Detection and classification of exploit kits

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9825976
  • Patent Number
    9,825,976
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, September 30, 2015
    9 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 21, 2017
    7 years ago
Abstract
A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions executable by a processor to perform operations including: responsive to determining that a correlation between a representation of the first portion of network traffic and a representation of a known exploit kit results in a score above a first prescribed score value, classifying the representation of the first portion of the received network traffic into an exploit kit family corresponding to the representation the known exploit kit; and responsive to determining that the score is below the first prescribed score value and above a second prescribed score value, (i) analyzing the representation of the first portion of the received network traffic, and (ii) processing, within a virtual machine, a second portion of the received network traffic to determine whether processing of the received network traffic results in behavior indicative of an exploit kit is shown.
Description
FIELD

Embodiments of the disclosure relate to the field of cyber security. More specifically, embodiments of the disclosure relate to a system for detecting anomalous, or more specifically, unwanted or malicious behavior associated with network traffic.


GENERAL BACKGROUND

Over the last decade, malicious software has become a pervasive problem for Internet users as many networked resources include vulnerabilities that are subject to attack. For example, payloads downloaded while browsing the Internet may exploit these vulnerabilities by allowing a third-party to gain access to one or more areas within the network not typically accessible. For example, a third-party may exploit a software vulnerability to gain unauthorized access to email accounts and/or data files.


For instance, content (e.g., payloads within network traffic) received by a network device while loading an Internet web page may include an exploit kit, which may be understood as a self-contained framework designed to exploit known vulnerabilities and/or download and install additional malicious, anomalous or unwanted objects. Exploit kits, as well as the additional objects that may be downloaded, may attempt to acquire sensitive information, adversely influence, or attack normal operations of the network device or the entire enterprise network by taking advantage of a vulnerability in computer software.


For example, the user of a network device, e.g., a laptop, may activate (e.g., click on) a link while browsing the Internet. The link may open up a new window, or tab within the web browsing application, and redirect the user to an unwanted web page instead of loading the web page expected by the user. The redirect may perform additional actions that may include downloading and installing malicious, anomalous and unwanted payloads.


In current malware detection systems, exploit kit detection is based on a correlation of signatures of known exploit kits. However, in order to generate a signature for an exploit kit, the exploit kit necessarily must have been activated such that malicious, anomalous or unwanted behavior affected one or more network devices or the operation of the network itself. Therefore, current malware detection systems are unable to proactively detect exploit kits and prevent the download and activation thereof.


In some situations, a redirect, a hidden link on a web page or content that automatically downloads upon activation of a link, may enable a third-party to access one or more storage areas of the network device (e.g., contact list or password storage). As another example, through a redirect, a hidden link or automatically downloaded content, a third-party may gain access to the network to which the network device is connected (e.g., an enterprise network) through the network device without proper permissions. Stated generally, exploit kits and additional payloads downloaded in association with an exploit kit may affect the network device, an enterprise network to which the network device is connected, and/or other network devices connected to the enterprise network in a negative or anomalous manner.


Based on the shortcomings set forth above, current signature-based malware detection systems do not proactively detect exploit kits effectively in order to prevent the download thereof and/or the download of additional malicious, anomalous or unwanted payloads.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example and not by way of limitation in the figures of the accompanying drawings, in which like references indicate similar elements and in which:



FIG. 1 is an exemplary block diagram of an exploit kit detection system 110.



FIG. 2 is an exemplary logic diagram of the exploit kit detection system 110 of FIG. 1.



FIG. 3A is the first portion of a flowchart illustrating an exemplary method for detecting and/or classifying an exploit kit with the exploit kit detection system 110 of FIG. 1.



FIG. 3B is the second portion of the flowchart of FIG. 3A illustrating an exemplary method for detecting and/or classifying an exploit kit with the exploit kit detection system 110 of FIG. 1.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Various embodiments of the disclosure relate to a detection system that improves detection of exploit kits, particularly, exploit kits for which a signature has not previously been generated. Herein, an exploit kit may lead to infection of an endpoint device with malware, wherein “malware” may collectively refer to exploits that initiate malicious, anomalous or unwanted behaviors.


In one embodiment of the disclosure, the exploit kit detection system comprises one or more of an Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) generating and filtering logic, a correlation logic, a classification logic, an expert system and a dynamic analysis logic. The exploit kit detection system may capture network traffic addressed to one or more endpoint devices within a network (e.g., an enterprise network), parse HyperText Markup Language (HTML) source code within the network traffic, extract the JavaScript™ included within the HTML source code, generate an AST from the extracted JavaScript™ and filter the AST (e.g., the AST provides a standard form for the HTTP source code that is susceptible to analysis). The exploit kit detection system then correlates the filtered AST with ASTs of known exploit kits to determine whether a level of similarity (e.g., a score value based on a performed correlation, wherein the level of similarity may be represented as a percentage, which may be equal to or less than 100%) above a first threshold exists. When a correlation above the first threshold exists, the filtered AST is determined to be within a family of an exploit kit. Herein, it is advantageous to classify an AST that has at least a predetermined level of similarity (e.g., a percentage) with an AST of a known exploit kit as exploit kits may morph quickly. Therefore, as an exploit kit morphs, minor changes to the exploit kit do not prevent the exploit kit detection system from detecting and classifying the morphed exploit kit even though an exact AST has not yet been identified and stored for the exploit kit. Exploit kits that change, or morph, may be referred to as “polymorphic exploit kits.” The minor variations associated with a polymorphic exploit kit have previously made detection of versions of a polymorphic exploit kit for which a signature was not created very difficult. However, correlating the filtered AST with ASTs of known exploit kits enables the exploit kit detection system to account for the minor variations.


Additionally, the detected exploit kit may be used in future correlations with received network traffic. Therefore, the exploit kit detection system is able evolve automatically without the involvement of a network administrator.


Other embodiments may extract additional and/or alternative portions of the received network traffic. For example, an embedded object may be extracted from the HTML source code or from another portion of the received network traffic and analyzed with the exploit kit detection system. Another example may include the extraction of Flash components (e.g., graphics, text, animation, applications, etc.) from the HTML source code and analysis of the Flash components with the exploit detection kit system. Other HTML plug-ins may similarly be extracted, wherein a plug-in may be an application or applet design to extend the functionality of a web browser. Additionally, HTML is merely one example of one markup language used to create web pages. Therefore, alternative markup languages, such as eXtensible HyperText Markup Language (XHTML) may be extracted in place of, or in combination with, the HTML. Other programming languages, scripting languages and markup languages may be used (e.g., XML, Perl, Tcl, Python, PHP: Hypertext Preprocessor (PHP), etc.).


When the correlations do not reveal a level of similarity above the first threshold, the exploit kit detection system determines whether there is a level of similarity above a second threshold being lower than the first threshold. This second threshold signifies that the filtered AST includes some resemblance to a known exploit kit but the system does not have enough confidence to determine the network traffic includes an exploit kit without further analysis. Subsequently, the filtered AST is provided to an expert system which applies heuristic, probabilistic and/or machine learning algorithms to the filtered AST during analysis to further determine a likelihood of the filtered AST including an exploit kit and, if applicable, obtaining a context for dynamic processing. The context may include, but is not limited or restricted to, results of an n-gram analysis performed on the name of a file included within the received network traffic. Examples of heuristics that may aid in the determination of a score, as discussed below, include but are not limited or restricted to, the presence, or lack thereof, of: a redirection from a secured website (“HTTPS”) to an unsecured website (“HTTP”) or vice versa; a number of images above a predefined threshold; and/or POST requests for personal information.


When the expert system determines that a score for the filtered AST is above a third predefined threshold, the HTML source code associated with the filtered AST, the score and the context are provided to the dynamic analysis logic. When the expert system determines the score for the filtered AST is not above a third predefined threshold, the HTML source code associated with the filtered AST is provided to the dynamic analysis logic. The HTML source code is then processed within one or more VMs and monitoring logic monitors the processing for malicious, anomalous or unwanted behaviors. Such behaviors are recorded and upon completion of the processing (e.g., expiration of a predefined time or a certain number of actions have been performed), a score is determined that indicates whether the dynamic processing discovered an exploit kit. A user of an endpoint that was to receive the network traffic and/or a network administer may be alerted to the results of the processing via alert generated by a reporting logic. Such an alert may include various types of messages, which may include text messages and/or email messages, video or audio stream, or other types of information over a wired or wireless communication path. Additionally, when an exploit kit is determined to have been detected, a representation of the filtered AST may be stored for inclusion in future analyses of received network traffic.


As used herein, the transmission of data may take the form of transmission of electrical signals and/or electromagnetic radiation (e.g., radio waves, microwaves, ultraviolet (UV) waves, etc.).


