Which practice is NOT considered a countermeasure against anti-forensic techniques?

Imposing strict laws against the legal use of tools is not considered a countermeasure against anti-forensic techniques because it primarily focuses on the regulation of tool usage rather than directly addressing the methods used by individuals who might engage in anti-forensic activities. Anti-forensic techniques are often methods that individuals employ to obstruct forensic investigations, such as data deletion, encryption, or creating decoy files.

Countermeasures are typically proactive strategies that cybersecurity and forensic professionals implement to detect, mitigate, or prevent these activities. For example, conducting employee background checks helps ensure that personnel involved in sensitive information handling have a trustworthy history. Regular system auditing identifies vulnerabilities and potential anti-forensic tactics being used in the system, while implementing monitoring software can actively track and log user activities, providing a real-time overview of system integrity and alerting administrators to suspicious actions. These practices create a fortified environment against the malicious intent of potential offenders, thus serving as effective countermeasures.