them, we just need proof”
Working backward from a suspect is how attribution goes wrong. The evidence is examined first; the conclusion is whatever it actually supports, at whatever confidence that earns — including when it points somewhere unexpected.
“Reset everything and move on, we don't need to know how it happened”
Resetting credentials without investigating the access path leaves the door the intruder used wide open, and destroys the log evidence that would have shown what else they touched.
“It's just a fake profile, it's not a real security issue”
Impersonation and harassment cases routinely precede account-compromise attempts, fraud against customers, or reputational damage that outlasts the original profile. They are investigated with the same rigor as a technical compromise.
Seven investigation types, one accountable team
Digital investigations we conduct
Each engagement works from the client's own systems, accounts, and lawfully available evidence — and hands off to Digital Forensics or SIRI Law LLP when the case requires it.
Cybercrime & Online Fraud Investigations
Investigating a cybercrime incident or online fraud scheme targeting the organisation, its customers, or its executives.
- Business-email-compromise & payment-fraud reconstruction
- Fraudulent-site & fake-storefront investigation
- Customer-targeted scam-campaign analysis
Account Compromise & Digital Identity Investigations
Establishing how an account or identity was compromised, using logs and records the client administers.
- Identity-provider & authentication-log analysis
- Session, device & access-pattern reconstruction
- Identity-verification checks via public & licensed records
Data-Leak & Insider Investigations
Determining the source, scope, and likely cause of an exposed or leaked dataset, including possible insider involvement.
- Leak-source scoping & exposure-scope confirmation
- Client-authorised insider access-pattern review
- Dark-web & leak-forum exposure confirmation
Online Impersonation Investigations
Investigating a fake profile, page, or account impersonating the organisation or an executive, from the victim's own evidence.
- Evidence capture from the victim's own record
- Lawful open-source attribution of the operator
- Platform trust-and-safety escalation & takedown support
Digital Harassment & Threat Investigations
Investigating a targeted harassment or threat campaign against an employee or executive, working from the victim's own record.
- Threat-communication documentation & pattern analysis
- Cross-platform account correlation
- Law-enforcement & legal referral support
IP-Theft & Malicious-Infrastructure Investigations
Investigating digital exfiltration of intellectual property and the infrastructure used to attack or defraud the organisation.
- Client-authorised data-movement & exfiltration review
- Attacker infrastructure mapping via lawful OSINT
- Coordination with Threat Intelligence for ongoing exposure
Digital Evidence Analysis
Initial investigative triage of digital evidence to identify leads, before formal forensic preservation where a case requires it.
- Investigative triage of logs, messages & device data
- Lead development for interview & escalation planning
- Handoff to Digital Forensics for chain-of-custody preservation
Attribution, not assumption
Doing nothing vs. resetting and moving on vs. SIRI
The difference is whether anyone ever finds out what happened, how it happened, and who was behind it.
| Approach | No investigation | Reset & move on | SIRI Digital Investigations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Establishes how access was obtained | No | No | Yes — before remediation, not instead of it |
| Attribution stated with a confidence level | N/A | N/A | Yes — every finding, every case |
| Works only from lawful, client-controlled evidence | N/A | Usually | Always — by design, not disclaimer |
| Connected to forensics & legal follow-through | No | No | Yes — one team, plus SIRI Law LLP where needed |
| Produces a case file for platform or legal escalation | No | No | Standard deliverable |
Comparison reflects typical outcomes of taking no investigative action or resetting credentials without investigation, versus SIRI Security's documented methodology; individual circumstances vary.
Methodological alignment
Frameworks & standards our methodology draws on
Our digital-investigation methodology follows a documented evidentiary lifecycle, aligned to standards used in cyber-incident handling and, where required, legal proceedings.
Framework references reflect publicly available standards our methodology is aligned to; they are not a claim of certification, licensure, or law-enforcement authority. SIRI Security conducts all intelligence and investigative work through lawful, ethical means and does not misrepresent its personnel as government, law-enforcement, or intelligence-agency officials.
Why SIRI for digital investigations specifically
The team that runs your incident response also runs this investigation
This is where the founder sees SIRI most differentiated: the investigative layer, offensive-security depth, and legal follow-through, all in one place.
One team, not three handoffs
The people investigating a cybercrime or compromise case sit inside the same team that runs SIRI's offensive security, threat intelligence, and digital forensics work — no findings lost in translation between vendors.
Lawful by construction
We work from the client's own systems, accounts and legally available records. Third-party accounts are never accessed without authorisation — attribution and escalation happen through lawful channels instead.
Attribution at earned confidence
Every finding states how confident the evidence actually makes us — high, moderate, or indicative only — rather than presenting a working theory as a certainty.
A path to resolution, not just a report
Findings translate directly into platform escalation, law-enforcement referral, or litigation support through SIRI Law LLP — the investigation is a step toward resolution, not an end in itself.
Who this is built for
Organisations this capability is built for
How an engagement runs
From a digital incident to an attributed, actionable finding
Preserve & Scope
Secure logs, records and account data before they rotate or are lost, and define the specific incident and question the investigation needs to answer.
Hours–Days 1–2Reconstruct
Rebuild the sequence of events from authentication logs, platform activity, and other records the client owns or is lawfully entitled to.
Days 2–7Attribute & Corroborate
Build attribution from infrastructure, behavioural, and open-source indicators, corroborated across independent sources.
1–2 WeeksReport & Escalate
Deliver a decision-ready case file with stated confidence levels, and support platform, law-enforcement, or legal escalation as required.
At closeFrequently asked
Digital Investigations, answered directly
Do you access the accounts of the person you're investigating?
No. We do not access third-party accounts without legal authorisation. Investigations work from the client's own systems and accounts, public records, licensed data sources, and voluntary cooperation. Where a responsible party operates a third-party account, we document and attribute it, then pursue platform reporting or legal referral rather than accessing it directly.
How is this different from Threat Intelligence?
Threat Intelligence tracks adversary infrastructure and behaviour on an ongoing basis, generally before and independent of a specific incident. Digital Investigations starts from a specific incident that has already occurred and works out what happened and who is likely responsible.
How is this different from Digital Forensics?
Digital Forensics preserves and examines digital evidence to the standard a legal or regulatory process requires — the evidentiary layer. Digital Investigations is the investigative layer that determines what happened and who is likely responsible, and hands specific evidence to Forensics for formal chain-of-custody preservation when a case requires it.
Can you guarantee you'll identify who is responsible?
No, and we would not trust a firm that claimed otherwise. Attribution depends on the evidence available. We report findings at the confidence level the evidence actually supports — sometimes high confidence, sometimes indicative only, and occasionally inconclusive.
What can you do about a fake profile or impersonation account?
We document the evidence, attribute the account through lawful open-source and infrastructure analysis, and escalate through the platform's trust-and-safety reporting channel and, where the conduct is criminal or defamatory, through law-enforcement or legal referral via SIRI Law LLP.
Is this work admissible if the matter goes to litigation or a police report?
Where an engagement is scoped for that purpose, we apply chain-of-custody and documentation practices intended to support it. Admissibility ultimately depends on the presiding jurisdiction and how counsel presents the evidence.
Know what happened, and who is likely behind it
A digital incident deserves an investigation, not just a reset.
Start with a confidential scoping conversation about the incident in front of you.
Related