I. Terminology

In the following description, certain terminology is used to describe features of the invention. For example, in certain situations, both terms “logic” and “engine” are representative of hardware, firmware and/or software that is configured to perform one or more functions. As hardware, logic (or engine) may include circuitry having data processing or storage functionality. Examples of such circuitry may include, but are not limited or restricted to a microprocessor, one or more processor cores, a programmable gate array, a microcontroller, a controller, an application specific integrated circuit, wireless receiver, transmitter and/or transceiver circuitry, semiconductor memory, or combinatorial logic.


Logic (or engine) may be software in the form of one or more software modules, such as executable code in the form of an executable application, an application programming interface (API), a subroutine, a function, a procedure, an applet, a servlet, a routine, source code, object code, a shared library/dynamic link library, or one or more instructions. These software modules may be stored in any type of a suitable non-transitory storage medium, or transitory storage medium (e.g., electrical, optical, acoustical or other form of propagated signals such as carrier waves, infrared signals, or digital signals). Examples of non-transitory storage medium may include, but are not limited or restricted to a programmable circuit; a semiconductor memory; non-persistent storage such as volatile memory (e.g., any type of random access memory “RAM”); persistent storage such as non-volatile memory (e.g., read-only memory “ROM”, power-backed RAM, flash memory, phase-change memory, etc.), a solid-state drive, hard disk drive, an optical disc drive, or a portable memory device. As firmware, the executable code is stored in persistent storage.


According to one embodiment, the term “malware” may be construed broadly as any code or activity that initiates a malicious attack and/or operations associated with anomalous or unwanted behavior. For instance, malware may correspond to a type of malicious computer code that executes an exploit to take advantage of a vulnerability, for example, to harm or co-opt operation of a network device or misappropriate, modify or delete data. In the alternative, malware may correspond to an exploit, namely information (e.g., executable code, data, command(s), etc.) that attempts to take advantage of a vulnerability in software and/or an action by a person gaining unauthorized access to one or more areas of a network device to cause the network device to experience undesirable or anomalous behaviors. The undesirable or anomalous behaviors may include a communication-based anomaly or an execution-based anomaly, which, for example, could (1) alter the functionality of an network device executing application software in an atypical manner (a file is opened by a first process where the file is configured to be opened by a second process and not the first process); (2) alter the functionality of the network device executing that application software without any malicious intent; and/or (3) provide unwanted functionality which may be generally acceptable in another context. Additionally, malware may be code that initiates unwanted behavior which may be, as one example, uploading a contact list from an endpoint device to cloud storage without receiving permission from the user.


The term “exploit kit” should be construed as a self-contained framework designed to exploit known vulnerabilities and/or download and install additional malicious, anomalous or unwanted objects. In particular, an exploit kit may comprise a plurality of scripts (e.g., written in PHP) that target specific vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities are typically security holes in software applications such as Internet browsers (e.g., Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, etc.) or other software applications (e.g., Adobe PDF Reader, Adobe Flash Player, etc.). In some embodiments, an exploit kit will be downloaded onto an endpoint device after visiting a website. For example, upon activating a link (e.g., selecting to download data or merely clicking on an advertisement), the user may be redirected to various websites, which may also redirect the user to multiple servers. Upon encountering a compromised server, the exploit kit will be downloaded and run automatically such that malicious, anomalous or unwanted behavior results. For example, a plurality of popups may be generated, the user may be redirected again to various websites, or callbacks may be made to a server in an attempt to download payloads. Alternatively, an exploit kit may be downloaded with received network traffic, even from an uncompromised server, and attempt to create a communication line with a foreign server in order to download a payload. This action typically happens without the knowledge of the user and occurs automatically after the initial user interaction of visiting a particular website or activating a link. Exploit kits pose serious security threats as additional payloads downloaded as a result of the callback may attempt to steal sensitive information (e.g., credential information, financial information, etc.) or merely result in anomalous or unwanted behavior.


The term “processing” may include launching an application wherein launching should be interpreted as placing the application in an open state and simulating operations within the application. Processing may also include performing simulations of actions typical of human interactions with the application. For example, the application, “Google Chrome” may be processed such that the application is opened and actions such as visiting a website, scrolling the website page, and activating a link from the website are performed (e.g., the performance of simulated human interactions).


The term “network device” should be construed as any electronic device with the capability of connecting to a network, downloading and installing applications. Such a network may be a public network such as the Internet or a private network such as a wireless data telecommunication network, wide area network, a type of local area network (LAN), or a combination of networks. Examples of a network device may include, but are not limited or restricted to, a laptop, a mobile phone, a tablet, etc. Herein, the terms “network device,” “endpoint device,” and “mobile device” will be used interchangeably. The terms “mobile application” and “application” should be interpreted as software developed to run specifically on a mobile network device.


The term “malicious” may represent a probability (or level of confidence) that the object is associated with a malicious attack or known vulnerability. For instance, the probability may be based, at least in part, on (i) pattern matches; (ii) analyzed deviations in messaging practices or formats (e.g., out of order commands) set forth in applicable communication protocols (e.g., HTTP, TCP, etc.) and/or proprietary document specifications (e.g., Adobe® PDF document specification); (iii) analyzed header or payload parameters to determine compliance, (iv) attempts to communicate with external servers during dynamic processing, (v) attempts to access memory allocated to the application during dynamic processing, and/or other factors that may evidence unwanted or malicious activity.


Lastly, the terms “or” and “and/or” as used herein are to be interpreted as inclusive or meaning any one or any combination. Therefore, “A, B or C” or “A, B and/or C” mean “any of the following: A; B; C; A and B; A and C; B and C; A, B and C.” An exception to this definition will occur only when a combination of elements, functions, steps or acts are in some way inherently mutually exclusive.


The invention may be utilized for detecting exploit kits encountered as a result of browsing the Internet. As this invention is susceptible to embodiments of many different forms, it is intended that the present disclosure includes illustrative embodiments and general principles of the invention and is not intended to limit the invention to the specific embodiments shown and described.


II. General Architecture of an Exploit Kit Detection System

Referring to FIG. 1, an exemplary block diagram of an exploit kit detection system 110 deployed within the network 100 is shown. In one embodiment, the network 100 may be an enterprise network that includes the exploit kit detection system 110, a router 150, an optional firewall 151, a network switch 152, and one or endpoint devices 153. The network 100 may include a public network such as the Internet, a private network (e.g., a local area network “LAN”, wireless LAN, etc.), or a combination thereof. The router 150 serves to receive data, e.g., packets, transmitted via a wireless medium (e.g., a Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) utilizing the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 standard) and/or a wired medium from the cloud computing services 160 and the endpoint devices 153. As is known in the art, the router 150 may provide access to the Internet for devices connected to the network 110.


In one embodiment, the network switch 152 may capture network traffic, make a copy of the network traffic, pass the network traffic to the appropriate endpoint device(s) 153 and pass the copy of the network traffic to the exploit kit detection system 110. In a second embodiment, the network switch 152 may capture the network traffic and pass the network traffic to the exploit kit detection system 110 for processing prior to passing the network traffic to the appropriate endpoint device(s) 153. In such an embodiment, the network traffic will only be passed to the appropriate endpoint device(s) 153 if the analysis of the network traffic does not indicate that the network traffic is associated with a malicious attack, anomalous or unwanted behavior, or, in particular, an exploit kit.


The exploit kit detection system 110 includes a communication interface 111, a storage device 112, an AST generating and filtering logic 113, a correlation logic 114, a classification logic 115, an expert system 116, a dynamic analysis logic 120 and a reporting logic 130.


As shown, the exploit detection kit 110 is communicatively coupled with the cloud computing services 160, the Internet and one or more endpoint devices 153 via the communication interface 111, which directs at least a portion of the network traffic to the AST generating and filtering logic 113. The AST generating and filtering logic 113 receives at least a portion of the received network traffic from the communication interface 111 and extracts the Javascript™ within HTML source code within the network traffic. The received network traffic may be in, for example, one or more packet capture files (PCAP files). Subsequently, the AST generating and filtering logic 113 generates an AST from the Javascript™. Finally, the AST generating and filtering logic 113 filters the AST, which may include, but is not limited or restricted to, removing hardcoded parameters or variables from the AST, determining and removing portions of the AST that are not accessible (e.g., dead code, typically construed as software code that does not affect the results of running the software code) and/or determining and removing infinite loops within the AST.


In one embodiment, the AST generating and filtering logic 113 may comprise a compiler. In a second embodiment, the AST generating and filtering logic 113 may comprise one or more software libraries (e.g., open source libraries).


