Patent Grant
9986279
Particular embodiments are in the technical field of networking technology. More particularly, particular embodiments are in the technical field of computer and embedded device communications.
The Internet and home entertainment devices usually do not communicate with one another. Attempts have been made to bridge these two: game consoles communicate over the Internet so allowing many players to engage in the same game, Apple TV downloads videos from iTunes, Microsoft media extenders play media housed on a user's personal computer. The dominant paradigm is to extend the home entertainment device so that users can search the Internet or nearby computers from the device. Less has been done to extend the PC to push content to the entertainment device.
Set-top boxes exist that stream videos from websites to the TV. The set-top boxes all assume the user sits in front of the TV when navigating between videos. Due to the limitations of TV remote controls, no acceptable user interface has been devised to enable users to hunt through catalogs of thousands of titles. Computers have the advantage of a keyboard and mouse: rich input devices that have performed well for inputting queries to web search engines and video web sites. An entertainment system might exploit the advantages of the computer to push the most relevant content to the TV leaving the home entertainment user interface to handle the smaller problem of hunting through tens or hundreds of titles.
In the case of a joint venture between Amazon and TiVo, a user of Amazon Unboxed can click on a purchased video and it is then downloaded to the user's TiVo Internet-equipped digital video recorder. The TiVo then plays the video directly to the user's TV. NetFlix has a similar arrangement with Roku. However, both products require user configuration and a pre-existing user registration, e.g., for Amazon/TiVo the user must have an account that is linked to the user's TiVo account which is associated with the user's TiVo. The Amazon-TiVo relationship is explicit and does not extend beyond Amazon to other websites. The “click to send” to your TiVo functionality is an example of extending the computer to push content to a device over a network.
Particular embodiments provide a building block enabling any website to send video to an entertainment device within the user's home without requiring user configuration or account registration, and without exposing the user's device unduly to spam, i.e., unsolicited content pushed from websites or other users.
Particular embodiments enable the following scenario: Alice uses her laptop to browse a website foo.com that serves video. The website contains an Adobe Flash-based video player. Alice watches a video v for a few seconds and decides it is interesting and would like to view the video on her television. Below the video is a button that says. “Send to your living room TV.” Alice clicks the button, and a dialog box appears, “foo.bar is attempting to send V to your living room TV. Do you want to allow foo.bar to send videos to your TV?” She clicks “yes.” and video V starts playing on her living room TV.
The next day Alice goes to work. While browsing the web she stumbles on a video on bar.com that she would like to watch when she gets home. Even though bar.com and foo.com are not the same website, she sees the name of her television in a button on the website. She clicks on the button, the same message “bar.com is attempting . . . ” appears to which she again clicks “yes.” When she gets home that night, the program is available on her television.
The discovery of the TV did not require Alice to install anything on her laptop; it did not require her to provide any configuration on her laptop; it did not require her to have any account with foo.com, bar.com or any third party; and it did not require her to configure her television other than to provide it with a human-friendly name when she first purchased the TV. If the TV is manufactured with a reasonable human-friendly name (e.g., Company X 36″ TV) then even this step can be skipped. This allows minimal configuration or a truly zero-configuration solution. All of this is achieved within the security constraints imposed by the web browser, and in a manner that resists spam, i.e., particular embodiments resist web sites and other users sending unsolicited content to Alice's TV.
Alice's forays are compelling example uses of particular embodiments. More generally the television could be any device: a stereo, game console, another computer. The communication between the website and the device need not be a message telling the device to play a video but could be any communiqué. Adobe Flash could be replaced with Microsoft Silverlight or any runtime environment imposing a security sandbox that meets the constraints described in Section 0. Lastly the dialog prompting the user for permission to send the message could be replaced with any user interface component that requests a policy decision from the user regarding the communication to take place. Or default or previously established policy might forgo the policy prompt.
Particular embodiments specify how devices are discovered and how messages are conveyed to these devices without revealing any unique identifiers for the devices to web sites. Particular embodiments also specify how policy can be implemented with little or no local persistent storage on the user's personal computer, without requiring the user to make policy decisions repeatedly for the same website when there is non-zero persistent storage, and without permitting the website to modify or subvert the policy.
A further understanding of the nature and the advantages of particular embodiments disclosed herein may be realized by reference of the remaining portions of the specification and the attached drawings.
In all figures, this document adopts notation with syntax identical to that of the programming language Python. Brackets [ ] surround a list; curly brackets { }surround a dictionary; and commas separate elements in a dictionary, elements in a list, or arguments in a call. Lists appearing in figures sometimes contain a single element, but this should be taken to mean that there can be zero or more elements in the list. In some cases the semantics of a zero element list may be ill-defined. For example, there is no reason and no possibility for a device with zero network interfaces to announce itself to the network. Dictionaries contain key-value pairs. Keys are unique, but values need not be so. The key and value are separated by a colon. In a call, particular embodiments present variable name and value separated by the assignment operator ‘=’. Values are represented using italics. Values are provided for purposes of illustration with the understanding that they should be replaced for each real-world scenario, e.g., replace “name” with the actual name of some entity.
When the Internet was first designed in the late 60's and early 70's all nodes were provided with static IP address assignments and all packets were routed only based on IP address. IP addresses were hard to remember so nodes were assigned names, but not until the Domain Name System (DNS) was there a single scalable distributed database for translating domain names to IP addresses.
The DNS uses domain names not only to name nodes but also to specify administrative boundaries and has been overloaded to locate nodes serving a particular function and to locate services running on particular ports. For example www.example.com refers to the nodes providing World Wide Web services in the administrative domain example.com. If a user working at the example company wishes to find a printer he or she might look up ipp.example.com where ipp stands for “Internet Printing Protocol.” However, to do so would require the user to know he or she is on a network under the same administration as example.com. When a computer boots for the first time, it has no IP address and it does not know its administrator's domain. If a computer moves its IP address might change and the administrator of the network in which the computer finds itself might have changed. The printer ipp.example.com may no longer be the appropriate printer or may no longer be accessible.
To allow users to boot or move their computers into networks without requiring any a priori knowledge or user configuration, most computers implement some form of Zero Configuration networking (Zeroconf). All modern Apple computers implement a form of Zeroconf called Multicast DNS (MDNS) and DNS-based Service Discovery (DNS-SD) as parts of Bonjour. Multicast DNS is similar to the Internet's Domain Name System (DNS) except every node in the network acts as a server. When a computer multicasts a query for the IP address of the node with domain name “foo,” if “foo” is on the network then “foo” responds with its IP address. As with DNS, the query need not be for a node's IP address, but may be a query for a named service. PoinTeR (PTR) resource records point from one domain name to another. With DNS-SD, the user looking for service “bar” queries for a PTR record for domain name bar.example.com, where “bar” and “example.com” can be replaced with any service and domain name respectively. The PTR record maps to a domain name of the form
1st floor._ipp._tcp.local
mezzanine._ipp._tcp.local
Assume the client wants to print to the printer named “1st floor,” the querying client then sends a second query for the service (SRV) record for “1st floor.” The SRV record contains the port number and canonical domain name for the printer. Now that the client has uniquely identified the printer and the port number on which the printer's print service application is running, the client sends the job to the printer.
Apple's MDNS and DNS-SD work when the application has access to multicast. However, the security sandbox as described in Section 0 does not allow access to multicast: Adobe Flash employs such a sandbox and thus a flash-based application running in the browser cannot directly discover a printer, TV, or other local networked peripheral. When a user wishes to print a web page, the browser rather than a sandboxed program initiates the print process. The browser has access to multicast or indirectly has access to MDNS via the Bonjour system service provided by OS X or as an installed service on nodes running Unix or Microsoft Windows.
Microsoft's competing discovery mechanism Simple Service Discovery Protocol (SSDP) relies on UDP unicast and multicast. Neither UDP unicast nor multicast is available within the security sandbox described in Section 0.
