Windows 10 Timeline Forensic Artefacts

The April 2018 Update that Microsoft rolled out for Windows 10 a few days ago included a new feature called “Timeline”. Timeline is like a browser history, but for your whole computer; it provides a chronology which not only contains the websites that you visited, but the documents you edited, the games you played, the images you viewed or created and so on. The feature is opt-in with the option to make use of it presented as the April 2018 Feature is applied and subsequently controlled from within the “Privacy” section in the Windows 10 settings.

For the user, the Timeline lives within the Task View, which by default is accessed by hitting Win+Tab. Prior to this update, the Task View was somewhat like the classic “Alt+Tab” application switching, but augmented (and prettier). Now however, if you scroll down from the open apps you are also presented with a timeline of prior activities. The timeline is broken down by day, and you can dig down even more granularly to see your activity hour by hour.

At the time of writing, not every application contributes data to the timeline that the user sees. Some of the applications we found that currently provide data to the Timeline are: Edge (browsing history); the Office 2016 suite (files accessed); Windows’ Photo viewer (photos viewed); the XBox app (games played); Paint 3D (drawings drawn).

All very useful for the user (personally I think I’ll be making use of this – “what was I doing 2 days ago” is a question I often need answering), but what artefacts does this system leave for the pioneering analyst? Let’s take a look:

Our initial exploration made use of the fantastic ProcMon utility in the Sysinternals suite (, to hone in on a file which seemed to be at the centre of most interactions with the timeline. This file was found in “%APPDATA%\ConnectedDevicesPlatform\AAD.xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx\ActivitivitiesCache.db”. “ActivitiesCache.db” is a nice SQLite database with a fairly straightforward schema:

The table which jumps out as being the most important initially is “Activity”, as it appears to contain data directly related to the entries displayed in the timeline and how that data is displayed. Much of the data in the Activity table (and indeed the database as a whole) is serialised as JSON ( There are some complications caused by the fact that the JSON is sometimes stored as text (as in the “AppId” field) and other times as a binary data in a BLOB field, with the text encoded as UTF-8 (for example in the “Payload” field); one feasible explanation for this is that Microsoft may store other types of payload in the future, but in our testing, we only encountered JSON.

Each row in the table represents an “activity”. These activities have a number of timestamps: “Last Modified”; “Created In Cloud” (because of course this data is synchronised in the cloud); “Start Time”; “End Time”; “Last Modified on Client”; and “Expiration Time”; the timestamps are stored as the number of seconds since 01/01/1970 – a Unix epoch timestamp. In our testing, the Expiration Time appeared to be set 30 days after the initial event. Whether or not “expired” records are removed from the database immediately requires some further research, but given that this is an SQLite database a tool such as Epilog may still be able to recover deleted records.

The activities also have an associated “App ID”, which is stored as a JSON object in the “AppId” field in the table. The App ID field is slightly tricky: it does not absolutely record the application which generated the activity, rather it lists applications which are suitable for picking up and continuing this activity across multiple platforms (or even multiple options on the same platform). As an example, an activity related to accessing an Excel Spreadsheet lists 2 different versions of Excel on (native, Win32) Windows, the Universal App version of Excel and both the Android and iOS versions of Excel. Clearly, we didn’t open the spreadsheet with all of these Apps at once, so we should be very careful how we interpret this field. It does, however, highlight something very interesting: it seems that Microsoft have aspirations for the Timeline to operate cross-platform, through the cloud. The opportunities and potential pitfalls provided by cross-device synchronisation was something I discussed in another recent blog (

It seems that many of these “Activities” can relate to the same application or system, and can be grouped together by examining the “AppActivityId” field – where this field matches another entry in the Activity table, they appear to relate to one another.

Given that overview of the structure of the database table, the meat of the information resides in the Payload field (which as mentioned previously is JSON stored in a BLOB field). The structure and content of the JSON data will vary based on the data it is representing, but what types of information did we observe during our exploration?

As expected, we found records which directly related back to the tiles seen in the Timeline itself; this includes the URLs of websites, the details of documents opened, games that were played, etc. and of course these entries are all timestamped.

More interestingly, there is significant information stored in this database table which is not otherwise displayed to the user in the Timeline view.

One such example is what seems to be a comprehensive list of applications that have been launched by the user – not just the applications which we noted above as contributing to the timeline, but all applications; native, UWP (universal) apps – it doesn’t seem to matter, they all make their way into the Activity table. This is another potential source to demonstrate that a program was launched – but wait, it gets better!

Most of the types of entries we’ve mentioned so far have associated activities (by way of the matching “AppActivityId”) where the Payload has the type “UserEngaged”. This is a fascinating artefact which contains an “activeDurationSeconds” field which, from our testing so far, seems to provide a duration not of an application’s (or part of an application’s) execution, but rather the period of time that the user actively interacted with it. Furthermore it is possible to have multiple instances of “UserEngaged” activities related to an activity.

As an example, a user might browse to a site in a tab within the Edge browser. This creates a record in the timeline relating to that site’s URL; interacting with that tab also creates a “UserEngaged” record for the time that they are browsing that page. They then follow link on that page and open it in a new tab; this creates a new entry in the for the URL they opened and as they interact with the tab, a new “UserEngaged” record is created for the new URL. Finally closing the new tab, they return to the previous tab, which creates a second “UserEngaged” record in the timeline for the original URL. This “UserEngaged” artefact may be a new way for us to “put hands on the keyboard” when examining Windows 10 machines with a high level of specificity.

There is obviously much work to be done to more exhaustively analyse and understand this interesting new artefact in Windows 10, and we look forward to sharing more details with you, but in the meantime, if you have any questions email or call 01789 261 200.

Alex Caithness
Principal Analyst (Research & Development)