The correlation logic 114 receives the filtered AST from the AST generating and filtering logic 113 and correlates the filtered AST with one or more entries in a database (e.g., the storage device 112 or a database stored within the cloud computing services 160). Each entry in the database represents an AST of a known exploit kit. The result of a correlation of the filtered AST and an entry in the database reveals a score indicating a prescribed score (e.g., a percentage, a numerical value, a weighted numerical value) that represents how similar the filtered AST is to the AST of the known exploit kit represented by the databasebase entry. In one embodiment, each database entry takes the form of a hash value (e.g., a MD5 hash value, a secure hash algorithm (SHA) hash value, etc.). In such an embodiment, the correlation logic 114 computes a hash value representing the filtered AST and performs the correlation of hash values. In other embodiments, other representations may be used in place of hash values. Additionally, the correlations between the filtered AST and the entries in the database may be of the entire filtered AST or may be of one or more portions of the filtered AST.


The correlation logic 114 subsequently analyzes the results of the correlations performed by the correlation logic to determine whether a correlation of the filtered AST and an entry within the database reveals a level of similarity above a first predetermined threshold (e.g., 60%, 70%, 80%, etc.). When there is a level of similarity above the first predetermined threshold, the correlation logic 114 passes information associated with the correlation to the classification logic 115. The passed information may include the filtered AST, the entry within the database having a level of similarity above the first predetermined threshold with the filtered AST, and/or the score of the correlation. The classification logic 115 then acts to classify the filtered AST as part of the exploit kit family of the known exploit kit represented by the database entry.


Herein, the use of the correlation logic 114 to compare the filtered AST with ASTs of known exploit kits enables the exploit kit detection system 110 to proactively detect exploit kits. An exploit kit may change at a rapid pace such that a detected exploit kit may morph within a matter of days or weeks such that a strict use of signature matching will not be sufficient to detected the morphed version. Therefore, determining whether the filtered AST correlates with an AST of a known exploit kit to produce a level of similarity above a first predetermined threshold enables the exploit kit detection system 110 to, as discussed above, account for changes from a first version of the exploit kit to a second version. When the exploit kit morphs, it may maintain the same malicious, anomalous or unwanted effects. Therefore, the classification logic 115 classifies the santizied AST as a member of the exploit kit family of the exploit kit represented by the database entry. Furthermore, the classification logic 115 may create a new entry to be added to the database representing the exploit kit detected in the filtered AST. Therefore, the exploit kit detection system 110 continuously evolves as it detects variations in exploit kits.


When the correlation logic 114 determines that no correlation between the filtered AST and a database entry is above the first predetermined threshold, the correlation logic determines whether a correlation of the filtered AST and an entry within the database reveals a level of similarity above a second predetermined threshold being lower than the first predetermined threshold (e.g., 30%, 40%, 50%, etc.). When a level of similarity above the second predetermined threshold is present, information associated with the correlation, as discussed above, is passed to the expert system 116.


The expert system 116 utilizes at least one of heuristic, probabilistic and/or machine learning algorithms to analyze the filtered AST for characteristics and/or attributes indicative of an exploit kit. Based on the results of the analysis, the score determination logic 118 of the expert system 116 determines a score indicative of the likelihood the filtered AST includes an exploit kit. For example, the AST analysis logic 113 may analyze the filtered AST for shell code patterns, No-Operation (NOOP) sleds, function calls known to be vulnerable, and/or perform an n-gram analysis on names of files received with the network traffic wherein the n-gram analysis results are correlated with known malicious class names (e.g., stored in the storage device 112).


Upon determination by the expert system that the AST is suspicious (e.g., a score for the AST generated by the expert system 116 signifying the likelihood the filtered AST includes an exploit kit is above a third predefined threshold), the HTML source code of the network traffic, the score and the context of the analysis are passed to the dynamic analysis logic 120 via the scheduler 119. The scheduler 119 may configure one or more of VM 1241-VM 124M (M≧1) with selected software profiles. For instance, the context of the analysis may be used to determine which software images (e.g., application(s)) and/or operating systems to be fetched from the storage device 123 for configuring operability of the VM 1241-VM 124M.


Upon receiving information from the expert system 116, the dynamic analysis logic 120 performs processing within one or more VMs (e.g., virtual processing) on the HTML source code represented by the filtered AST. Herein, the dynamic processing may occur within one or more virtual machine instances (VMs), which may be provisioned with a guest image associated with a prescribed software profile. Each guest image may include a software application and/or an operating system (OS). Each guest image may further include one or more monitors, namely software components that are configured to observe and capture run-time behavior of an object under analysis during processing within the virtual machine. During the dynamic processing, the network traffic is analyzed. In one embodiment, the monitoring logic 131 may record, inter alia, (i) the location from where the traffic originated (e.g., a trusted or an untrusted website), (ii) the location to where the traffic is being transmitted, and/or (iii) actions taken by received network traffic (e.g., attempts to access particular storage locations, install malware, open anomalous files, attempts to open additional Internet connections (e.g., TCP/IP connections), etc.


In one embodiment, the HTML source code is virtually processed in one or more of VM 1241-VM 124M. The monitoring logic 121 monitors the processing such that any malicious, anomalous or unwanted behaviors, and any resulting actions, are recorded. In particular, the monitoring logic 121 may monitor processing of the HTML source code for anomalous traffic to be transmitted outside of the network 100, e.g., callbacks to foreign and/or unknown servers. Callbacks to unknown servers may indicate, for example, an attempt by the HTML source code to download additional payloads which may include malware or software code that results in anomalous or unwanted behavior. Of course, additional malicious, anomalous or unwanted behaviors may be recorded by the monitoring logic 121. In one embodiment, the storage device 123 or the storage device 112 may include predefined definitions and/or rules that indicate malicious, anomalous or unwanted behaviors the monitoring logic 121 is to record. These predefined definitions and/or rules may be continuously updated via software updates received via the cloud computing services 160 and/or via a network administrator (for example, using the Internet to transmit such).


Upon completion of the dynamic processing by the one or more VMs, the score determination logic 125 of the dynamic processing logic 120 determines a score for the HTML source code that indicates a level of suspiciousness for the HTML source code, which is attributed to the filtered AST. The determination of the risk level of the network traffic may be based on, inter alia, (i) the location from where the traffic originated (e.g., a known website compared to an unknown website), (ii) the location to where the traffic is being transmitted, and/or (iii) actions taken by received network traffic during processing (e.g., executable code contained in the network traffic attempts to execute a callback).


When the score indicates that the filtered AST is above a predetermined threshold level (e.g., a particular numerical score or within a predefined category such as “malicious”), the filtered AST, and optionally the dynamic results of the dynamic processing and the analysis of the expert system 116, may be provided to a network administrator. In such a situation, when the network traffic represented by the filtered AST has not yet been provided to the endpoint device(s) 153, the network traffic will not be provided to the endpoint device(s) 153. In the situation in which the network traffic has been provided, an alert may be generated by the reporting logic 190 and transmitted to the endpoint device(s) 153 alerting the user of the inclusion of software the processing of which will result in malicious, anomalous or unwanted behaviors, and in particular, if the network traffic includes an exploit kit.


Furthermore, when the score of the filtered AST indicates the network traffic includes an exploit kit, the filtered AST along with, optionally, the results of the dynamic processing and/or the analysis performed by the expert system 116 may be passed to the classification logic 115 for the generation of a database entry detailing the exploit kit. Herein, the classification logic 115 may define a new exploit kit family or add the filtered AST to the exploit kit bearing the greatest similarity to the filtered AST.


When the score determined by the score determination logic 125 does not rise above a predetermined threshold (i.e., the HTML source code does not include an exploit kit or include software the processing of which results in malicious, anomalous or unwanted behaviors), the network traffic is passed to the endpoint device(s) 153, if it had not previously been done.


The reporting logic 130 is adapted to receive information from the dynamic analysis logic 120, the expert system 116 and the classification logic 115 and generate alerts that identify to a user of an endpoint device, network administrator or an expert network analyst the likelihood of inclusion of an exploit kit within received network traffic and, if applicable, the exploit kit family to which the detected exploit kit belongs. Other additional information regarding the exploit kit family may optionally be included in the alerts. For example, typical behaviors associated with the exploit kit family may be included.


Referring to FIG. 2, an exemplary embodiment of a logical representation of the exploit kit detection system 110 of FIG. 1 is shown. The exploit kit detection system 110 includes one or more processors 200 that are coupled to communication interface logic 210 via a first transmission medium. Communication interface logic 210 enables communications with network devices via the Internet, the cloud computing services 160 and the one or more endpoint devices 153. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, communication interface logic 210 may be implemented as a physical interface including one or more ports for wired connectors. Additionally, or in the alternative, communication interface logic 210 may be implemented with one or more radio units for supporting wireless communications with other electronic devices.


Processor(s) 200 is further coupled to persistent storage 230 via a second transmission medium. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, persistent storage 230 may include (a) the AST generating and filtering logic 113; (b) the correlation logic 114; (c) the classification logic 115; (d) the expert system 116 including the AST analysis logic 117 and the score determination logic 118; and (e) the dynamic analysis logic 120 including the monitoring logic 121, one or more VMs 1241-124M and the VMM 122. Of course, when implemented as hardware, one or more of these logic units could be implemented separately from each other.