Similarly the IETF's Service Location Protocol (SLP)(4), UPnP (which is based on SSDP), and uTorrent's Local Service Discovery (LSD) use multicast to discover services within the local area network and thus share the same problem with MDNS/DNS-SD and SSDP.
A node on the Internet is a computer or device that has an Internet Protocol (IP) address. Nodes include but axe not limited to laptops, printers, desktop computers, and IP-equipped televisions, stereos, and game consoles. When a node communicates with another node it sends a packet that like an envelope in the postal mail system contains a message and bears a source and destination address. Messages, especially lengthier messages, may span multiple packets. With a packet, the addresses are IP addresses. The IP address is a numeric address not generally intended for human consumption, but rather is used by nodes inside the Internet to forward packets toward the destination node. Many nodes on the Internet also have a human-friendly domain name that uniquely names the node. A domain name may also refer to a set of nodes. For example www.google.com refers to the set of computers that provide the human-facing portion of google's web search service.
A server refers to a node or set of nodes that respond to queries from clients. A node may be both a server and a client depending on the role the node takes in processing a particular query/response. Google's nodes running at www.google.com are servers and the nodes that query google.com with web searches are clients.
Particular embodiments refer to devices or discovering services offered by a device. For illustration, this is appropriate since embodiments are applicable to discovering services offered by televisions, digital video recorders, printers, or other special-purpose electronics that consumers usually refer to as “devices.” For example, the service provided by a printer is to print a document while the service offered by a networked TV may be to play a video. More generally this document describes mechanisms to discover services within a network. Any service which can be discovered using embodiments of the discovery service is a discoverable service.
The Internet may be divided into public and private networks (as illustrated in
To communicate with nodes over the public Internet, private nodes communicate via a Network Address Translator (NAT) 105, 106. A NAT straddles private and public networks and has both a public IP address and a private IP address. The NAT replaces the source address on each packet destined for the public Internet with the NAT's public IP address. A response to the packet is addressed for the NAT. The NAT translates the destination address from packets arriving from the public Internet to the appropriate private IP address within its private network. In
To address a packet to a specific application running on a node, packets also contain source and destination port numbers. Any given application may send from or listen on any number of ports, but a port belongs to only one application at any given time. As a shorthand this document often refers to a sender's or receiver's IP address x and port number y as the address pair (x,y). The pair is denoted as a sender's or receiver's address. When the IP address in an address pair is a private IP address, this is denoted the private address. When a packet passes through a NAT from a private network to a public network, the sender's private address is mapped to a port on the NAT's public-facing network interface. The port number on a NAT mapped to a private address and the NAT's public IP address together constitute a sender's or receiver's public address. Many NATs attempt to preserve port numbers when mapping from private to public IP addresses, but this is not always possible. Assume two packets destined for www.goole.com port 80 arrive from the private network: packet 1 has sender private-IP and port (x,y), packet 2 has sender private-IP and port (w,y). Both packets have the same sender port. A NAT often has only 1 public IP address here denoted n. If the NAT maps packet 1 to (n,y) and maps packet 2 to (n,y) then both packets appear to come from the same private node. Instead the NAT maps either packet 1 or packet 2 onto a sender port other than y so that when responses arrive from google, the NAT can forward those responses back to the correct private nodes. The ambiguities and limitations imposed by NATs may influence the design of certain embodiments.
When a user visits a web site, the web browser downloads a number of web pages often containing one or more scripts written in Javascript or Actionscript. Such scripts or anything that executes in a web page are usually constrained in the types of operations they can perform. These constraints protect the user's privacy and the security of the user's computer. These constraints together comprise a security sandbox or more tersely a sandbox. Hereafter anything that executes in a security sandbox is referred to as a sandboxed program. The sandboxed program may be a script, binary executable, intermediate bytecode, abstract syntax tree, or anything that can be executed with the appropriate runtime environment. A security sandbox may or may not run inside a web browser.
Particular embodiments assume a user runs a sandboxed program. This program wishes to communicate with services running on devices that reside in the same private network. The program calls a discovery agent that finds discoverable services within the same private network and updates contact information (addresses) for services that were previously contacted but may now reside in another private network. The discovery agent tells the sandboxed program about the discovered services. Section 0 details the constraints imposed by the security sandbox. Subsequent sections describe the discovery process, and several variations that permit direct communication when the sandboxed program and discoverable service reside in different private networks.
Security Sandbox
Particular embodiments operate within a security sandbox that imposes the following restrictions:
Particular embodiments may also work in security sandboxes that impose a subset of these restrictions or weaker versions of these restrictions.
Particular embodiments may not require substantial computation or memory and reasonable constraints on computation or memory usage will not affect the proposed embodiments.
In the case of Adobe Flash, the explicit permission to communicate with a server comes in the form of a crossdomain.xml file that specifies permissions to access a domain x and is stored at URL http://x/crossdomain.xml. After the crossdomain.xml file has been communicated, further communication with existing Adobe Flash 8 through 10 libraries occurs over HTTP. With Adobe Flash 8 through 10, sandboxed programs can communicate with each other via LocalConnection objects or via Javascript calls exported via the ActionScript ExternalInterface. LocalConnection and ExternalInterface mechanisms are provided as examples, other mechanisms may exist for sandboxed programs to communicate with each other, and other mechanisms may be introduced in future versions of Adobe Flash.
A service that is designed to communicate with sandboxed programs is called a sandbox-reachable service. A service designed to communicate with a program running in an Adobe Flash sandbox is called aflash-reachable service. Specifically, a flash-reachable service speaks HTTP and returns a sufficiently permissive crossdomain.xml file.
Centralized Embodiment
Traditionally a program multicasts or broadcasts to its local network to discover available networked services. Because sandboxed programs cannot use multicast or broadcast, they discover services via some intermediary. This intermediary is referred to as the discovery service. Services announce themselves to the discovery service, and discovery agents running with the sandboxed program query the discovery service to discover previously announced devices.
In the centralized embodiment of this invention, as shown in
Each discoverable service running on device 201 has a globally unique id (GUID) denoted g. The GUID is provided only to the discovery service 207 and to nodes on the same private network. The GUID is valuable in that it identifies the device even when the device's public or private addresses change. e.g., the user's service provider may reallocate the customer's public IP address(es), the device owner may change Internet service providers, or the private network's Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) may reassign IP addresses. In practice the GUID can be assigned during manufacture, or the GUID can be a random number drawn from a large enough space that the resulting number is unique with high probability. The latter allows the GUID to be changed at any time without contacting a central authority. An owner might wish to change a device's GUID if he or she believes the GUID has been compromised. e.g., as might be evidenced by a sudden increase in spam appearing on her TV.
The discoverable service on device 201 also has a human-friendly name denoted by the key “human name” with value “name.” The human name is not intended to be globally unique and possibly not even locally unique, but rather to be meaningful to the users of a service. Example names include “living room TV” and “bedroom printer.” Device 201 also has at least one IP address 202 in order for it to communicate to the network. Device 201 may have more than one IP address. If the device 201 sits inside a private network that is connected to the public Internet via a NAT 204 then all of the device's IP addresses are private IP addresses. Any communication sent or received by this device must originate or be destined to a program with a port number. Thus device 201 has a both a private IP and port pair 202, hereafter called the address pair and illustrated as (x,y) in
When announcing, device 201 sends its service information: its GUID, and its human name 203. As the announce message propagates from the private network via the NAT 204 to the public Internet, the NAT 204 translates the device's announce message's private address (x,z) to its public address (u,w) 205 where u is the public IP address of the NAT 204. (x,z) differs from (x,y) because the connection over which the device announces may use an ephemeral source port, i.e., a port allocated for use by a single connection. Ephemeral ports are described in any textbook on TCP/IP. The end result of this translation is the message 206, which the Discovery Service 207 receives. The Discovery Service stores the service information for later lookup 208 during the discovery process.
In the centralized embodiment, the connection used for announcing is also used for forwarding all communications between sandboxed programs and the discoverable services. Thus the table 208 also contains connection state such as a socket file descriptor. Since a connection is initiated by the discoverable service to the discovery service, it is likely that such connections will be permitted by any NAT, especially if those connections use HTTP. Since the connection between the discoverable service and the discovery service is maintained, it can probably be used to route messages back through any number of intervening NATs so long as those NATs permit long-run HTTP connections to the discovery service. To prevent NAT mappings from timing out, the discoverable service, sends periodic keep-alive messages.
If only infrequent and small communications take place between sandboxed programs and any given discoverable service then the centralized embodiment is the best solution due to its simplicity.
When a user runs a sandboxed program that queries the discover service, the discovery service returns the GUID and any human names for the services behind the same NAT. The GUID ensures that the sandboxed program can distinguish between devices that have identical human names.
Once the sandboxed program 304 has obtained device 301's service information, the sandboxed program has the necessary information to contact 301. When the sandboxed program 304404 decides to communicate with the discoverable service 301401, it forwards the desired payload to communicate with the destination service's guid 406409 through the NAT 407 to the discovery service 410. The discovery service looks up the connection state such as a file descriptor from the table shown in 208 and forwards the payload through this connection 411412 to the discoverable service 401.
By virtue of passing all communications through central infrastructure and having devices maintain connections to the central infrastructure, the centralized embodiment can penetrate commercially available NATs.
If there is no user configuration and devices and the sandboxed program come from disparate organizations, e.g., the device manufacturer and a website respectively, then the discovery service may be known to both a priori. In practice, this means the discovery service is global.
Variations on the Centralized Embodiment
In another embodiment, the announce message omits the human name. The human name would then not appear in the mappings maintained by the discovery service, and would not be communicated from the discovery service to the sandboxed program. The guid is all that is necessary to route packets through central infrastructure to the sandboxed program and device reside on the same private network. The human name could thus be obtained from further communication between the sandboxed program and the discovered service. The no-human-name embodiment has the drawback that the human name cannot be presented to the user until after at least the first call between the sandboxed program and the device has completed. Thus there would be no human name to present a meaningful error message when the sandboxed program cannot communicate with the discovered service. This may not be deemed a drawback if the sandboxed program calls the services to confirm they are reachable before their human names in the user interface.
For the centralized embodiment, the term “discovery service” is a bit of a misnomer. Central infrastructure provides both discovery and application-layer routing between the sandboxed programs and the discoverable services. The discovery service is logically centralized, but may be distributed across multiple servers to provide scale and robustness. The IP address space and the guid address space may be partitioned across these servers and/or replicated across subsets of the servers to provide failover.
For reasonable performance the service information for the two queries based on GUID or based on IP address may be stored in separate mappings (a.k.a., indices): from GUID to service information 208 and from public IP to service information 209. The traditional data structure for such lookups is a hash table though the mappings can be stored with different trade-offs in time and space complexity using a variety of data structures (e.g., tries, balanced trees, radix trees).
With some cost in lookup time, a Distributed Hash Table (DHT) permits a physically decentralized lookup data structure and associated message routing where the data structure can be spread across a wide number of nodes including the devices themselves. However DHTs introduce occasional NAT traversal problems, since many of the nodes in the DHT may be behind NATs. Furthermore, the nodes in a decentralized data structure are less trustworthy and thus using a DHT introduces potential spam problems (see Section 0).
Embodiment that Allows Direct Communication
With the centralized embodiment, all communications between sandboxed programs and discoverable services pass through the discovery service. The centralized embodiment requires an amount of infrastructure linear to the volume of communications between sandboxed programs and discovered services. Communicating without passing packets through central infrastructure is denoted as direct communications. By this definition, directly communicated packets may transit between two nodes on a Local Area Network (LAN) or may pass through multiple routers and NATs between two nodes on disparate networks. This section presents an embodiment wherein central infrastructure is still used to discover services, but once a service has been discovered all further communications takes place directly between the sandboxed program and the discoverable service. The embodiment that enables direct communications is hereafter called the direct embodiment.
With the direct embodiment, the central infrastructure requirement scales linearly with the number of announces and discovery requests it must process as opposed to linearly with all communications transiting between sandboxed programs and discovered services.
TVs, DVRs, and set-top boxes are usually not considered mobile devices. Non-mobile nodes may retain IP address assignments for days or longer even when repeatedly turned off. Discoverable services running on those nodes can choose to reuse the same port numbers whenever possible, thus making ip and port stable values worthy of caching. If the sandboxed program caches ip-port pairs as long as the ip-port pairs remain valid, the sandboxed program may communicate with the device hundreds of times for each time the sandboxed program must contact the discovery service.
To achieve direct communications between the sandboxed program and the discoverable service, the system communicates more information via the discovery service: the sandboxed program must at least know the private address of the discoverable service. For remote access the sandboxed program also needs the discoverable service's public address. Once a sandboxed program knows the discoverable service's addresses, it can attempt to establish communications. If the sandboxed program resides on the same private network with the discoverable service then opening a connection to the private address likely succeeds. Establishing direct communication between private networks and thus through one or more NATs is more complicated. Related discussion is thus deferred until Section 0.
When announcing, discoverable service 901 sends its service information: a list of all of its known addresses, the service's port v mapped on the NAT, its GUID, and its human name 903. In the centralized embodiment, the known addresses are the IP addresses of the discoverable service's device's network interfaces with their respective ports on which the discoverable service listens. In
As the announce message propagates from the private network via the NAT 904 to the public Internet, the NAT 904 translates the device's announce message's private address (x,z) to its public address (u,w) 905 where u is the public IP address of the NAT 904. (x,z) differs from (x,y) because the connection over which the device announces may use an ephemeral source port. i.e., a port allocated for use by a single connection. Ephemeral ports are described in any textbook on TCP/IP. The end result of this translation is the message 906, which the Discovery Service 907 receives. The Discovery Service stores the service information for later lookup during the discovery process.
Once the sandboxed program 1004 obtains device 1001's service information, the sandboxed program has the necessary information to contact 1001. When the sandboxed program 1004 decides to communicate with device 1001, to satisfy the requirements of the security sandbox, the sandbox queries the discovered service to obtain permission 1012 to communicate. Assuming the discovered service grants permission 1013, the sandboxed program 1004 proceeds to communicate with the discovered service 1014.
The discovery state machine completes once the connection has been established 1211 because what is communicated over the connection is orthogonal to the discovery process.
Once the security sandbox 1503 interprets the crossdomain.xml file, assuming access is permitted the sandbox allows “Sandboxed.swf” 1509 to send a Discovery( ) query 15161517 to the Discovery Service 1513. Assuming device 1523 has previously announced to the Discovery Service and resides behind the same NAT 1511, the Discovery Service returns a list of discovered devices 15181519 containing the service information for device 1523.
Assuming the device 1523 has address (x,y). “Sandboxed.swf” 1509 references device 1523 as if it were a server using an URL
Before permitting any communication with device 1523, the Flash security sandbox 1509 performs an HTTP GET 1520 for the URL
Once the security sandbox 1509 has determined that communications are permitted, communication between the “Sandbox.swf” and the device commences.
Variations of the Direct Embodiment
As with variations of the centralized embodiment, a variation of the direct embodiment could omit the human name from the announce message with the same drawbacks.
In another variation, the announce message may omit the GUID, but when the GUID is omitted the sandboxed program lacks any identifier by which to lookup services on previously visited private networks. If no device communicates its GUID then there is no reason for the discovery service to maintain the mapping from GUID to service information and GUIDs may be omitted from all other communication.
A variation that omits both GUID and human name in announce messages is also possible with the drawbacks of both the variations that omit only one of the two.
Security and Spam Prevention: The Two Sandbox Extension
In the embodiments discussed so far, the sandboxed program is given the known addresses and/or the GUID of the discoverable service. Although the sandboxed program is limited regarding what it can do to its local node, the sandboxed program is allowed to communicate across the Internet. Any information given to the sandboxed program could become public knowledge including the public address and the GUID: potentially anyone can forever communicate with the discoverable service. This section extends the direct embodiment to limits access to the GUIDs and addresses of discoverable service.
One traditional way to prevent undesired access is to introduce usernames and/or passwords. This is a reasonable solution, however usernames and passwords are examples of user configuration-in this case the configuration is often called user registration. Particular embodiments are provided that avoid user registration.
For purposes of illustration this section hereafter limits the scope of the services addressed to those offered by entertainment devices. However, this does not preclude using any embodiments with other types of services.
A prominent example use of the proposed embodiments is to allow video web sites to find televisions in the user's home and then tell the TV to play a video. This TV has enough persistent storage to store content metadata: information about videos, such as titles, descriptions, and URLs from which the videos can be streamed. The IP-enabled, on-demand TV exports a discoverable service by which a caller can list, add or remove metadata. What are the threats posed by an attacker from somewhere on the Internet?
An attacker could
IP-enabled Digital Video Recorders (DVRs) differ from IP-enabled on-demand TVs in that they have substantial persistent storage. If an IP-enabled DVR exports functions to the IP interface to list downloaded/recorded videos, download/record video, delete video, and share video then the attacker could
For most entertainment devices there appear to be three classes of attack: deletion, privacy invasion, and spam. The prior two could be damaging; the last is mostly annoying. In the worst case spam attacks could use up all storage on a DVR preventing desired recording.
A way to protect against deletion is to not export any deletion functions as part of the discoverable service. The easiest way to protect against privacy invasions is to not expose any metadata already in the device via the discoverable service. This leaves only spam attacks. The most damaging form of spam attacks can be mitigated by imposing resource restrictions. Do not allow newly added items to the device to consume more than allotted resources.
To address these threats consider a two-level security model for functions implemented by a device: protected and local. A local function is only available via interfaces that require the user's physical proximity to the device, e.g., buttons on the TV or on an infrared remote control. A protected function is available via IP as a discoverable service but only to programs running on nodes in the same private network, programs that know the device's public address, or programs that know the device's GUID. Functions that perform critical activities like deleting files would probably be local. Functions that add content or metadata, or that tell the device to play content are still sensitive to spam and are thus deemed protected.
Spam is prevented to the extent the system protects the GUID and public address of the device from untrusted, visited websites. Fortunately these pieces of information can be well protected using the constraints imposed by the security sandbox. As stated in Section 0:
Sandboxed programs may not be permitted to communicate with other programs running within other security sandboxes except via a limited, mutually agreed programming interface enforced by the sandboxes.
A program running in a separate sandboxed program downloaded from a trusted website performs service discovery. Devices then only expose service information to the trusted website. This example assumes that the discovery service and the website delivering the discovery sandboxed program work together as a trusted entity. Particular embodiments hereafter refer to the discovery sandboxed program as the discovery agent.
Particular embodiments hereafter refer to this as the two sandbox extension. The two sandbox extension can be applied to the centralized and direct embodiments though this section presents it in the context of the direct embodiment.
In
Since the untrusted sandboxed program 1604 only has access to human names and local identifiers and those local identifiers are only meaningful to the discovery agent, the untrusted sandboxed program can only communicate with discovered services via the discovery agent. When the untrusted sandboxed program wishes to communicate some arbitrary payload to a discovered service, it sends the payload 1612 to the discovery agent with the id of the sandboxed program to which the payload should be sent. The discovery agent then forwards the payload 1613 to the discoverable service with or without the id and likewise the discovery agent forwards any response from the discoverable service to the sandboxed program.
If the untrusted sandboxed program leaks the human names to a third-party this does not compromise any address or global identifier that the third party could exploit to communicate with the discovered service.
The discovery service and the content website have different domain names and thus the flash player prevents the two sandboxed programs from communicating with one another except via a programming interface explicitly exported by each SWF. For example, the two SWFs can export JavaScript call interfaces using ActionScript's ExternalInterface:
The discovery agent might use the above code to export a call named “play” that allows “Player.swf” 1707 to tell the device to play content described by the video_metainfo argument. The video metainfo is represented as an URL in a “play” call 1716 passed from “Player.swf” identifying service with id=0 and then forwarded by “Discovery.swf” to the TV service 1717. The TV then downloads 1718 the video from foo.com's video server.
Similarly “Player.swf” 1707 might export a JavaScript call via which the discovery agent communicates references to newly discovered devices:
Because all communications between the untrusted sandboxed program and the discovered service, e.g., the TV, pass through the discovery agent, the discovery agent stands in the unique position to enforce policy: preventing or modifying communications between the untrusted sandboxed program and the discovered service according to rules imposed by the user.
Upon receiving a communiqué the discovery agent 1806 determines the sender of the communication. For example with ActionScript, the discovery agent can determine the URL of http://foo.com/x.html 1804 via the ExternalInterface:
var page_url=ExternalInterface.call(“eval”, “window.location.href”);
From page_url, the discovery agent 1806 extracts the domain name of the content provider website foo.com. The discovery agent then queries a policy database for access restrictions for foo.com. When there is no policy present in the database, the discovery agent may prompt the user. For example if the discovery agent 1806 is a SWF, the discovery agent could use ActionScript's ExternalInterface to prompt the user with a confirm modal dialog box asking whether a website is allowed to send a video to a TV:
In the code snippet above, update_policy stores policy for domain_name(page_url), domain_name(page_url) returns the domain name portion of page_url.
The policy database can reside in persistent storage on the computer running the discovery agent or the policy database can reside in the device on which the discovery agent runs or the policy database can be distributed across both. When the policy device is in the computer running the discovery agent, the policy moves with the personal computer (e.g., a laptop) and can be applied across devices. When the policy is stored in the device running the discoverable service, the policy can apply to all users of that device. Furthermore policy stored in the personal computer is available before communication with the device is achieved and can thus be used to rapidly remove unavailable user options, but a policy database on the personal computer is also limited to the constraints imposed by the sandbox. Adobe Flash, by default, limits each website to 100 KB. This is sufficient to locally store domain names and a few associated Boolean access flags for thousands of web sites. Unfortunately if the user clears Adobe Flash website storage then all policy is lost. A device may have much larger storage for policy and is less likely to allow a user to accidentally delete all policy.
“Player.swf” 1707 may be replaced with any sandboxed program including those not running in Adobe Flash. Likewise the discovery agent 17091806, may be written in any language and run-time environment that imposes a security sandbox meeting the constraints specified in Section 0. The device references 17141809 returned from the discovery service 17131808 contain all of the information illustrated in
Sharing Discovery State Across Web Pages and Domains
In the example in
Sharing state between page loads also enables a user to visit a network once and be able to communicate with a discovered service when the service is no longer in the same private network and thus does not appear in a response from the discovery service. Remote communications is discussed in Section 0.
Variations on the Two Sandbox Extension
The discovery agent may have its own UI for selecting discoverable services. The sandboxed program may communicate what it wants to communicate to the discovery agent, which then forwards to the discoverable service. In this variation the untrusted sandboxed program is not even told a locally unique id or human name of any discoverable services.
As another Adobe Flash example of the two sandbox extension, the limited, mutually agreed programming interface between the two sandboxes could use the LocalConnection class rather than JavaScript. However, any limited, mutually agreed programming interface suffices.
Remote Communications
Problems related to communicating between nodes with one or more intervening NAT are generally known as NAT traversal problems. This section describes how the direct embodiment enables a client that previously discovered a service to communicate with that service when the client and service no longer reside in the same private network. Such communication by the definition of private network implies traversing one or more NATs. This section then discusses embodiments that handle a wider array of NAT traversal problems.
When contacting a service's known addresses fails and the service does not appear in the response to a query for local private network services, the sandboxed program assumes the previously discovered service resides in another private network or is no longer operational.
In the direct embodiment presented in Section 0 and as illustrated in
A port mapping is the mapping between a private ip-port to one of the NAT's public IP addresses and one of the NAT's public ports. A NAT usually sets up a port mapping automatically when a program inside the NAT's private network initiates a TCP connection or starts a UDP packet exchange with any node outside the private network. However when a packet arrives on one of the NAT's public network interfaces bearing a port number for which there exists no mapping, the NAT typically discards the packet. There is one exception: some NATs implement a way to designate a single node within the private network to handle all packets that arrive on a public port for which there exists no port mapping. Forwarding all packets addressed to unmapped ports to a particular private node is sometimes called placing the private node in the DeMilitarized Zone (DMZ). Some NATs support mechanisms for explicit port mapping, whereby an application running within the NATs private network can tell the NAT to establish a port mapping without initiating a connection to any particular node outside the private network. NAT-PNP and uPNP specify mechanisms for explicit port mapping. NAT-PNP and uPNP are preferable to placing a node in the DMZ since placing a node in the DMZ opens that node up to various security threats.
Because a user trying to communicate with a service running on a different private network is initiating a connection via a NAT, the NAT must either be particularly unrestrictive (e.g., implementing a DMZ) or it must provide explicit port mapping. This section later describes embodiments that do not require explicit port mapping.
If a NAT does not support NAT-PNP or uPNP, most NATs provide a web user interface by which user's can manually set up port mappings or designate a device responsible for all packets to unmapped ports. NAT-PNP or uPNP are obviously preferable since they do not require any user configuration.
Assume prior to the events depicted in
Once the SYN/ACK arrives, the sandboxed program acknowledges the SYN/ACK. The ACK to the SYN/ACK follows the same path through the illustration as the initiating SYN. At this point, the connection has been established between the sandboxed program and the discovered service on device 2012.
Once the connection has been established, communication commences. What is communicated is orthogonal to the discovery process.
Multiple NATs between the sandboxed program and the public Internet represents little difficulty in practice since the sandboxed program initiates communications 2008. However, explicit port mapping may fail when there are multiple NATs between the discoverable service and the public Internet.
The direct embodiment without explicit port mapping often requires some form of manual user configuration to permit remote access over TCP.
The next section considers embodiments that can traverse a wider variety of NAT scenarios.
Advanced Nat Traversal
NATs implement port translation in various ways. For all descriptions consider the case when a private node initiates communications by sending a packet bearing private source address (x,y) and publicly routable destination address (a,b). The most restrictive NATs are sometimes called symmetric NATs. With symmetric NATs, the mapping exists only between (x,y) and (a,b). Packets arriving at the NAT from the public network with destination (x,y) but with source address other than (a,b) are discarded. Symmetric NATs are the most difficult to traverse and we propose only one embodiment that can traverse such NATs: the global message queues embodiment.
The global message queues embodiment extends the direct embodiment as well as any of the other embodiments discussed with a message queue for each service that announces to the discovery service. A message can contain arbitrary information and the message can span a single packet or multiple packets. The message queue stores the message for at least long enough for a normally operating discoverable service to poll the queue and download any pending messages. The message queue solution casts both the sandboxed program and the discoverable service in the role of communication initiator, the sandboxed program initiates communication to push the message; the service initiates communications when it polls. Thus the NAT traversal will succeed for almost any NAT including symmetric NATs by virtue of NAT's automatically establishing port mappings for communications initiated from within any of a NAT's private networks.
Providing a global message queue per discoverable service has unique benefits that make it useful in combination with all of the NAT traversal techniques we discuss:
However, the global message queues embodiment has a number of drawbacks that make it the logical last resort when attempting to communicate with a device:
Some of these drawbacks are no worse than the drawbacks of a global discovery service, since it represents central infrastructure that too must scale to handle periodic announces from all discoverable services. However the global discovery service can be completely implemented with soft state and thus does not require persistent storage.
As an example, global message queues can be implemented using Internet electronic mailboxes. a.k.a. email mailboxes. Global message queues have not previously been designed for use with a sandboxed program, and thus to work global message queues are extended to return “explicit permission to communicate” (see Section 0). For Adobe Flash, this means the global message queue must return a crossdomain.xml file. Extending a global message queue to return “explicit permission to communicate” and in particular return a crossdomain.xml file is novel.
Consider a less restrictive NAT that forwards all packets addressed to public address (x,y) regardless of each packet's public source address. Such NATs are sometimes referred to as full cone NATs. In another embodiment, the discoverable service announces to the discovery service with a source port that is bound to the same port on which the discoverable service listens, i.e., port y=z in
In yet another embodiment, the discovery service periodically sends a SYN to a random maybe unreachable or nonexistent public IP address but from the port on which the service listens, i.e., port y in
Additional embodiments can incorporate any subset or all of the following NAT traversal mechanisms: Simple Traversal of UDP over NATs (STUN). “STUN and TCP too” (STUNT), port prediction, and TURN.
With STUN, a STUN client on a private node contacts an a priori known STUN server. The STUN server interrogates the private node to determine what kind of NAT(s) might reside in the path between the server and the private node. By this means, a service running on a private node can learn its public address on its outermost NAT and whether it is likely that other nodes would be able to communicate with the service via this public address. Via some external mechanism, the service communicates the public address to peers that might want to contact the service, e.g., our proposed discovery service could be used. The discovery service by virtue of returning the public address already provides much of the relevant functionality provided by STUN. However, an embodiment that uses STUN to discover the public address and then communicates the public address via our discovery service is novel.
STUN by itself does not provide any mechanism for traversing more restrictive NATs like symmetric NATs. STUN is also not designed for use with TCP. Even if the discoverable service speaks UDP, the sandboxed program is limited to HTTP over TCP. There is no guarantee that a public address returned by STUN correlates to a public address available for incoming TCP connections from remote sandboxed programs.
With STUNT, the client uses UDP and TCP to communicate with a server sitting on the public network. This server implements STUN plus it listens for TCP connections. The server communicates back to the client the client's public addresses for the TCP and UDP exchanges with the server. The client then communicates via an external mechanism typically the Session Initiation Protocol SIP to tell a peer to attempt to establish communication. The client and the peer simultaneously or near simultaneously send packets to each other using each other's respective public addresses. This initial exchange sets up mappings in the intervening NAT(s): the process is sometimes called hole punching. Sometimes the hole punch succeeds and further bidirectional communication can commence. When a hole punch attempt fails, the client and peer may attempt communicating on port numbers neighboring the public port numbers to exploit port allocation patterns in many NATs: this is called port prediction.
A STUNT embodiment combines the TCP-part of STUNT with the direct embodiment. STUN and STUNT are not designed to communicate with sandboxed programs, as such in the STUNT embodiment, the STUNT server provides the sandbox with explicit permission to communicate. A flash-reachable STUNT server speaks HTTP and returns a sufficiently permissive crossdomain.xml file (see Section 0). Extending STUNT to communicate with a sandboxed program is novel.
Although STUNT can sometimes penetrate NATs, it depends on the effectiveness of port prediction. STUNT will not work with symmetric NATs that have random port allocation patterns. The only way to ensure communication can take place is to fall back to a global message queue or to a relay. A relay sits on the public network forwarding packets back and forth between a private node and private or public nodes anywhere on the network.
A TURN server acts as a relay. Assume a private node P with private address P′ sits behind a NAT that does not allow public nodes to establish connections to P. Assume also that a TURN client runs on P. The TURN client initiates communication with the TURN server thereby establishing a mapping in the NAT between the private node and the TURN server. The TURN server can now talk to P whenever it wants so long as the TURN client maintains the mapping by periodically talking to the TURN server. The TURN server then listens on a public address P″ on behalf of P. P′ and P″ differ in that packets address to P″ are routable over the public Internet. The TURN server forwards any packet sent to P″ to P via the existing mapping in the NAT. Relay solutions such as TURN can traverse even symmetric NATs with random port assignments; however, all relay solutions are quite heavyweight and should only be used as a last resort, or as a second-to-last-resort if global message queues are also employed in the system. Message queues (as defined) differ from relays such as TURN servers in that message queues are polled by the discoverable service whereas a relay forwards packets or messages as soon as they have been received. Message queues may store messages until they can be delivered and are thus better at reaching temporarily-powered-off discoverable services.
In a TURN embodiment of the proposed invention, a slightly-extended TURN server relays communications between a sandboxed program and the discoverable service. As with STUN, a TURN server must be sandbox-reachable, and with Adobe Flash this implies that a flash-reachable TURN server must return a crossdomain.xml file and must be able to perform all communications over HTTP. Extending TURN to communicate with a sandboxed program is novel.
Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) (21) combines STUN and TURN. It is trivial to consider an embodiment that combines both the STUNT embodiment and the TURN embodiment and call this the ICE embodiment. Extending ICE to function within the constraints imposed by the security sandbox is extending STUNT and TURN in the aforementioned ways and thus is novel in the same ways.
STUNT, TURN, and ICE provide no mechanisms for discovering STUNT or TURN servers. STUNT or TURN servers could announce to the discovery service in the same manner as discoverable services.
TURN is a specific kind of relay and may be more complicated than is needed for communication establishment in some embodiments. A scalable simple relay embodiment in which each simple relays has a sandbox-reachable interface and optionally a TCP interfaces is provided. When a simple relay has a TCP interface that is less restrictive than the sandbox-reachable interface then it is called the simple relay TCP interface. TCP is distinguished from sandbox-reachable (e.g., HTTP for Flash) because the sandbox reachable interface may be more restrictive than TCP.
In the simple relay embodiment and the simple TCP relay embodiment, the discoverable service opens a connection to the relay and sustains mappings in intervening NATs by periodically sending keep-alive messages in the connection. When a message arrives on the sandbox-reachable interface from a sandboxed program, the message is forward via the TCP connection to the discoverable service. The simple relay embodiment and the simple TCP relay embodiments are similar to the TURN embodiment except that they do not limit the scope to the specifics of TURN.
In the simple UDP relay embodiment, the discoverable service communicates with the relay using UDP rather than TCP or falls back to TCP when UDP fails. As with the simple relay and simple TCP relay embodiments, the discoverable service periodically sends keep-alive message to maintain mappings in any intervening NATs. When a sandboxed program queries the discovery service the returned service information contains the discovered service's public address and the picked relay's IP and port, i.e., all state related to the mapping in the relay. The sandboxed program then can communicate the state in each message thereby eliminating the need for the relay to retain any per-discoverable-service-state. Stateless systems also typically have simpler failover. When a simple relay fails, the discoverable service sees the failover at the end of the next keep-alive period and can switch to a different relay without needing to reestablish any state.
With the TURN, simple relay, and simple TCP relay embodiments, the relay keeps TCP connections open to each discoverable service, and thus the relay must maintain TCP-related state such as retransmission timers and send windows for each such discoverable service. State maintenance overhead can grow quite large compared to the simple UDP relay embodiment.
In the GUID-relay embodiment, the discovery service is combined with the relay service: discoverable services announce to the relay, the relay maintains a mapping from each GUID to the associated discovery service's public address, sandboxed programs then send messages bearing the discoverable service's GUID as the destination address, and the GUID-routing-relay immediately forwards the messages to the discoverable service's public address. Using the GUID as a destination address is orthogonal to whether discoverable service announce using UDP or TCP, thus there are TCP GUID-routing-relay and UDP GUID-routing-relay embodiments.
The GUID-relay must maintain discoverable-service state, but in the case of UDP this is no more state then would have to be maintained for the GUID mapping any of the discover service embodiments that maintain a GUID mapping.
Using a sandbox-reachable interface on one side to talk to sandboxed programs, and using UDP to talk to discoverable services is novel.
Retractable Access without User Accounts
In embodiments discussed so far, the GUID is sufficient to identify and establish communications with a discoverable service. However, there may be nothing to identify the user or the sandboxed program to the discoverable service.
For example. Alice owns a discoverable television. Alice's TV provides a discoverable service that allows sandboxed programs to tell the TV to download a video. Spammy visits Alice's house with his laptop. He visits a web site that loads Discovery.swf. Spammy discovery agent now has the GUID of Alice's TV. After Spammy leaves the Alice's home, much to Alice's disappointment. Spammy proceeds to litter her TV with unsolicited content.
One solution to this problem is to require password-protected user accounts for anyone with access to a discoverable service. This however introduces the burden of setting up accounts. Imposing user account registration for something as harmless as occasional visits from spammers seems like overkill. A less burdensome solution allows anyone to communicate with the discoverable service, and then allows the discoverable service to identify and exclude those that abuse the access.
With the access-token-extension, the discoverable service requires the sandboxed program to pass an access token in any message excepting messages soliciting access tokens. An access token may be an opaque bitstring from the view of the sandboxed program, but to the discoverable service it uniquely identifies the message sender. The access-token-extension may be used with any embodiment discussed so far.
In one extension to the access-token-extension, the sandboxed program employs the policy of only granting access tokens to sandboxed programs running on nodes in the same private network. i.e., as illustrated in
The local-grant access-token extension further restricts granting access tokens only to sandboxed programs running on nodes in the same local area network as the discoverable service. In home environments there is often one NAT and one local area network behind the NAT, in such cases the local area and private networks are the same. Because the discoverable service and the sandboxed program communicate over a single local area network, any frame from the sandboxed program arriving at the discoverable service's node contains the hardware address of the sandboxed program's node. Since hardware addresses are generally assigned by the manufacturer, are often left unchanged by users, and in many cases are not changeable, the hardware address may be used as a long-term pseudonym for a user, albeit the hardware address is an imperfect pseudonym as it conflates multiple users on the same node. When the discoverable service grants an access token, it may derive the token from the hardware address or it may remember the token granted to each hardware address. If a node loses its token, whether due to mischief or happenstance, the discoverable service can reissue the same access token to the sandboxed program(s) on that node thereby maintaining the pseudonym for a user (or users) across browsers, system crashes, browser cache erasures, and reboots into different operating systems.
With the local-grant access-token extension, not only is Spammy's laptop only able to send spam once it has operated in Alice's home, but Alice can also retract Spammy's laptop's access to her TV forever even if Spammy happens to clear his access tokens before revisiting Alice's home.
The access token may not only uniquely identify the user or his sandboxed program(s), but must also not be guessable or derivable by other sandboxed programs; else any sandboxed program could hijack access tokens or could generate its own access tokens outside the scope of the discoverable service's access control policy. Preventing hijacking means the token should be kept reasonably private by the sandboxed program: assuming attackers do not have access to intervening network hardware, the access token could be stored locally to the sandboxed program and transmitted only in packets from the sandboxed program destined to the discoverable service. If the intervening network is considered untrustworthy then the access could be encrypted whenever transmitted using shared key. The shared key would only be known only to the sandboxed program and the discoverable service. There are many ways to generate access such that the discoverable service can verify that they were previously issued by the discoverable service. The various methods for token generation are orthogonal to this proposed extension, although two example techniques are provided: 1) the discoverable service draws tokens from a long highly random pseudorandom sequence seeded with a secret known only to the discoverable service, 2) the discoverable service uses a key-Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) as the access token where the key used in generating the HMAC is known only to the discoverable service and the input message to the HMAC algorithm is the sandboxed program's node's hardware address.
