AC468 Unit 4 Deleted File Recovery Exercise Example

Reviewed by Chester Goodwin, MBA Digital Forensics and Investigative Techniques Purdue University Global Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

This AC468 Unit 4 deleted file recovery exercise brings back a bank-change letter from a FAT32 flash drive at Belmonte Fine Foods, an imaginary gourmet goods distributor, and records why its laptop copy could not be recovered. Purdue Global AC 468, Digital Forensics and Investigative Techniques, assigns recovery work like this to BS in Accounting students once the artifacts are understood. The flash drive copy is recovered twice, through its deleted directory entry and through a signature search of unallocated space, and both routes give the same hash. The laptop's solid-state drive returns zeros because TRIM let the controller erase freed blocks. Verification then reads the letter's metadata and compares its text with the emailed PDF.

CourseAC468 Digital Forensics and Investigative Techniques
UnitUnit 4
Paper typeDeleted file recovery exercise
LengthAbout 580 words, 5 pages double-spaced
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolPurdue University Global
ProgramBS in Accounting
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for AC468 Unit 4

1

Removed but Not Overwritten: A Unit 4 Deleted File Recovery Exercise on a Flash Drive and a Solid-State Drive

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

AC468: Digital Forensics and Investigative Techniques

Unit 4 Deleted File Recovery Exercise

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

Belmonte Fine Foods and every file detail are composite; hash values are shortened illustrations; the books and article cited are real.

What this part is doingStating the two outcomes and the two recovery methods in the lead shows the exercise's structure.
2

Method

Both recoveries worked on verified copies of the images from the acquisition record, never on the original media. Each recovered item was hashed on extraction, and every step was logged with the tool and version used.

Recovery 1: The Flash Drive Copy

In the FAT32 directory on the flash drive image, the entry for the letter still exists. When FAT32 deletes a file, it replaces the first character of the name with a deletion marker and marks the file's clusters as free in the allocation table, but it does not erase the clusters themselves. The entry keeps the rest of the name, the size of 48,212 bytes and the starting cluster.

The clusters the entry points to were unallocated but intact: nothing had been written over them in the seventeen days between deletion and imaging. Reading 48,212 bytes from the starting cluster, following the clusters in order, produced a file that opens as a Word document.

A second, independent method confirmed the result. A signature search of the drive's unallocated space looked for the four-byte header that begins every zip archive, since a DOCX file is a zip package. It found the same file at the same starting cluster, and the carved copy's hash matched the copy recovered through the directory entry: SHA-256 beginning 6d2e9a14.

Two recovery methods reaching the same bytes from different starting points, one from the file system's record and one from the raw data alone, make the recovered file far harder to challenge than either method would on its own.

What this part is doingThe highlighted sentence explains why a second method matters, the verification step graders look for.
3

Recovery 2: The Laptop Copy

The laptop's master file table still holds the deleted entry for the desktop copy, naming the file and listing the clusters it occupied. Those clusters read as zeros. On a solid-state drive, the operating system tells the drive which blocks are no longer in use, a command called TRIM, and the drive's controller erases them in the background to keep write speeds high. Research on solid-state media warned early that this behavior can destroy deleted data within minutes, unlike magnetic disks and flash drives without such management (Bell & Boddington, 2010).

The failed recovery is recorded as a finding: a file of this name existed on the desktop and its content was erased by the drive's normal operation after deletion. It is not evidence that anyone wiped it deliberately.

Verification of the Recovered Letter

The document's internal metadata gives a creation time of March 13 at 19:05 UTC, three minutes after the flash drive was first connected, and an author field showing the employee's user name. The author field records the name configured in Word on the machine that saved it; it does not prove who typed the letter. The text of the recovered document matches, word for word, the PDF attached to the March 17 email that requested the bank change, including a misspelling of the supplier's town.

File system structures retain information about deleted files until their space is reused, which is why FAT32 recovery succeeded here (Carrier, 2005). Recovered files should be verified independently before they are relied on (Casey, 2011).

What this part is doingEnding on verification ties the recovered file to the rest of the case's evidence.
4

References

Bell, G. B., & Boddington, R. (2010). Solid state drives: The beginning of the end for current practice in digital forensic recovery? Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 5(3), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.15394/jdfsl.2010.1078

Carrier, B. (2005). File system forensic analysis. Addison-Wesley.