Referring to FIGS. 3A and 3B, an exemplary method for detecting and classifying an exploit kit included in received network traffic using the exploit kit detection system 110 of FIG. 1 is shown. Each block illustrated in FIGS. 3A and 3B represents an operation performed in the method 300 of detecting and classifying an exploit kit included in received network traffic. Referring to FIG. 3A, network traffic is received by network 100 and captured by the network switch 152. For example, the network traffic may be captured and sent to the exploit kit detection system 110 for processing prior to passing the network traffic to the endpoint devices 153. Upon receipt of the network traffic, the AST generating and filtering logic 113 parses the network traffic (e.g., HTML source code) and extracts the JavaScript™ (block 301). At block 302, the AST generating and filtering logic 113 generates an AST from the HTML source code. Additionally, the AST generating and filtering logic 113 filters the AST. As was discussed above, in one embodiment, filtering the AST code may refer to removing the hard-coded values within the AST.


At block 303, the correlation logic 114 correlates a representation of the filtered AST with one or more entries within a database, wherein the each entry of the database represents a representation of an AST of a known exploit kit. At block 304, a determination is made as to whether the correlation of block 303 resulted in a level of similarity above a first predetermined threshold between the representation of the filtered AST and an entry in the database. When a level of similarity above the first threshold occurred (yes at block 304), the filtered AST is classified as being part of the exploit kit family to which the exploit kit represented by the entry in database belongs.


When a level of similarity above the first threshold did not occur (no at block 304), a determination is made as to whether the correlation of block 303 resulted in a level of similarity above a second predetermined threshold between the representation of the filtered AST and an entry in the database. When a level of similarity above the second threshold did not occur (no at block 306), the filtered AST is determined to not include an exploit kit and the method 300 ends (block 307). When a level of similarity above the second threshold occurred (yes at block 306), the expert system analyzes the AST (block 308 in FIG. 3B).


Referring now to FIG. 3B, as discussed above, the expert system analyses the AST by through the application of heuristic, probabilistic and machine learning algorithms (block 308). Upon completion of the analysis by the expert system (block 308), a determination is made as to whether the score of the AST exceeds a third predefined threshold (block 309). As discussed above, the third predefined threshold may indicate a level of suspiciousness of the AST. If the score of the AST analysis by the expert system exceeds the third predefined threshold (yes at block 309), the score, the context of the analysis and the HTML source code from the received network traffic are transmitted to the dynamic analysis logic (block 310). If the score of the AST analysis by the expert system does not exceed the predefined score (no at block 309), the HTML source code from the received network traffic are transmitted to the dynamic analysis logic (block 311).


At block 312, the dynamic analysis logic processes the HTML source code in one or more VMs to determine whether the web content received and transmitted during processing of the HTML source code is malicious, anomalous or unwanted. For example, the monitoring logic within the dynamic analysis logic may monitor outgoing network traffic generated by the HTML source code looking for requests to automatically download additional payloads. In some instances, these payloads may be malicious software that is downloaded and installed into the system. Therefore, determining that HTML source code will attempt to download additional payloads on an endpoint device is advantageous and may assist in determining whether the HTML source code includes an exploit kit.


In the foregoing description, the invention is described with reference to specific exemplary embodiments thereof. It will, however, be evident that various modifications and changes may be made thereto without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims.

