The awesome folks over at Cyber Triage recently published their 2025 Guide to Registry Forensic Tools, and being somewhat interested in the Windows Registry, I was very interested to take a look. The article is very well-written, and provides an excellent basis for folks who are new to DF/IR work, and new to the Windows Registry.
Within the blog post, there’s a table in the Registry Forensic Tools section (see the image to the right). In the image, we see that one of the metrics or indicators associated with the tools listed are whether or not the tool “handles transaction logs”, with just a statement to that effect.
If someone is new to including the Windows Registry as part of their analysis process, and doesn’t understand the purpose of the transaction logs, nor how they work, they’d likely look at this table and think, “Well, I’m not using RegRipper! Handling the transaction logs are important to Chris Ray, and while I don’t know why, I’m going to go along with what Chris recommends!”
The statement, “Does not handle transaction logs” doesn’t tell the whole story, as I purposely wrote RegRipper to not handle the transaction logs. From my perspective, incorporating transaction logs into your analysis needs to be a purposeful, intentional decision. Incorporating transaction logs certainly has it’s place in any analysis process for Windows systems, but it should not happen automagically, without the analyst/examiners knowledge. And it should not just happen every time. Further, why should I write out code for processing transaction logs, when as it is, there are a number o
[…]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.
[…]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.
This article has been indexed from Windows Incident Response
Read the original article: