eprintid: 136533 rev_number: 54 eprint_status: archive userid: 216917 dir: disk0/00/13/65/33 datestamp: 2025-08-28 07:11:24 lastmod: 2025-08-28 07:11:24 status_changed: 2025-08-28 07:11:24 type: thesis metadata_visibility: show creators_name: Nabila Nur Rahmita, - creators_name: Rizki Hikmawan, - creators_nim: NIM2101190 creators_nim: NIDN0031078803 creators_id: Nabilanurrahmita@upi.edu creators_id: hikmariz@upi.edu contributors_type: http://www.loc.gov/loc.terms/relators/THS contributors_name: Rizki Hikmawan, - contributors_nidn: NIDN0031078803 contributors_id: hikmariz@upi.edu title: KOMPARASI EFEKTIVITAS METODE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY (NIST) DENGAN NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE (NIJ) DALAM ANALISIS BARANG BUKTI DIGITAL PADA APLIKASI TIKTOK ispublished: pub subjects: T1 divisions: Pend.STI_S1_PWT full_text_status: restricted keywords: Forensik Digital, Bukti Digital, NIST, NIJ, TikTok. Digital Forensics, Digital Evidence, NIST, NIJ, TikTok. note: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=GoFVceoAAAAJ ID SINTA Dosen Pembimbing: Rizki Hikmawan: 6122897 abstract: Peningkatan signifikan dalam penyebaran hoaks melalui platform media sosial seperti TikTok menuntut pendekatan forensik digital yang efektif dan terstandarisasi. Namun, belum ada penelitian yang secara khusus membandingkan efektivitas metode National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) dan National Institute of Justice (NIJ) dalam menganalisis bukti digital dari TikTok. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji perbedaan efektivitas kedua metode tersebut dalam hal kelengkapan data, integritas bukti, dan efisiensi waktu. Metode yang digunakan adalah pendekatan kuantitatif komparatif dengan desain kuasi-eksperimen, menggunakan FTK Imager untuk akuisisi dan Autopsy untuk analisis artefak. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kedua metode mencapai kelengkapan data 100% dengan integritas terjaga (hash match), tanpa perbedaan signifikan secara statistik (p > 0,05). Metode NIST lebih efisien dalam waktu (605 menit), sedangkan NIJ unggul dalam dokumentasi awal. Temuan ini memberikan panduan praktis bagi praktisi forensik dalam memilih metode sesuai konteks investigasi, serta mendukung pengembangan standar forensik digital nasional. ----- The significant rise in hoax dissemination through social media platforms like TikTok demands effective and standardized digital forensic approaches. However, no study has specifically compared the effectiveness of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and National Institute of Justice (NIJ) methods in analyzing digital evidence from TikTok. This study aims to examine the differences in effectiveness between the two methods in terms of data completeness, evidence integrity, and time efficiency. A comparative quantitative approach with a quasi-experimental design was employed, using FTK Imager for acquisition and Autopsy for artifact analysis. The results indicate that both methods achieved 100% data completeness with maintained integrity (hash match), with no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). The NIST method was more time-efficient (605 minutes), while NIJ excelled in initial documentation. These findings offer practical guidance for forensic practitioners in selecting methods based on investigative contexts and support the development of national digital forensic standards. date: 2025-08-19 date_type: published institution: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia department: KODEPRODI59201#Pendidikan Sistem dan Teknologi Informasi Kampus Purwakarta_S1 thesis_type: other thesis_name: other official_url: https://repository.upi.edu/ related_url_url: https://perpustakaan.upi.edu/ related_url_type: org citation: Nabila Nur Rahmita, - and Rizki Hikmawan, - (2025) KOMPARASI EFEKTIVITAS METODE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY (NIST) DENGAN NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE (NIJ) DALAM ANALISIS BARANG BUKTI DIGITAL PADA APLIKASI TIKTOK. S1 thesis, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. document_url: http://repository.upi.edu/136533/8/S_PSTI_2101190_Title.pdf document_url: http://repository.upi.edu/136533/2/S_PSTI_2101190_Chapter1.pdf document_url: http://repository.upi.edu/136533/3/S_PSTI_2101190_Chapter2.pdf document_url: http://repository.upi.edu/136533/4/S_PSTI_2101190_Chapter3.pdf document_url: http://repository.upi.edu/136533/5/S_PSTI_2101190_Chapter4.pdf document_url: http://repository.upi.edu/136533/6/S_PSTI_2101190_Chapter5.pdf document_url: http://repository.upi.edu/136533/7/S_PSTI_2101190_Appendix.pdf