Claims
  • 1. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions, the instructions being executable by one or more processors to perform operations including: responsive to determining that a correlation between a representation of the first portion of received network traffic and a representation of a known exploit kit results in a level of similarity above a first prescribed score value, classifying the representation of the first portion of the received network traffic into an exploit kit family corresponding to the representation the known exploit kit; andresponsive to determining that the level of similarity resulting from the correlation between the representation of the first portion of the received network traffic and the representation of the known exploit kit is below the first prescribed score value and above a second prescribed score value, (i) analyzing, by an expert system logic executed by the one or more processors, the representation of the first portion of the received network traffic, and(ii) processing, within a virtual machine, at least a second portion of the received network traffic to determine whether processing of the received network traffic results in behavior indicative of an exploit kit.
  • 2. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 having stored thereon further instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, perform operations further comprising: correlating, by a correlation logic executed by the one or more processors, the representation of the first portion of the received network traffic with the representation of the known exploit kit.
  • 3. The computer readable storage medium of claim 2 having stored thereon further instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, perform operations further comprising: prior to the correlating, removing one or more hardcoded parameters from the representation of the first portion of the received network traffic, wherein the representation of the first portion of the received network traffic is an Abstract Syntax Tree (AST).
  • 4. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 having stored thereon further instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, perform operations further comprising: generating a score representing a level of confidence that processing the representation of the first portion of received network traffic results in malicious, anomalous or unwanted behavior.
  • 5. The computer readable storage medium of claim 4 having stored thereon further instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, perform operations further comprising: responsive to determining the score is above a third threshold, configuring the virtual machine in accordance with a context of the score.
  • 6. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the analyzing by the expert system logic includes applying at least one of a heuristic algorithm, a probabilistic algorithm or a machine learning algorithm to the representation of the first portion of received network traffic.
  • 7. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the analyzing by the expert system logic includes an analysis for a presence of one or more of a shell code pattern, a No-Operation (NOOP) sled or a function call known to be vulnerable.
  • 8. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the analyzing by the expert system logic includes an n-gram analysis on a name of a file that is included in the received network traffic.
  • 9. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the first portion of the received network traffic includes less than an entirety of a representation of the received network traffic.
  • 10. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein processing in the virtual machine includes performance of one or more simulated human interactions.
  • 11. An apparatus for exploit kit detection and classification, the apparatus comprising: one or more processors;a storage device communicatively coupled to the one or more processors;a correlation logic for (i) correlating an abstract syntax tree (AST) representation of network traffic to one or more ASTs representing known exploit kits and (ii) determining whether a level of similarity exists (a) above a first threshold or (b) below the first threshold and above a second threshold;an AST analysis logic for applying at least one of a heuristic algorithm, a probabilistic algorithm or a machine learning algorithm to the AST representation of the network traffic when the level of similarity is below the first threshold and above the second threshold;a dynamic analysis logic including one or more virtual machines for processing the AST representation of the network traffic, and a score determination logic for determining a score indicating a likelihood of the network including an exploit kit,wherein the score is based on one or more of the analysis of the AST analysis logic or the processing of the AST representation of the network traffic in the one or more virtual machines.
  • 12. The apparatus of claim 11 further comprising: an AST generating and filtering logic for extracting JavaScript from the received network traffic, generating the AST representation of the network traffic from the extracted JavaScript and filtering the AST representation of the network traffic.
  • 13. The apparatus of claim 12, wherein the filtering includes removing one or more hardcoded parameters from the AST representation of the network traffic.
  • 14. The apparatus of claim 11 further comprising: a classification logic for classifying the AST representation of the network traffic into an exploit kit family when the level of similarity is above the first threshold.
  • 15. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein responsive to determining the score is above a third threshold, configuring the virtual machine in accordance with a context of the score.
  • 16. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the analyzing by the expert system logic includes applying at least one of a heuristic algorithm, a probabilistic algorithm or a machine learning algorithm to the representation of the first portion of received network traffic.
  • 17. A method for exploit kit detection comprising: correlating an abstract syntax tree (AST) representation of network traffic to a AST representation of a known exploit kit;responsive to determining a first level of similarity exists below a first threshold and above a second threshold, applying at least one of a heuristic algorithm, a probabilistic algorithm or a machine learning algorithm to the AST representation of the network traffic; andprocessing the AST representation of the network traffic in a virtual machine to determine a likelihood that the network traffic includes an exploit kit,wherein the determination of the likelihood is based on results of one or more of (i) the application of at least one of the heuristic algorithm, the probabilistic algorithm or the machine learning algorithm, or (ii) the processing in the virtual machine.
  • 18. The method of claim 17 further comprising: responsive to determining that a second level of similarity exists above a first threshold, classifying the AST representation of the network traffic into an exploit kit family corresponding to the AST representation the known exploit kit.
  • 19. The method of claim 17 further comprising: responsive to determining the application at least one of the heuristic algorithm, the probabilistic algorithm or the machine learning algorithm to the AST representation of the network traffic indicate the network traffic is above a predetermined level of suspiciousness, configuring the virtual machine in accordance with a context of the score.
  • 20. The method of claim 19, wherein the context may include results of a n-gram analysis performed on the name of a file included within the network traffic.
US Referenced Citations (572)
Number Name Date Kind
4292580 Ott et al. Sep 1981 A
5175732 Hendel et al. Dec 1992 A
5440723 Arnold et al. Aug 1995 A
5490249 Miller Feb 1996 A
5657473 Killean et al. Aug 1997 A
5842002 Schnurer et al. Nov 1998 A
5978917 Chi Nov 1999 A
6088803 Tso et al. Jul 2000 A
6094677 Capek et al. Jul 2000 A
6108799 Boulay et al. Aug 2000 A
6269330 Cidon et al. Jul 2001 B1
6272641 Ji Aug 2001 B1
6279113 Vaidya Aug 2001 B1
6298445 Shostack et al. Oct 2001 B1
6357008 Nachenberg Mar 2002 B1
6424627 S.o slashed.rhaug et al. Jul 2002 B1
6442696 Wray et al. Aug 2002 B1
6484315 Ziese Nov 2002 B1
6487666 Shanklin et al. Nov 2002 B1
6493756 O'Brien et al. Dec 2002 B1
6550012 Villa et al. Apr 2003 B1
6775657 Baker Aug 2004 B1
6831893 Ben Nun et al. Dec 2004 B1
6832367 Choi et al. Dec 2004 B1
6895550 Kanchirayappa et al. May 2005 B2
6898632 Gordy et al. May 2005 B2
6907396 Muttik et al. Jun 2005 B1
6941348 Petry et al. Sep 2005 B2
6971097 Wallman Nov 2005 B1
6981279 Arnold et al. Dec 2005 B1
7007107 Ivchenko et al. Feb 2006 B1
7028179 Anderson et al. Apr 2006 B2
7043757 Hoefelmeyer et al. May 2006 B2
7069316 Gryaznov Jun 2006 B1
7080407 Zhao et al. Jul 2006 B1
7080408 Pak et al. Jul 2006 B1
7093002 Wolff et al. Aug 2006 B2
7093239 van der Made Aug 2006 B1
7096498 Judge Aug 2006 B2
7100201 Izatt Aug 2006 B2
7107617 Hursey et al. Sep 2006 B2
7159149 Spiegel et al. Jan 2007 B2
7213260 Judge May 2007 B2
7231667 Jordan Jun 2007 B2
7240364 Branscomb et al. Jul 2007 B1
7240368 Roesch et al. Jul 2007 B1
7243371 Kasper et al. Jul 2007 B1
7249175 Donaldson Jul 2007 B1
7287278 Liang Oct 2007 B2
7308716 Danford et al. Dec 2007 B2
7328453 Merkle, Jr. et al. Feb 2008 B2
7346486 Ivancic et al. Mar 2008 B2
7356736 Natvig Apr 2008 B2
7386888 Liang et al. Jun 2008 B2
7392542 Bucher Jun 2008 B2
7418729 Szor Aug 2008 B2
7428300 Drew et al. Sep 2008 B1
7441272 Durham et al. Oct 2008 B2
7448084 Apap et al. Nov 2008 B1
7458098 Judge et al. Nov 2008 B2
7464404 Carpenter et al. Dec 2008 B2
7464407 Nakae et al. Dec 2008 B2
7467408 O'Toole, Jr. Dec 2008 B1
7478428 Thomlinson Jan 2009 B1
7480773 Reed Jan 2009 B1
7487543 Arnold et al. Feb 2009 B2
7496960 Chen et al. Feb 2009 B1
7496961 Zimmer et al. Feb 2009 B2
7519990 Xie Apr 2009 B1
7523493 Liang et al. Apr 2009 B2
7530104 Thrower et al. May 2009 B1
7540025 Tzadikario May 2009 B2
7546638 Anderson et al. Jun 2009 B2
7565550 Liang et al. Jul 2009 B2
7568233 Szor et al. Jul 2009 B1
7584455 Ball Sep 2009 B2
7603715 Costa et al. Oct 2009 B2
7607171 Marsden et al. Oct 2009 B1
7639714 Stolfo et al. Dec 2009 B2
7644441 Schmid et al. Jan 2010 B2
7657419 van der Made Feb 2010 B2
7676841 Sobchuk et al. Mar 2010 B2
7698548 Shelest et al. Apr 2010 B2
7707633 Danford et al. Apr 2010 B2
7712136 Sprosts et al. May 2010 B2
7730011 Deninger et al. Jun 2010 B1
7739740 Nachenberg et al. Jun 2010 B1
7779463 Stolfo et al. Aug 2010 B2
7784097 Stolfo et al. Aug 2010 B1
7832008 Kraemer Nov 2010 B1
7836502 Zhao et al. Nov 2010 B1
7849506 Dansey et al. Dec 2010 B1
7854007 Sprosts et al. Dec 2010 B2
7869073 Oshima Jan 2011 B2
7877803 Enstone et al. Jan 2011 B2
7904959 Sidiroglou et al. Mar 2011 B2
7908660 Bahl Mar 2011 B2
7930738 Petersen Apr 2011 B1
7937387 Frazier et al. May 2011 B2
7937761 Bennett May 2011 B1
7949849 Lowe et al. May 2011 B2
7996556 Raghavan et al. Aug 2011 B2
7996836 McCorkendale et al. Aug 2011 B1
7996904 Chiueh et al. Aug 2011 B1
7996905 Arnold et al. Aug 2011 B2
8006305 Aziz Aug 2011 B2
8010667 Zhang et al. Aug 2011 B2
8020206 Hubbard et al. Sep 2011 B2
8028338 Schneider et al. Sep 2011 B1
8042184 Batenin Oct 2011 B1
8045094 Teragawa Oct 2011 B2
8045458 Alperovitch et al. Oct 2011 B2
8069484 McMillan et al. Nov 2011 B2
8087086 Lai et al. Dec 2011 B1
8171553 Aziz et al. May 2012 B2
8176049 Deninger et al. May 2012 B2
8176480 Spertus May 2012 B1
8201246 Wu et al. Jun 2012 B1
8204984 Aziz et al. Jun 2012 B1
8214905 Doukhvalov et al. Jul 2012 B1
8220055 Kennedy Jul 2012 B1
8225288 Miller et al. Jul 2012 B2
