Memory forensics tools: a comparative analysis

May 21, 2026

Upload by Levi

Memory forensics tools support incident response by extracting and presenting digital artifacts from volatile RAM. This paper compares three widely used tools—Volatility, Autopsy, and Redline—through malware-focused evaluation. Three malware behavior scenarios are constructed using 30 Trojan samples executed in a controlled environment, and the ability of each tool to identify malicious evidence is assessed. CPU load and memory consumption are also measured during analysis on Windows, and Volatility shows the highest accuracy; Redline uses more CPU, while Autopsy requires more memory resources.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages26

Reading Time1 h 6 min

Introduction

Memory forensics and incident response

Motivation for comparative tool evaluation

Scope, evaluation model, and measurement approach

Comparative evaluation methodology

FAQs

Which memory forensics tools are compared in the paper?

The paper compares three tools: Volatility, Autopsy, and Redline.

How does the paper evaluate malware forensics capabilities?

It runs 30 Trojan malware samples in a controlled environment on Windows, defines three malware behavior scenarios, and evaluates how each tool identifies malicious evidence in the resulting memory dumps.

What are the main findings about accuracy and resource usage?

Volatility provides the most accurate memory analysis. Redline consumes more CPU resources, while Autopsy needs more memory resources to analyze a memory image file.

May 21, 2026

Upload by Levi