Casey, E. (2011). Digital evidence and computer crime: Forensic science, computers, and the Internet (3rd ed.). Academic Press.

AC468 Unit 4 instructions, in plain terms

Unit 4 of AC468 asks you to recover deleted files and document the work so it can be repeated. State the method first: work only on verified images, hash every recovered item and log each step with tool and version. For each medium, explain how its file system or controller handles deletion, then describe the recovery route, such as a deleted directory entry, a master file table record or a signature search. Where possible, recover the same file by two independent methods and compare their hashes. Report failed recoveries as findings and explain them. Verify the recovered file before interpreting it, and treat metadata like author fields with care. Close by relating the recovered content to other evidence in the case. Cite a file system text and research on solid-state media in APA 7.

How the AC 468 Unit 4 example is put together

The sample's method section states that recovery ran on verified image copies with hashes on extraction. The flash drive recovery explains how FAT32 marks a deleted entry and frees its clusters without erasing them, then reads 48,212 bytes from the starting cluster. A signature search for the zip header at the start of every DOCX file finds the same bytes, and the highlighted sentence explains why two routes matter. The laptop recovery finds the master file table entry intact but the clusters zeroed, and explains TRIM with Bell and Boddington's research, recording the result as a finding and not as wiping. Verification reports a March 13 creation time, an author field limited to the configured user name, and wording identical to the emailed PDF.

Where the points sit in the AC468 Unit 4 rubric

Recovery exercises in AC468 are graded on documented method, correct explanation of each medium and verification. Points go to students who state the method before results and who show that work was done on copies. Explaining why FAT32 and solid-state drives behave differently earns credit; asserting results without that explanation does not. A second independent recovery route, with matching hashes, is rewarded as a mark of reliability. Graders also look for honest handling of failure: a recovery that returned nothing should be explained, not omitted or blamed on deliberate destruction without evidence. Metadata must be interpreted within its limits. APA 7 citations to file system and solid-state research support the explanation.

AC468 Unit 4 help: mistakes that cost points

Many Unit 4 exercises describe a tool's output without explaining what the tool did, so the recovery cannot be repeated. A single recovery route is presented as conclusive. Solid-state results are reported as a failure of technique or as proof of deliberate wiping, rather than as the expected effect of TRIM. Recovered documents are interpreted before they are hashed and exported. Author fields are treated as proof of authorship. The recovered content is never compared with the rest of the case. If your section's practice media differ, such as an exFAT card or a hard disk, our writers can document recovery for that medium with the method and checks your instructor expects.

Get an AC468 Unit 4 example written to your instructions

Flash, magnetic or solid-state: the kind of practice media decides what a Unit 4 recovery can return, so name it, list the software the exercise expects, and attach the prompt and the rubric. Successful and failed recoveries are both documented, each hashed before interpretation. A first custom exercise is free and arrives in 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.

Request this unit free All AC468 units Finished samples

More AC468 papers and BS in Accounting samples

AC468 Unit 4 questions, answered

Why could the flash drive file be recovered but not the laptop copy?

Because the two kinds of storage handle deletion differently. A FAT32 flash drive typically marks the space free and leaves the data until something overwrites it. A solid-state drive, told by the operating system which blocks are no longer in use, often erases them in the background, so the data is gone even though file system records remain.

Does the author field in a document prove who wrote it?

No. The author and last-modified-by fields record the user name configured in the software at the time, which anyone can set to anything. The exercise reports the field, notes that it matches the account's configured name, and treats it as one consistent fact among several rather than as identification.

Can the exercise use my section's practice image?

Yes. Describe the practice media or list the files provided, along with the tools your section expects, the prompt and the rubric. Recovery routes are documented for that media, recovered files are hashed and numbered before they are examined, and any recovery that fails is reported with the reason, which rubrics usually credit.

Where can I find a free AC468 Unit 4 sample paper?

This page holds a full AC468 Unit 4 deleted file recovery exercise at Belmonte Fine Foods with a FAT32 recovery by two methods, a failed solid-state recovery explained, verification of the letter and APA 7 references.

What is a signature search?

It scans raw space for the byte patterns that begin known file types, without relying on the file system's records. A DOCX file begins with the zip archive header, so finding that header in unallocated space locates the letter even if its directory entry were gone.