8225373 Kraemer Jul 2012 B2
8233882 Rogel Jul 2012 B2
8234640 Fitzgerald et al. Jul 2012 B1
8234709 Viljoen et al. Jul 2012 B2
8239944 Nachenberg et al. Aug 2012 B1
8260914 Ranjan Sep 2012 B1
8266091 Gubin et al. Sep 2012 B1
8286251 Eker et al. Oct 2012 B2
8291499 Aziz et al. Oct 2012 B2
8307435 Mann et al. Nov 2012 B1
8307443 Wang et al. Nov 2012 B2
8312545 Tuvell et al. Nov 2012 B2
8321936 Green et al. Nov 2012 B1
8321941 Tuvell et al. Nov 2012 B2
8332571 Edwards, Sr. Dec 2012 B1
8365286 Poston Jan 2013 B2
8365297 Parshin et al. Jan 2013 B1
8370938 Daswani et al. Feb 2013 B1
8370939 Zaitsev et al. Feb 2013 B2
8375444 Aziz et al. Feb 2013 B2
8381299 Stolfo et al. Feb 2013 B2
8402529 Green et al. Mar 2013 B1
8464340 Ahn et al. Jun 2013 B2
8479174 Chiriac Jul 2013 B2
8479276 Vaystikh et al. Jul 2013 B1
8479291 Bodke Jul 2013 B1
8499283 Mony Jul 2013 B2
8510827 Leake et al. Aug 2013 B1
8510828 Guo et al. Aug 2013 B1
8510842 Amit et al. Aug 2013 B2
8516478 Edwards et al. Aug 2013 B1
8516590 Ranadive et al. Aug 2013 B1
8516593 Aziz Aug 2013 B2
8522348 Chen et al. Aug 2013 B2
8528086 Aziz Sep 2013 B1
8533824 Hutton et al. Sep 2013 B2
8539582 Aziz et al. Sep 2013 B1
8549638 Aziz Oct 2013 B2
8555391 Demir et al. Oct 2013 B1
8561177 Aziz et al. Oct 2013 B1
8566476 Shiffer et al. Oct 2013 B2
8566946 Aziz et al. Oct 2013 B1
8584094 Dadhia et al. Nov 2013 B2
8584234 Sobel et al. Nov 2013 B1
8584239 Aziz et al. Nov 2013 B2
8595834 Xie et al. Nov 2013 B2
8627476 Satish et al. Jan 2014 B1
8635696 Aziz Jan 2014 B1
8650170 Tonn Feb 2014 B2
8650637 Beresnevichiene et al. Feb 2014 B2
8682054 Xue et al. Mar 2014 B2
8682812 Ranjan Mar 2014 B1
8689333 Aziz Apr 2014 B2
8695096 Zhang Apr 2014 B1
8713631 Pavlyushchik Apr 2014 B1
8713681 Silberman et al. Apr 2014 B2
8726392 McCorkendale et al. May 2014 B1
8739280 Chess et al. May 2014 B2
8776229 Aziz Jul 2014 B1
8782792 Bodke Jul 2014 B1
8789172 Stolfo et al. Jul 2014 B2
8789178 Kejriwal et al. Jul 2014 B2
8793278 Frazier et al. Jul 2014 B2
8793787 Ismael et al. Jul 2014 B2
8805947 Kuzkin et al. Aug 2014 B1
8806647 Daswani et al. Aug 2014 B1
8832829 Manni et al. Sep 2014 B2
8850570 Ramzan Sep 2014 B1
8850571 Staniford et al. Sep 2014 B2
8881234 Narasimhan et al. Nov 2014 B2
8881271 Butler, II Nov 2014 B2
8881282 Aziz et al. Nov 2014 B1
8898788 Aziz et al. Nov 2014 B1
8935779 Manni et al. Jan 2015 B2
8949257 Shiffer et al. Feb 2015 B2
8984638 Aziz et al. Mar 2015 B1
8990939 Staniford et al. Mar 2015 B2
8990944 Singh et al. Mar 2015 B1
8997219 Staniford et al. Mar 2015 B2
9009822 Ismael et al. Apr 2015 B1
9009823 Ismael et al. Apr 2015 B1
9027135 Aziz May 2015 B1
9071638 Aziz et al. Jun 2015 B1
9104867 Thioux et al. Aug 2015 B1
9106630 Frazier et al. Aug 2015 B2
9106694 Aziz et al. Aug 2015 B2
9118715 Staniford et al. Aug 2015 B2
9159035 Ismael et al. Oct 2015 B1
9171160 Vincent et al. Oct 2015 B2
9176843 Ismael et al. Nov 2015 B1
9189627 Islam Nov 2015 B1
9195829 Goradia et al. Nov 2015 B1
9197664 Aziz et al. Nov 2015 B1
9223972 Vincent et al. Dec 2015 B1
9225740 Ismael et al. Dec 2015 B1
9241010 Bennett et al. Jan 2016 B1
9251343 Vincent et al. Feb 2016 B1
9262635 Paithane et al. Feb 2016 B2
9268936 Butler Feb 2016 B2
9275229 LeMasters Mar 2016 B2
9282109 Aziz et al. Mar 2016 B1
9294501 Mesdaq et al. Mar 2016 B2
9300686 Pidathala et al. Mar 2016 B2
9306960 Aziz Apr 2016 B1
9306974 Aziz et al. Apr 2016 B1
9311479 Manni et al. Apr 2016 B1
9413781 Cunningham et al. Aug 2016 B2
20010005889 Albrecht Jun 2001 A1
20010047326 Broadbent et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020018903 Kokubo et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020038430 Edwards et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020091819 Melchione et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020095607 Lin-Hendel Jul 2002 A1
20020116627 Tarbotton et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020144156 Copeland Oct 2002 A1
20020162015 Tang Oct 2002 A1
20020166063 Lachman et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020169952 DiSanto et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020184528 Shevenell et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020188887 Largman et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020194490 Halperin et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030021728 Sharpe et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030074578 Ford et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030084318 Schertz May 2003 A1
20030101381 Mateev et al. May 2003 A1
20030115483 Liang Jun 2003 A1
20030188190 Aaron et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030191957 Hypponen et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030200460 Morota et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030212902 van der Made Nov 2003 A1
20030229801 Kouznetsov et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030237000 Denton et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040003323 Bennett et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040006473 Mills et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040015712 Szor Jan 2004 A1
20040019832 Arnold et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040047356 Bauer Mar 2004 A1
20040083408 Spiegel et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040088581 Brawn et al. May 2004 A1
20040093513 Cantrell et al. May 2004 A1
20040111531 Staniford et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040117478 Triulzi et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040117624 Brandt et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040128355 Chao et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040165588 Pandya Aug 2004 A1
20040236963 Danford et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040243349 Greifeneder et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040249911 Alkhatib et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040255161 Cavanaugh Dec 2004 A1
20040268147 Wiederin et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050005159 Oliphant Jan 2005 A1
20050021740 Bar et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050033960 Vialen et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050033989 Poletto et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050050148 Mohammadioun et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050086523 Zimmer et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091513 Mitomo et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091533 Omote et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091652 Ross et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050108562 Khazan et al. May 2005 A1
20050114663 Cornell et al. May 2005 A1
20050125195 Brendel Jun 2005 A1
20050149726 Joshi et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050157662 Bingham et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050183143 Anderholm et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050201297 Peikari Sep 2005 A1
20050210533 Copeland et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050238005 Chen et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050240781 Gassoway Oct 2005 A1
20050262562 Gassoway Nov 2005 A1
20050265331 Stolfo Dec 2005 A1
20050283839 Cowburn Dec 2005 A1
20060010495 Cohen et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015416 Hoffman et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015715 Anderson Jan 2006 A1
20060015747 Van de Ven Jan 2006 A1
20060021029 Brickell et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060021054 Costa et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060031476 Mathes et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060047665 Neil Mar 2006 A1
20060070130 Costea et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060075496 Carpenter et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060095968 Portolani et al. May 2006 A1
20060101516 Sudaharan et al. May 2006 A1
20060101517 Banzhof et al. May 2006 A1
20060117385 Mester et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060123477 Raghavan et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060143709 Brooks et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060150249 Gassen et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060161983 Cothrell et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060161987 Levy-Yurista Jul 2006 A1
20060161989 Reshef et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060164199 Gilde et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060173992 Weber et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060179147 Tran et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060184632 Marino et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060191010 Benjamin Aug 2006 A1
20060221956 Narayan et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060236393 Kramer et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060242709 Seinfeld et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060248519 Jaeger et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060248582 Panjwani et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060251104 Koga Nov 2006 A1
20060288417 Bookbinder et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070006288 Mayfield et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070006313 Porras et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070011174 Takaragi et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070016951 Piccard et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070019286 Kikuchi Jan 2007 A1
20070033645 Jones Feb 2007 A1
20070038943 FitzGerald et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070064689 Shin et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070074169 Chess et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070094730 Bhikkaji et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070101435 Konanka et al. May 2007 A1
20070128855 Cho et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070142030 Sinha et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143827 Nicodemus et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070156895 Vuong Jul 2007 A1
20070157180 Tillmann et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070157306 Elrod et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070168988 Eisner et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070171824 Ruello et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070174915 Gribble et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070192500 Lum Aug 2007 A1
20070192858 Lum Aug 2007 A1
20070198275 Malden et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070208822 Wang et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070220607 Sprosts et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070240218 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070240219 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070240220 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070240222 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070250930 Aziz et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070256132 Oliphant Nov 2007 A2
20070271446 Nakamura Nov 2007 A1
20080005782 Aziz Jan 2008 A1
20080018122 Zierler et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080028463 Dagon et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080040710 Chiriac Feb 2008 A1
20080046781 Childs et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080066179 Liu Mar 2008 A1
20080072326 Danford et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080077793 Tan et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080080518 Hoeflin et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080086720 Lekel Apr 2008 A1
20080098476 Syversen Apr 2008 A1
20080120722 Sima et al. May 2008 A1
