Investigation Techniques & Ethics Flashcards
7 cards from real CFS practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Investigation Techniques & Ethics flashcards as text
An investigator uses social engineering to gain access to a suspect's computer files without authorization. This action is best described as:
Answer: An illegal and unethical method that violates privacy laws
Unauthorized access to computer files via social engineering violates computer fraud laws (e.g., CFAA) and professional ethics regardless of suspected wrongdoing.
During a fraud examination, the investigator identifies multiple red flags but no direct evidence of fraud. The report should:
Answer: Document the red flags and recommend further investigation
Red flags indicate risk but not proof; investigators should document findings and recommend additional steps rather than drawing unsupported conclusions.
What is the primary purpose of conducting a background check on a fraud suspect during an investigation?
Answer: To identify prior incidents, patterns, or undisclosed affiliations relevant to the case
Background checks help investigators identify prior fraud incidents, criminal history, conflicts of interest, or hidden business relationships relevant to the case.
In fraud investigations, 'corroborating evidence' refers to:
Answer: Additional evidence that supports or confirms other evidence already gathered
Corroborating evidence independently supports or strengthens other evidence, increasing the overall reliability of the investigative findings.
A fraud investigator is subpoenaed to testify about a confidential client investigation. The investigator's primary duty is to:
Answer: Testify truthfully while asserting applicable privilege through legal counsel
When subpoenaed, investigators must testify truthfully; any applicable privilege (such as attorney-client) should be asserted by legal counsel, not through refusal to appear.
Which of the following is an example of a 'predication' in a fraud investigation?
Answer: The factual basis or reasonable grounds that justify initiating a fraud examination
Predication is the totality of circumstances that would lead a reasonable, professionally trained person to believe fraud may have occurred, justifying an investigation.
When conducting a fraud investigation involving digital evidence, hash values are used to:
Answer: Verify that digital files have not been altered since collection
Hash values (e.g., MD5, SHA-256) create a unique fingerprint of digital files, allowing investigators to prove files were not modified after collection.