Integrated Security System Framework Using Blockchain and Digital Forensics Technology

The proliferation of cybersecurity incidents and large-scale data breaches has exposed significant weaknesses in traditional security systems, particularly regarding data integrity, transparency, chain of custody, and forensic readiness. Centralised architectures suffer from single points of failure, log-tampering risks and limited cross-organisational trust. This paper designed, developed and evaluated an Integrated Security System Framework combining blockchain-style integrity mechanisms with digital forensics methodology. It was implemented as a four-layer system: a React presentation layer, two Node.js/Express API services, a Python-based business logic layer, and a data layer that includes an Ethereum-compatible (Hardhat) deployment path together with off-chain filesystem storage. The evaluated core comprises a custom Python blockchain (SHA-256 Proof-of-Work) with Python classes providing contract-style policy enforcement and audit logging. A parallel suite of four Solidity smart contracts was also implemented, but those contracts were not exercised when producing the quantitative results reported here; that distinction is stated explicitly throughout. The design was evaluated by executing the public implementation directly and repeatedly against a functional correctness workload of 100 events and up to 30 evidence items across five independent runs. Six further security and stress tests examined varied file sizes, concurrent access, malformed transactions, unauthorised access, direct tampering and off-chain tampering. These tests located and fixed three real defects, most significantly a concurrency defect that corrupted the blockchain under twenty simultaneous writers; after the fix, chain validity held under 500 concurrent writes. The evaluation also surfaced an unresolved limitation: no identity-authentication mechanism is implemented, so accountability guarantees depend on honest caller identity claims. All evaluation categories scored above 90 percent on the framework's disclosed self-referential scoring formula, and forensic risk-scoring, audit logging, custody tracking and tampering detection functioned as designed within their tested scope. The findings support the feasibility of integrating blockchain-style integrity with digital forensics for evidence management under controlled evaluation conditions, and they underline the necessity of repeated, adversarially minded testing before stronger operational claims are made.

Blockchain, Digital Forensics, Smart Contracts, Chain of Custody, Evidence Integrity

1. Al-Khateeb, H., Epiphaniou, G. and Daly, H. (2019). Blockchain for modern digital forensics: The chain-of-custody as a distributed ledger. In: Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, pp. 149-168. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Blueprint Newspapers Limited (2026). Banks urged to tighten cyber defences, lose over N2.75bn to ATM attacks. Available at: https://blueprint.ng/banks-urged-to-tighten-cyber-defences-lose-over-n2-75bn-to-atm-attacks/ (Accessed: July 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bonomi, S., Casini, M. and Ciccotelli, C. (2020). B-CoC: A Blockchain-based Chain of Custody for Evidences Management in Digital Forensics. In: International Conference on Blockchain Economics, Security and Protocols (Tokenomics 2019). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), vol. 71, pp. 12:1-12:15. Schloss Dagstuhl. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Buschmann, F., Meunier, R., Rohnert, H., Sommerlad, P. and Stal, M. (1996). Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture: A System of Patterns. Wiley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Businessday NG (2026). Nigeria flags rising exposure in $20.9bn global cybercrime surge. Available at: https://businessday.ng/technology/article/nigeria-flags-rising-exposure-in-20-9bn-global-cybercrime-surge/ (Accessed: July 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Collberg, C. and Proebsting, T. A. (2016). Repeatability in computer systems research. Communications of the ACM, 59(3), pp. 62-69. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cucurull, J. and Puiggali, J. (2016). Distributed Immutabilization of Secure Logs. In: Security and Trust Management. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9871. Springer, pp. 122-137. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Falco, M. and Robiolo, G. (2021). Building a Catalogue of ISO/IEC 25010 Quality Measures Applied in an Industrial Context. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1828, 012077. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Fan, C., Ghaemi, S., Khazaei, H. and Musilek, P. (2020). Performance evaluation of blockchain systems: A systematic survey. IEEE Access, 8, pp. 126927-126950. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Garfinkel, S. L. (2010). Digital forensics research: The next 10 years. Digital Investigation, 7, pp. S64-S73. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J. and Ram, S. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), pp. 75-105. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Jeong, J., Kim, D., Lee, B. and Son, Y. (2020). Design of a Digital Evidence Management Model Based on Hyperledger Fabric. Journal of Information Processing Systems, 16(4), pp. 760-773. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kubor v. Dickson (2012). LPELR-9817(SC), Supreme Court of Nigeria. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Li, S., Qin, T. and Min, G. (2019). Blockchain-based digital forensics investigation framework in the internet of things and social systems. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 6(6), pp. 1433-1441. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Liang, X., Shetty, S., Tosh, D., Kamhoua, C., Kwiat, K. and Njilla, L. (2017). ProvChain: A Blockchain-based Data Provenance Architecture in Cloud Environment with Enhanced Privacy and Availability. In: 17th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lone, A. H. and Mir, R. N. (2019). Forensic-chain: Blockchain based digital forensics chain of custody with PoC in Hyperledger Composer. Digital Investigation, 28, pp. 44-55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Mondaq (2025). Legal Implications of Ransomware in Nigeria: Legal Risks, Regulatory Duties and Cybersecurity Compliance. Available at: https://www.mondaq.com/nigeria/security/1691386/legal-implications-of-ransomware-in-nigeria-legal-risks-regulatory-duties-and-cybersecurity-compliance (Accessed: July 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. Available at: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf (Accessed: July 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Nigeria Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) Act 2015 (as amended by the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act 2024). Federal Republic of Nigeria. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023. Federal Republic of Nigeria. Available at: https://ndpc.gov.ng/ (Accessed: July 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Nigeria Evidence Act 2011 (as amended 2023), Section 84. Federal Republic of Nigeria. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. OpenZeppelin (2024). OpenZeppelin Contracts 5.0. Available at: https://www.openzeppelin.com/contracts (Accessed: July 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A. and Chatterjee, S. (2007). A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), pp. 45-77. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Tian, Z., Li, M., Qiu, M., Sun, Y. and Su, S. (2019). Block-DEF: A secure digital evidence framework using blockchain. Information Sciences, 491, pp. 151-165. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. UNODC (2025). Cybercrime Assessment – Nigeria 2025. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Country Office Nigeria. Available at: https://www.unodc.org/conig/uploads/documents/ Cybercrime_Assessment_in_Nigeria_WEB.pdf (Accessed: July 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Vanguard (2026). Cybercrime still hits Nigeria's digital economy hard. Available at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2026/06/cybercrime-still-hits-nigerias-digital-economy-hard/ (Accessed: July 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Zarpala, L. and Casino, F. (2021). A Blockchain-based Forensic Model for Financial Crime Investigation: The Embezzlement Scenario. arXiv:2008.07958. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H. N., Chen, X. and Wang, H. (2018). Blockchain challenges and opportunities: A survey. International Journal of Web and Grid Services, 14(4), pp. 352-375. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• LeafQuest: A Mobile-Based Augmented Reality for Plant Placement, Discovery, and Growth
• Participatory Ergonomic Intervention Approach on Musculoskeletal Disorder (MSD) in Construction Sectors: A Systematic Review
• Integrating GIS into Traffic Incident Management: A Web-Based System
• RideSmart: A Personalized Motorcycle Product Recommendation System Using TF-IDF and Descriptive Analytics for Javidson Motorshop
• Educational Technology Course Design in Pre-Service Teachers Education: A Bibliometric Review of the Research Landscape