Digital Forensics Firm Fraudently Represented Goods, Services, Suit Alleges

An unknown threat actor placed Christopher Brown’s personal information on the internet via “misappropriated conduct” on PlayStation and Microsoft services while Brown was playing video games, said the Rochester, New York, pro se plaintiff in a fraud complaint Monday (docket 6:23-cv-06566) against Digital Forensics in U.S. District Court for Western New York in Rochester. Brown sought documentation from Digital Forensics that would help him discover information about the threat actor, it said.

Brown experienced computer fraud and abuse beginning in 2018 through placement of Social Security numbers, bank account information, cellphone numbers, “known whereabouts of family members, threats of such to kidnap or harm children” and other information that led to the theft and deformation of intellectual property and customer information, the complaint said. He also received email originating from Africa that stated: “My mother is sick and needs help send can you send me some money,” the complaint said. The plaintiff responded that he couldn’t help, the complaint said, and Brown then sought digital forensics services to capture evidence of the threat actor.

The plaintiff found Warrensville, Ohio-based Digital Forensics and initiated contact through its message portal, saying he wanted digital evidence that could be used as evidence in a judicial proceeding against the threat actor. Brown was offered such a service for $800 to cover phases one and two of digital investigation, which would include a detailed report, the complaint said. When Brown inquired about documentation after phase one, he was told he would have to deposit $2,500-$5,000 for phase two, which would include the evidence he sought.

Brown also contracted with Digital Forensics for services when an app on his cellphone “began to show ailments that more than one user was on the phone,” the complaint said. Digital Forensics employees said Brown needed to send in his device for forensics service. Again, the defendant failed to provide the documentation Brown would need for a legal proceeding and told him he would need to contract for additional services to get details of the investigation, the complaint said. When Brown received his phone he could no longer access the device due to it "possibly being reconfigured,” the complaint said.

In addition, Brown paid $250 to the defendant under another contract for data recovery on a hard drive but was told the hard drive was broken, said the complaint. The defendant said another $800 would be required for “full recovery” of the hard drive, it said.

Brown asked for all his money back for the “nonperformance and multitude of contracts” with the defendant, which “failed to perform such contractual obligations,” the complaint said. The defendant told Brown he would refund him the funds he paid if he would sign legal documents that would "halt his rights" to bring claims against Digital Forensics, which didn't provide the evidence Brown sought, it said.

The breach of contract suit seeks compensatory, punitive or exemplary, consequential and future damages, plus legal fees and costs. Brown also asserts violations of express warranty, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and violation of U.S. Code 1512 for tampering with and preventing judicial proceedings. Digital Forensics didn’t comment.