20080134178 Fitzgerald et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080134334 Kim et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080141376 Clausen et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080184367 McMillan et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080184373 Traut et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080189787 Arnold et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080201778 Guo et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080209557 Herley et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080215742 Goldszmidt et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080222729 Chen et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080263665 Ma et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080295172 Bohacek Nov 2008 A1
20080301810 Lehane et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080307524 Singh et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080313738 Enderby Dec 2008 A1
20080320594 Jiang Dec 2008 A1
20090003317 Kasralikar et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090007100 Field et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090013408 Schipka Jan 2009 A1
20090031423 Liu et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090036111 Danford et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090037835 Goldman Feb 2009 A1
20090044024 Oberheide et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090044274 Budko et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090064332 Porras et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090077666 Chen et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090083369 Marmor Mar 2009 A1
20090083855 Apap et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090089879 Wang et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090094697 Provos et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090113425 Ports et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090125976 Wassermann et al. May 2009 A1
20090126015 Monastyrsky et al. May 2009 A1
20090126016 Sobko et al. May 2009 A1
20090133125 Choi et al. May 2009 A1
20090144823 Lamastra et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090158430 Borders Jun 2009 A1
20090172815 Gu et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090187992 Poston Jul 2009 A1
20090193293 Stolfo et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090198651 Shiffer et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090198670 Shiffer et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090198689 Frazier et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090199274 Frazier et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090199296 Xie et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090228233 Anderson et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090241187 Troyansky Sep 2009 A1
20090241190 Todd et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090265692 Godefroid et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090271867 Zhang Oct 2009 A1
20090300415 Zhang et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090300761 Park et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090328185 Berg et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090328221 Blumfield et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100005146 Drako et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100011205 McKenna Jan 2010 A1
20100017546 Poo et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100030996 Butler, II Feb 2010 A1
20100031353 Thomas Feb 2010 A1
20100037314 Perdisci et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100043073 Kuwamura Feb 2010 A1
20100054278 Stolfo et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100058474 Hicks Mar 2010 A1
20100064044 Nonoyama Mar 2010 A1
20100077481 Polyakov et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100083376 Pereira et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100115621 Staniford et al. May 2010 A1
20100132038 Zaitsev May 2010 A1
20100154056 Smith et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100180344 Malyshev et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100192223 Ismael et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100220863 Dupaquis et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100235831 Dittmer Sep 2010 A1
20100251104 Massand Sep 2010 A1
20100281102 Chinta et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100281541 Stolfo et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100281542 Stolfo et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100287260 Peterson et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100299754 Amit et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100306173 Frank Dec 2010 A1
20110004737 Greenebaum Jan 2011 A1
20110025504 Lyon et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110041179 St Hlberg Feb 2011 A1
20110047594 Mahaffey et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110047620 Mahaffey et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110055907 Narasimhan et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110078794 Manni et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110093951 Aziz Apr 2011 A1
20110099620 Stavrou et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110099633 Aziz Apr 2011 A1
20110099635 Silberman et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110113231 Kaminsky May 2011 A1
20110145918 Jung et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110145920 Mahaffey et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110145934 Abramovici et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110167493 Song et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110167494 Bowen et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110173213 Frazier et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110173460 Ito et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110219449 St. Neitzel et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110219450 McDougal et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110225624 Sawhney et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110225655 Niemela et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110247072 Staniford et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110265182 Peinado et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110289582 Kejriwal et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110302587 Nishikawa et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110307954 Melnik et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110307955 Kaplan et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110307956 Yermakov et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110314546 Aziz et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120023593 Puder et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120054869 Yen et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120066698 Yanoo Mar 2012 A1
20120079596 Thomas et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120084859 Radinsky et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120096553 Srivastava et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120110667 Zubrilin et al. May 2012 A1
20120117652 Manni et al. May 2012 A1
20120121154 Xue et al. May 2012 A1
20120124426 Maybee et al. May 2012 A1
20120174186 Aziz et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120174196 Bhogavilli et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120174218 McCoy et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120198279 Schroeder Aug 2012 A1
20120210423 Friedrichs et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120222121 Staniford et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120255015 Sahita et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120255017 Sallam Oct 2012 A1
20120260342 Dube et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120266244 Green Oct 2012 A1
20120278886 Luna Nov 2012 A1
20120297489 Dequevy Nov 2012 A1
20120330801 McDougal et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120331553 Aziz et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130014259 Gribble et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130036472 Aziz Feb 2013 A1
20130047257 Aziz Feb 2013 A1
20130074185 McDougal et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130086684 Mohler Apr 2013 A1
20130097699 Balupari et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130097706 Titonis et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130111587 Goel et al. May 2013 A1
20130117852 Stute May 2013 A1
20130117855 Kim et al. May 2013 A1
20130139264 Brinkley et al. May 2013 A1
20130160125 Likhachev et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130160127 Jeong et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130160130 Mendelev et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130160131 Madou et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130167236 Sick Jun 2013 A1
20130174214 Duncan Jul 2013 A1
20130185789 Hagiwara et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130185795 Winn et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130185798 Saunders et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130191915 Antonakakis et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130196649 Paddon et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130227691 Aziz et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130246370 Bartram et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247186 LeMasters Sep 2013 A1
20130263260 Mahaffey et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130291109 Staniford et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130298243 Kumar et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130318038 Shiffer et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130318073 Shiffer et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130325791 Shiffer et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130325792 Shiffer et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130325871 Shiffer et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130325872 Shiffer et al. Dec 2013 A1
20140032875 Butler Jan 2014 A1
20140053260 Gupta et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140053261 Gupta et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140130158 Wang May 2014 A1
20140137180 Lukacs et al. May 2014 A1
20140169762 Ryu Jun 2014 A1
20140179360 Jackson et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140181131 Ross Jun 2014 A1
20140189687 Jung et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140189866 Shiffer et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140189882 Jung et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140237600 Silberman et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140280245 Wilson Sep 2014 A1
20140283037 Sikorski et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140283063 Thompson et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140328204 Klotsche et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140337836 Ismael Nov 2014 A1
20140344926 Cunningham et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140351935 Shao et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140380473 Bu et al. Dec 2014 A1
20140380474 Paithane et al. Dec 2014 A1
20150007312 Pidathala et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150096022 Vincent et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150096023 Mesdaq et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150096024 Haq et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150096025 Ismael Apr 2015 A1
20150180886 Staniford et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150186645 Aziz et al. Jul 2015 A1
20150220735 Paithane et al. Aug 2015 A1
20150363598 Xu Dec 2015 A1
20150372980 Eyada Dec 2015 A1
20160044000 Cunningham Feb 2016 A1
20160127393 Aziz et al. May 2016 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (11)
