Skip to main content

Andrew Vu

Digital Forensics & Incident Response · Security Analyst

Oregon, USAB.S. Computer Science + Cybersecurity Certificate, Oregon State University, 2026

CompTIA Security+ — scheduled August 2026

Casework

Each page states what the evidence established, and — separately — what it did not, with the artifact that would settle each open question.

Tooling

Grouped by function.

Forensics & Incident Response

  • Autopsy
  • FTK Imager
  • Registry Explorer
  • ShellBags Explorer
  • HxD
  • Windows Event Viewer
  • E01 evidence images
  • Registry hive analysis (SYSTEM, SOFTWARE, SAM, NTUSER.DAT, UsrClass.dat)
  • USBSTOR & MountedDevices
  • ShellBags
  • MRU keys
  • Event log analysis
  • File carving & signature analysis
  • Timeline reconstruction
  • Malware detection triage
  • Anti-forensics detection
  • Chain of custody
  • Expert witness reporting

Detection, Windows & Active Directory

  • Wazuh (SIEM)
  • Sysmon
  • Autoruns
  • Process Explorer
  • Process Monitor
  • Windows Advanced Audit Policy
  • PowerShell script-block logging
  • Active Directory Domain Services
  • Group Policy
  • NTLM & Kerberos
  • SMB signing
  • RDP / Network Level Authentication

Linux, Network & Cloud

  • Linux hardening
  • OpenSSH / sshd_config
  • vsftpd
  • Wireshark
  • Packet analysis
  • TCP/IP
  • DNS
  • AWS IAM
  • Google Cloud IAM
  • Service accounts
  • Least-privilege role design
  • RBAC
  • VMware vSphere
  • Docker
  • CI/CD

Governance & Frameworks

  • NIST Cybersecurity Framework
  • CIS Controls
  • COBIT
  • ISO 27001
  • DISA STIGs
  • Risk assessment
  • Vulnerability assessment
  • Security policy development

Development & ML

  • Python
  • Java
  • JavaScript/TypeScript
  • C/C++
  • SQL
  • Bash
  • PyTorch
  • Convolutional neural networks
  • React Native
  • Next.js
  • FastAPI
  • REST APIs
  • PostgreSQL

Security coursework

Oregon State University.

  • CS 473Digital Forensics
  • CS 373Defense Against the Dark Arts: Enterprise Defense
  • ECE 478Network Security
  • CS 427Cryptography
  • CS 370Introduction to Security
  • BIS 482Information Security Governance
  • Cloud Application Development

Additional security work

Security governance framework comparison

BIS 482 Information Security Governance · Team assignment

Compared CIS Controls, the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, and COBIT for a small healthcare clinic risk assessment, evaluating control specificity, implementation burden, governance scope, and top-down versus bottom-up adoption; recommended CIS Controls as the practical entry point for an organization without a mature risk program. Also designed an enterprise security staffing model spanning CISO, security manager, architect, analyst, incident responder, IAM specialist, GRC analyst, and security engineer roles.

Google Cloud IAM for a deployed application

Cloud Application Development

Configured GCP IAM for a deployed application: dedicated service accounts per component with least-privilege roles scoped to required resources rather than broad predefined roles, eliminating shared high-privilege credentials between services.

AWS IAM access-control model

StrokeVision · iOS application, pre-release

Implemented the access-control model for an iOS application preparing for TestFlight release: scoped S3 bucket policies and IAM roles per service, isolated each user's uploaded video under least-privilege access, and kept long-lived credentials out of the mobile client.

StrokeVision case study

Applied security in systems I built

Attack surface and mitigations for systems I built, rather than environments I was given.

LLM → Home Assistant Safe Execution

Home Assistant AI

Threats

  • Prompt injection → unauthorized service calls
  • Entity spoofing → control wrong devices
  • API key leakage → unauthorized HA access
  • Malformed JSON → unexpected execution behavior

Mitigations

  • Allow-listed services (explicit whitelist)
  • Entity ID validation against known devices
  • JSON Schema validation on all LLM output
  • API keys in environment variables only
  • Input sanitization before prompt construction
  • Error isolation per command

SponsorHub Payout Correctness & Fraud

SponsorHub

Threats

  • Fake conversions → inflated payouts
  • Replay attacks → duplicate payouts
  • Budget overrun → overspending client funds
  • Tampered attribution → incorrect creator credit

Mitigations

  • HMAC-signed attribution artifacts
  • Composite key dedup + time window
  • Append-only ledger (no mutation)
  • Idempotent Stripe payouts
  • Funding gate (state machine enforcement)
  • Budget cap at rollup layer

Cybersecurity resume

Tooling, coursework, and experience in one page.