Media Evidence, Edit Detection and Deepfake Analysis
Audio, Video and Image Authentication Examinations for Litigation
A recording or a photograph is about to decide your case, and the other side says it was edited or generated. Global Digital Forensics examines the file history, the capture device and the signal itself to show what happened to the media, then defends the findings under oath. Law firms, insurers and businesses have relied on our examiners since 1992.
Why Disputed Recordings Come to GDF
Our examiners have been accepted by courts, deposed and cross examined, and they apply to a recording the same discipline they bring to a laptop or a mailbox: obtain the best available original, document every transformation it went through, test the authenticity question from independent directions and tie every finding to a record another examiner can check.
Each engagement is scoped around the original files, the devices that captured or exported them, the independent copies, the changes the other side alleges and the comparison material available. We examine ordinary and synthetic recordings and images alike, account for how compressed reposts affect the analysis and name the audio, image or video examiner before work begins.
The report sets container and codec observations, waveform and frame comparisons and supported manipulation findings side by side, so counsel can weigh each conclusion on its own footing. Questions about model and application evidence go to our AI forensics practice, and specialized synthetic media questions to deepfake detection and authentication.
Provenance checks follow the C2PA content credentials explainer, and each method is written up so the work can be repeated.
If the other side has already called the recording edited or generated, get a free consultation. An examiner will tell you what to preserve before anyone relies on the file.
The engagement
Start With the Original File and Its History
Media gets edited, transcoded, screen recorded, forwarded, enhanced and generated, and ordinary processing can look like manipulation when the context is missing. We reconstruct that history first, so the report explains how each known transformation affects the evidence before anyone reads meaning into an anomaly.
We examine containers, codecs, metadata, frame and waveform behavior, device and platform context and the source records available. Conclusions carry explicit confidence language and keep evidence of editing apart from evidence of deceptive fabrication, because a cropped clip and a fabricated one are different problems for your case.
The original file is the one that matters, so call (800) 868-8189 before the recording is forwarded, converted or uploaded anywhere else.
Scope
File and metadata examination
Containers, codecs, timestamps, streams and embedded metadata read for internal consistency and for the device and software traces that point to where the file came from.
Video examination
Frame structure, timing, motion, encoding and visual discontinuities compared with the file's history and the camera, phone or platform it is said to come from.
Audio examination
Waveform, spectral, timing, background and encoding characteristics examined for the splices, edits and synthesis the ear misses.
Image examination
Pixels, compression history, metadata, lighting and geometry tested against the claimed source of the photograph.
Synthetic media analysis
Technical and contextual methods combined to show whether a recording or image was generated or altered by AI, with detector scores treated as supporting observations.
Source and platform correlation
Source devices, cloud records, message exports and publication history compared with the file in dispute as independent records.
Methodology
How We Examine Recordings and Images
Preserve the best available source
We obtain the copy closest to the original, hash it and record every known transformation, since a repost has already lost metadata and detail the original still holds.
Examine file structure and history
Structure, streams, codecs and metadata are compared with the expected behavior of the claimed device or platform, so normal processing is accounted for first.
Test the authenticity evidence
Complementary media, signal and provenance analyses are weighed against each alternative explanation, testing the question from independent directions.
Explain the findings and the alternatives
Supported findings, inconsistencies and open questions are reported with calibrated confidence, giving the retaining firm a clear basis for the opinion and a clear view of where the other side will push.
Our free browser tools, the Free Audio Edit Detector, the Free Photo Forensics Tool and the Free Video Forensics Tool, read a working copy on your own computer without uploading it.
Evidence commonly examined
Media Evidence We Examine
We compare original and derivative files and the transformations between them, and we use source devices and application exports for capture and handling context the file alone cannot give. Container, codec and metadata records reconstruct structure and processing, frames, waveforms and spectral features supply the technical observations, and platform and message records trace where the file traveled. Reference recordings or imagery serve as comparison material where suitable examples exist.
What you can expect
Your Authenticity Report and Supporting Records
You receive a media inventory and provenance map of the material and its documented history, a record of the methods and their sequence for another examiner to review, and annotated findings that tie each observation to the question it answers. The expert opinion, exhibits and testimony carry that reasoning into the courtroom.
Tell us what happened and when, and a senior examiner will say which sources to secure first.
Frequently asked
AI Detectors, Social Media Copies and Edits
Can an AI detector prove a video is fake?
No single detector score proves anything on its own. A sound examination combines several technical methods with provenance records and case context, and the report states how much weight each observation carries.
Can you work from a copy downloaded from social media?
Yes. Recompression and stripped metadata narrow what a downloaded copy can show, and the original file or source device usually takes the analysis further. We tell you early whether the copy you hold answers the question.
Does evidence of editing mean fraud?
No. Cropping, transcoding, enhancement and platform processing all change a file. Our report keeps evidence of editing distinct from evidence of deceptive fabrication, and intent is a question other evidence in the matter speaks to.
Free consultation
Plan the Media Examination Before the Deadline
On the first call a senior examiner asks what the recording, photograph or video should show, which originals exist and who disputes it, then sets out the preservation steps, the methods and the delivery date.
Backed by examiners who have testified in federal and state courts.
GDF does not accept pro se litigation cases, and GDF may decline matrimonial or family law cases at our discretion.
Reviewed by Joseph Caruso, Founder, CEO and CTO, CISSP. Last reviewed .