Number Date Country
2439806 Jan 2008 GB
2490431 Oct 2012 GB
0223805 Mar 2002 WO
0206928 Nov 2003 WO
2007117636 Oct 2007 WO
2008041950 Apr 2008 WO
2011084431 Jul 2011 WO
2011112348 Sep 2011 WO
2012075336 Jun 2012 WO
2012145066 Oct 2012 WO
2013067505 May 2013 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (75)
Entry
“Mining Specification of Malicious Behavior”—Jha et al, UCSB, Sep. 2007 https://www.cs.ucsb.edu/.about.chris/research/doc/esec07.sub.--mining.pdf- . cited by examiner.
“Network Security: NetDetector—Network Intrusion Forensic System (NIFS) Whitepaper”, (“NetDetector Whitepaper”), (2003).
“Packet”, Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Microsoft Press, (Mar. 2002), 1 page.
“When Virtual is Better Than Real”, IEEEXplore Digital Library, available at, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.isp?reload=true&arnumbe- r=990073, (Dec. 7, 2013).
Abdullah, et al., Visualizing Network Data for Intrusion Detection, 2005 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security, pp. 100-108.
Adetoye, Adedayo , et al., “Network Intrusion Detection & Response System”, (“Adetoye”), (Sep. 2003).
AltaVista Advanced Search Results. “attack vector identifier”. Http://www.altavista.com/web/results?Itag=ody&pg=aq&aqmode=aqa=Event+Orch- estrator . . . , (Accessed on Sep. 15, 2009).
AltaVista Advanced Search Results. “Event Orchestrator”. Http://www.altavista.com/web/results?Itag=ody&pg=aq&aqmode=aqa=Event+Orch- esrator . . . , (Accessed on Sep. 3, 2009).
Apostolopoulos, George; hassapis, Constantinos; “V-eM: A cluster of Virtual Machines for Robust, Detailed, and High-Performance Network Emulation”, 14th IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, Sep. 11-14, 2006, pp. 117-126.
Aura, Tuomas, “Scanning electronic documents for personally identifiable information”, Proceedings of the 5th ACM workshop on Privacy in electronic society. ACM, 2006.
Baecher, “The Nepenthes Platform: An Efficient Approach to collect Malware”, Springer-verlag Berlin Heidelberg, (2006), pp. 165-184.
Baldi, Mario; Risso, Fulvio; “A Framework for Rapid Development and Portable Execution of Packet-Handling Applications”, 5th IEEE International Symposium Processing and Information Technology, Dec. 21, 2005, pp. 233-238.
Bayer, et al., “Dynamic Analysis of Malicious Code”, J Comput Virol, Springer-Verlag, France., (2006), pp. 67-77.
Boubalos, Chris , “extracting syslog data out of raw pcap dumps, seclists.org, Honeypots mailing list archives”, available at http://seclists.org/honeypots/2003/q2/319 (“Boubalos”), (Jun. 5, 2003).
Chaudet, C. , et al., “Optimal Positioning of Active and Passive Monitoring Devices”, International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Conference on Emerging Network Experiment and Technology, CoNEXT '05, Toulousse, France, (Oct. 2005), pp. 71-82.
Chen, P. M. and Noble, B. D., “When Virtual is Better Than Real, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science”, University of Michigan (“Chen”) (2001).
Cisco “Intrusion Prevention for the Cisco ASA 5500-x Series” Data Sheet (2012).
Cisco, Configuring the Catalyst Switched Port Analyzer (SPAN) (“Cisco”), (1992).
Clark, John, Sylvian Leblanc,and Scott Knight. “Risks associated with usb hardware trojan devices used by insiders.” Systems Conference (SysCon), 2011 IEEE International. IEEE, 2011.
Cohen, M.I. , “PyFlag—An advanced network forensic framework”, Digital investigation 5, Elsevier, (2008), pp. S112-S120.
Costa, M. , et al., “Vigilante: End-to-End Containment of Internet Worms”, SOSP '05, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., Brighton U.K., (Oct. 23-26, 2005).
Crandall, J.R. , et al., “Minos:Control Data Attack Prevention Orthogonal to Memory Model”, 37th International Symposium on Microarchitecture, Portland, Oregon, (Dec. 2004).
Deutsch, P. , “Zlib compressed data format specification version 3.3” RFC 1950, (1996).
Distler, “Malware Analysis: An Introduction”, SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room, SANS Institute, (2007).
Dunlap, George W. , et al., “ReVirt: Enabling Intrusion Analysis through Virtual-Machine Logging and Replay”, Proceeding of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX Association, (“Dunlap”), (Dec. 9, 2002).
Excerpt regarding First Printing Date for Merike Kaeo, Designing Network Security (“Kaeo”), (2005).
Filiol, Eric , et al., “Combinatorial Optimisation of Worm Propagation on an Unknown Network”, International Journal of Computer Science 2.2 (2007).
FireEye Malware Analysis & Exchange Network, Malware Protection System, FireEye Inc., 2010.
FireEye Malware Analysis, Modern Malware Forensics, FireEye Inc., 2010.
FireEye v.6.0 Security Target, pp. 1-35, Version 1.1, FireEye Inc., May 2011.
Gibler, Clint, et al. AndroidLeaks: automatically detecting potential privacy leaks in android applications on a large scale. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012.
Goel, et al., Reconstructing System State for Intrusion Analysis, Apr. 2008 SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, vol. 42 Issue 3, pp. 21-28.
Gregg Keizer: “Microsoft's HoneyMonkeys Show Patching Windows Works”, Aug. 8, 2005, XP055143386, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://www.informationweek.com/microsofts-honeymonkeys-show-patching-windows-works/d/d-id/1035069? [retrieved on Jun. 1, 2016].
Heng Yin et al, Panorama: Capturing System-Wide Information Flow for Malware Detection and Analysis, Research Showcase © CMU, Carnegie Mellon University, 2007.
Hjelmvik, Erik , “Passive Network Security Analysis with NetworkMiner”, (IN)Secure, Issue 18, (Oct. 2008), pp. 1-100.
Idika et al., A-Survey-of-Malware-Detection-Techniques, Feb. 2, 2007, Department of Computer Science, Purdue University.
IEEE Xplore Digital Library Sear Results for “detection of unknown computer worms”. Http//ieeexplore.ieee.org/searchresult.jsp?SortField=Score&SortOrder=desc- &ResultC . . . , (Accessed on Aug. 28, 2009).
Isohara, Takamasa, Keisuke Takemori, and Ayumu Kubota. “Kernel-based behavior analysis for android malware detection.” Computational intelligence and Security (CIS), 2011 Seventh International Conference on. IEEE, 2011.
Kaeo, Merike , “Designing Network Security”, (“Kaeo”), (Nov. 2003).
Kevin A Roundy et al: “Hybrid Analysis and Control of Malware”, Sep. 15, 2010, Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 317-338, XP019150454 ISBN:978-3-642-15511-6.
Kim, H., et al., “Autograph: Toward Automated, Distributed Worm Signature Detection”, Proceedings of the 13th Usenix Security Symposium (Security 2004), San Diego, (Aug. 2004), pp. 271-286.
King, Samuel T., et al., “Operating System Support for Virtual Machines”, (“King”) (2003).
Krasnyansky, Max , et al., Universal TUN/TAP driver, available at https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/tuntap.txt (2002) (“Krasnyansky”).
Kreibich, C. , et al., “Honeycomb-Creating Intrusion Detection Signatures Using Honeypots”, 2nd Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-11), Boston, USA, (2003).
Kristoff, J. , “Botnets, Detection and Mitigation: DNS-Based Techniques”, NU Security Day, (2005), 23 pages.
Leading Colleges Select FireEye to Stop Malware-Related Data Breaches, FireEye Inc., 2009.
Li et al., A VMM-Based System Call Interposition Framework for Program Monitoring, Dec. 2010, IEEE 16th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems, pp. 706-711.
Liljenstam, Michael , et al., “Simulating Realistic Network Traffic for Worm Warning System Design and Testing”, Institute for Security Technology studies, Dartmouth College (“Liljenstam”), (Oct. 27, 2003).
Lindorfer, Martina, Clemens Kolbitsch, and Paolo Milani Comparetti. “Detecting environment-sensitive malware.” Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.
Lok Kwong et al: “DroidScope: Seamlessly Reconstructing the OS and Dalvik Semantic Views for Dynamic Android Malware Analysis”, Aug. 10, 2012, XP055158513, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurity12/sec12--final107.pdf [retrieved on Dec. 15, 2014].
Marchette, David J., “Computer Intrusion Detection and Network Monitoring: A Statistical Viewpoint”, (“Marchette”), (2001).
Margolis, P.E. , “Random House Webster's ‘Computer & Internet Dictionary 3rd Edition’”, ISBN 0375703519, (Dec. 1998).
Moore, D. , et al., “Internet Quarantine: Requirements for Containing Self-Propagating Code”, INFOCOM, vol. 3, (Mar. 30-Apr. 3, 2003), pp. 1901-1910.
Morales, Jose A., et al., ““Analyzing and exploiting network behaviors of malware.””, Security and Privacy in Communication Networks. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. 20-34.
Mori, Detecting Unknown Computer Viruses, 2004, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Natvig, Kurt , “SANDBOXII: Internet”, Virus Bulletin Conference, (“Natvig”), (Sep. 2002).
NetBIOS Working Group. Protocol Standard for a NetBIOS Service on a TCP/UDP transport: Concepts and Methods. STD 19, RFC 1001, Mar. 1987.
Newsome, J. , et al., “Dynamic Taint Analysis for Automatic Detection, Analysis, and Signature Generation of Exploits on Commodity Software”, In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security, Symposium (NDSS '05), (Feb. 2005).
Newsome, J. , et al., “Polygraph: Automatically Generating Signatures for Polymorphic Worms”, In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, (May 2005).
Nojiri, D. , et al., “Cooperation Response Strategies for Large Scale Attack Mitigation”, DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition, vol. 1, (Apr. 22-24, 2003), pp. 293-302.
Oberheide et al., CloudAV.sub.—N-Version Antivirus in the Network Cloud, 17th USENIX Security Symposium USENIX Security '08 Jul. 28-Aug. 1, 2008 San Jose, CA.
Reiner Sailer, Enriquillo Valdez, Trent Jaeger, Roonald Perez, Leendert van Doom, John Linwood Griffin, Stefan Berger., sHype: Secure Hypervisor Appraoch to Trusted Virtualized Systems (Feb. 2, 2005) (“Sailer”).
Silicon Defense, “Worm Containment in the Internal Network”, (Mar. 2003), pp. 1-25.
Singh, S. , et al., “Automated Worm Fingerprinting”, Proceedings of the ACM/USENIX Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation, San Francisco, California, (Dec. 2004).
Spitzner, Lance , “Honeypots: Tracking Hackers”, (“Spizner”), (Sep. 17, 2002).
The Sniffers's Guide to Raw Traffic available at: yuba.stanford.edu/.about.casado/pcap/section1.html, (Jan. 6, 2014).
Thomas H. Ptacek, and Timothy N. Newsham , “Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection”, Secure Networks, (“Ptacek”), (Jan. 1998).
U.S. Pat. No. 8,171,553 filed Apr. 20, 2006, Inter Parties Review Decision dated Jul. 10, 2015.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,291,499 filed Mar. 16, 2012, Inter Parties Review Decision dated Jul. 10, 2015.
Venezia, Paul , “NetDetector Captures Intrusions”, InfoWorld Issue 27, (“Venezia”), (Jul. 14, 2003).
Wahid et al., Characterising the Evolution in Scanning Activity of Suspicious Hosts, Oct. 2009, Third International Conference on Network and System Security, pp. 344-350.
Whyte, et al., “DNS-Based Detection of Scanning Works in an Enterprise Network”, Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, (Feb. 2005), 15 pages.
Williamson, Matthew M., “Throttling Viruses: Restricting Propagation to Defeat Malicious Mobile Code”, ACSAC Conference, Las Vegas, NV, USA, (Dec. 2002), pp. 1-9.
Yuhei Kawakoya et al: “Memory behavior-based automatic malware unpacking in stealth debugging environment”, Malicious and Unwanted Software (Malware), 2010 5th International Conference on, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, Oct. 19, 2010, pp. 39-46, XP031833827, ISBN:978-1-4244-8-9353-1.
Zhang et al., The Effects of Threading, Infection Time, and Multiple-Attacker Collaboration on Malware Propagation, Sep. 2009, IEEE 28th International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, pp. 73-82.