To ensure users include the access token, the policy is imposed that the discoverable service discards, reclassifies, or otherwise applies policy to all remote communications without an accompanying access token 1309 issued by the discoverable service 13031308. Another policy that the discoverable service only issues access tokens to sandboxed programs on the same private network may also be used.
Exploiting User Accounts
In lieu of or in addition to access tokens, the discoverable service could choose to offer access only to authenticated, registered users. Many mechanisms exist to authenticate users. In the context of service discovery, with an account all policy and knowledge of discovered services can follow the user between machines. For example, Alice's laptop at home discovers her TV. From the laptop she registers with the discovery service. The sandboxed program on her laptop associates her TV with her discovery service user account. When she goes to work, she visits a website that runs a sandboxed program that uses the discovery service. She provides her login information to the sandboxed program and the sandboxed program then downloads from the discovery service the reference to her TV at home.
Remote access scenarios discussed with previous embodiments assumed that the user took the computer with him or her. If Alice takes her laptop to work then no user registration is necessary to reach her TV at home because her laptop already knows the TV's GUID and its public address if the address has not changed.
Multiple NATs
A node might be behind the same NAT that connects to the public Internet, but reside on a different private network from other discoverable services. Embodiments that include a relay or message queue can handle multiple private network behind the same public address by using the relay whenever direct communication fails.
Using Ranges or Prefixes Rather than Nat Public IPs
Not all discoverable services are behind a NAT. When a discoverable service's private and public addresses are identical, a discoverable service knows it resides on the public Internet, i.e., not behind a NAT. In most proposed embodiments in this application, a discoverable service can learn its public address by querying the discovery service.
With the ip-range-extension, when a discoverable service finds itself on the public Internet, the discoverable service announces itself to a range of public IP addresses by sending an address range or address prefix in its subsequent announces. With this extension, in query responses the discoverable service returns all discoverable services that announced to a range or prefix including the requestor's public address. The ip-range-extension can be combined with any embodiment or extension discussed in this application.
Deciding on the appropriate range may be left up to a user configuration in order to allow the device to be discovered across arbitrary IP address prefixes or ranges.
Advertisement Targetting, Recommender Systems, and Exposed Addresses
With embodiments derived from the direct embodiment, if the sandboxed program and the discoverable service run on nodes in the same local area network then the discoverable service can have access to the sandboxed program's node's hardware address. As discussed in Section 0, the hardware address may be used as a pseudonym for the user. This pseudonym could be used not only for imposing access control policy, but also to identify the user to recommender and advertisement targeting systems. With the world wide web, browsers hide the hardware address as well as any other form of permanent or semi-permanent pseudonym from web sites in order to protect user privacy. However, there is no way to protect a user's node's hardware address from other nodes on the same local area network. Thus discoverable services thus have an advantage not available to the world wide web for targeting advertising.
For example, when Alice visits a video website and pushes a video to her discoverable TV from her laptop in her home's local area network, the hardware address as pseudonym gives the TV an indicator of that Alice as opposed to her husband will watch the pushed video. This identification mechanism is not available to existing Internet TV platforms.
Capability-Based Discovery
In all embodiments discussed so far, the possibility that there may be many different kinds of services coexisting in the same network has not been mentioned. As such a user may wish to query for just those discoverable services that offer certain capabilities. With the capability-based extension, the discoverable service and sandboxed programs provide service descriptions to the discovery service. To each query, the discovery service returns only those discoverable services within the same private network that also match the service description. The service description may take the form of a logical predicate or just a list of keywords. The capability-based extension can be used in conjunction with any other embodiment or extension in this application.
Only One Per Private Network
Only one discoverable service in each private network need announce to the discovery service. By definition each private network has its own routable private network address space in which nodes within the same private network can communicate with each other. With the only-one extension, discoverable services within the same private network elect one device at any given time to act as the announcer to the global discovery service and all discoverable services announce to the elected discoverable service. The elected discoverable service either passes all discovery information for the private network to the discovery service or it acts itself as the private discovery service for its private network. When acting as the private discovery service for its private network, the discoverable service can answer discovery queries for sandboxed programs running on nodes in the private discovery service's private network.
The only-one extension is not safe on networks that exhibit the hidden terminal problem, i.e., networks in which visibility is not guaranteed to be transitive. This sometimes occurs in wireless networks, e.g., node A has strong enough signal to communicate with node B, node B can communicate with node C, but A and C are too far apart for their signals to reach each other and B is not configured to act as a router between A and C. Fortunately, the discoverable service can know if it is on a network that exhibits the hidden terminal problem and choose to not implement the only-one extension.
With the only-one extension, load on the central discovery service from announces grows linear in the number of private networks rather than linear to the number of discoverable services. Furthermore, with the only-one extension, if a sandboxed program already knows the elected discovery service from a prior discovery query then it need not contact the central discovery service at all as long as the elected discovery service remains operational and remains the elected discovery service.
With the referral extension to the only-one extension, a discoverable service that was previously the private discovery service is queried it either redirects the requestor or forwards the request (like with DNS iterative vs recursive name resolution) to the current private discovery service if known. If no private discovery service can be found then the sandboxed program falls back to the central discovery service.
Discovering Undiscoverable Services
Discoverable services as defined in this application are discoverable because they implement one of the many embodiments described. In particular embodiments, discoverable services announce either to the central discovery service or a private discovery service (see only-one extension).
There may exist services within the network that are undiscoverable as defined in this application but are discoverable by other means such as DLNA (via UPnP AV). Such services are not discoverable directly from within sandboxed programs because they do not implement sandbox-reachable interfaces. However a discoverable service implementing the gateway-extension acts as a gateway to other undiscoverable services by announcing on their behalf to the central (or private) discovery service and by providing a sandbox-reachable interface on their behalf.
With the only-one gateway extension, the discoverable services implementing the gateway extension elect a single discoverable service to act as the gateway.
In this manner, a discoverable TV could allow flash players to push video to a user's “undiscoverable” NAS device.
Extending Sandbox to Support Discovery
An alternative solution is to extend an existing system that implements a sandbox to perform any traditional discovery method including those that involve multicast, such as MDNS/DNS-SD, SSDP, or SLP.
Although the description has been described with respect to particular embodiments thereof, these particular embodiments are merely illustrative, and not restrictive.
Any suitable programming language can be used to implement the routines of particular embodiments including C, C++. Java, assembly language, etc. Different programming techniques can be employed such as procedural or object oriented. The routines can execute on a single processing device or multiple processors. Although the steps, operations, or computations may be presented in a specific order, this order may be changed in different particular embodiments. In some particular embodiments, multiple steps shown as sequential in this specification can be performed at the same time.
Particular embodiments may be implemented in a computer-readable storage medium for use by or in connection with the instruction execution system, apparatus, system, or device. Particular embodiments can be implemented in the form of control logic in software or hardware or a combination of both. The control logic, when executed by one or more processors, may be operable to perform that which is described in particular embodiments.
Particular embodiments may be implemented by using a programmed general purpose digital computer, by using application specific integrated circuits, programmable logic devices, field programmable gate arrays, optical, chemical, biological, quantum or nanoengineered systems, components and mechanisms may be used. In general, the functions of particular embodiments can be achieved by any means as is known in the art. Distributed, networked systems, components, and/or circuits can be used. Communication, or transfer, of data may be wired, wireless, or by any other means.
It will also be appreciated that one or more of the elements depicted in the drawings/figures can also be implemented in a more separated or integrated manner, or even removed or rendered as inoperable in certain cases, as is useful in accordance with a particular application. It is also within the spirit and scope to implement a program or code that can be stored in a machine-readable medium to permit a computer to perform any of the methods described above.
As used in the description herein and throughout the claims that follow, “a”, “an”, and “the” includes plural references unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Also, as used in the description herein and throughout the claims that follow, the meaning of “in” includes “in” and “on” unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.
Thus, while particular embodiments have been described herein, latitudes of modification, various changes, and substitutions are intended in the foregoing disclosures, and it will be appreciated that in some instances some features of particular embodiments will be employed without a corresponding use of other features without departing from the scope and spirit as set forth. Therefore, many modifications may be made to adapt a particular situation or material to the essential scope and spirit.
Finding devices behind the same NAT by querying central infrastructure and returning all previously announced service's sharing the same public IP address is novel.
There has previously been no configuration-free and software installation-free way of finding devices in the same network that didn't rely on broadcast or multicast.
A security model that is permissive to applications that reside behind the same NAT but that are otherwise constrained by a sandbox is novel.
Having a service providing a GUID to later allow a sandboxed program to lookup and then connect to a service on a previously visited private network is novel.
Separating the sandboxed program into two or more sandboxed program where one is loaded from trusted infrastructure is novel. It creates a trustable policy enforcement point inside the browser, whereas a similar component outside the browser would require an installation. Thus all policy enforcement mechanisms based on this separation are also novel.
Protecting a service from spam by obscuring the service's IP and port via a trusted sandboxed program acting as an intermediary is novel. Previous techniques involve some kind of configuration like account registration or administrator-configured IP-based access control lists.
Exposing only a locally unique ID and an unroutable but human-friendly name to untrusted sandboxed programs that is then translated by the trusted sandboxed program to routable information is novel.
Extending TURN, STUN, or STUNT to return “explicit to communicate” is novel. In particular having any of these return crossdomain.xml files to permit communication between the server and the programs running within a Flash sandbox is novel.
Using a TCP-to-UDP reflector to get around the TCP-only constraint imposed by the security sandbox (of which Flash employs a qualifying security sandbox) is novel. Before the existence of such sandboxes, such reflectors would have been useless since applications running on any IP node would likely have sent UDP directly.
Instead of requiring the user to create an account with each service, each service may generate random unique ids that are handed out freely to sandboxed programs on the same private network. Inclusion of a uid is not required for local private network access but is required for any remote access. Thus once the node running a sandboxed program leaves the private network containing the service in question, the service can continue to identify the user by the uid pseudonym. If the device so desires, it can retract access at any time by disallowing requests that contain a given user id. This is the first time someone has proposed a configuration-free mechanism that permits free local access and retractable remote access.
A discovery mechanism that is configuration free but allows extended functionality when a user provides account information is novel.
Using a metadiscovery service to find an appropriate discovery service is also novel.
TCP Reflectors
Global message queues (electronic mailboxes are global message queues)
This patent application is a Continuation-In-Part of, and hereby incorporates the entirety of the disclosures of and claims priority to each of the following cases: (1) Provisional patent application 62/183,756 titled SECOND SCREEN NETWORKING, TARGETING, AND COMMUNICATION METHODOLOGIES AND SYSTEMS and filed on Jun. 24, 2015.(2) Co-pending U.S. Continuation-in-Part patent application Ser. No. 14/018,408 titled EXPOSURE OF PUBLIC INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESSES IN AN ADVERTISING EXCHANGE SERVER TO IMPROVE RELEVANCY OF ADVERTISEMENTS filed on Sep. 4, 2013, a. which further claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application 61/696,711 titled SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF RECOGNIZING CONTENT filed on Sep. 4, 2012.b. on which a Petition has been filed, but not yet granted, which requests to further claim priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application 61/803,754 titled APPLICATIONS OF ZEROCONF BIDIRECTIONAL COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN A NETWORKED DEVICE AND A SECURITY SANDBOX COMPRISING TARGETED ADVERTISEMENT, ENVIRONMENT AWARENESS, USER MAPPING, GEOLOCATION SERVICES, AND CONTENT IDENTIFICATION filed on Mar. 20, 2013.(3) Co-pending U.S. Continuation-in-Part patent application Ser. No. 14/744,045 titled TARGETED ADVERTISING AND ATTRIBUTION ACROSS MULTIPLE SCREENS BASED ON PLAYING GAMES ON A GAME CONSOLE THROUGH A TELEVISION filed on Jun. 19, 2015. a. which further claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application 62/026,017 titled AUTOMATIC GAMING ADVERTISEMENT IDENTIFICATION, TIME STAMPING. AND CATALOGING BASED ON VIEWING HISTORY OF A USER OPERATING A MOBILE DEVICE COMMUNICATIVELY COUPLED WITH A NETWORKED TELEVISION, AND DELIVERY OF A TARGETED ADVERTISEMENT TO THE MOBILE DEVICE BASED ON THE IDENTIFICATION AND CATALOGING WITHIN A THRESHOLD AMOUNT OF TIME FROM A TIME STAMP OF AN IDENTIFIED ADVERTISEMENT DISPLAYED ON THE NETWORKED TELEVISION filed on Jul. 17, 2014.(4) Co-pending U.S. Continuation-in-Part patent application Ser. No. 14/981,938 titled RELEVANCY IMPROVEMENT THROUGH TARGETING OF INFORMATION BASED ON DATA GATHERED FROM A NETWORKED DEVICE ASSOCIATED WITH A SECURITY SANDBOX OF A CLIENT DEVICE filed on Dec. 29, 2015, a. which itself is a U.S. Continuation-in-Part patent application of Ser. No. 14/274,800 titled MONETIZATION OF TELEVISION AUDIENCE DATA ACROSS MULTIPLE SCREENS OF A USER WATCHING TELEVISION filed on May 12, 2014, i. which itself is a U.S. Continuation patent application of Ser. No. 13/943,866 titled RELEVANCY IMPROVEMENT THROUGH TARGETING OF INFORMATION BASED ON DATA GATHERED FROM A NETWORKED DEVICE ASSOCIATED WITH A SECURITY SANDBOX OF A CLIENT DEVICE filed on Jul. 17, 2013 and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,819,255 on Aug. 26, 2014, 1. which further is a U.S. Continuation patent application of Ser. No. 13/904,015 titled REAL-TIME AND RETARGETED ADVERTISING ON MULTIPLE SCREENS OF A USER WATCHING TELEVISION filed on May 28, 2013 and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,026,668 on May 5, 2015. a. which further claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application 61/652,153 titled CONTENT RECOGNITION SYSTEM filed on May 26, 2012,2. which further is a U.S. Continuation-in-Part patent application of Ser. No. 13/736,031 titled ZERO CONFIGURATION COMMUNICATION BETWEEN A BROWSER AND A NETWORKED MEDIA DEVICE filed on Jan. 7, 2013 and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,154,942 on Oct. 6, 2015. a. which further claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application 61/584,168 titled CAPTURING CONTENT FOR DISPLAY ON A TELEVISION and filed on Jan. 6, 2012.3. which further is a U.S. Continuation-in-Part patent application of Ser. No. 13/470,814 titled GENERATION OF A TARGETED ADVERTISEMENT IN AN UNTRUSTED SANDBOX BASED ON A PSUEDONYM filed on May 14, 2012 and granted into U.S. Pat. No. 8,539,072 of Sep. 17, 2013. a. which itself is a Continuation patent application of Ser. No. 12/592,377 titled DISCOVERY, ACCESS CONTROL, AND COMMUNICATION WITH NETWORKED SERVICES FROM WITHIN A SECURITY SANDBOX, filed on Nov. 23, 2009 and granted into U.S. Pat. No. 8,180,891 on May 15, 2012, i. which claims priority to U.S. Provisional patent application 61/118,286 titled DISCOVERY. ACCESS CONTROL, AND COMMUNICATION WITH NETWORKED SERVICES FROM WITHIN A SECURITY SANDBOX filed on Nov. 26, 2008.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3849760 | Endou et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
| 3919479 | Moon et al. | Nov 1975 | A |
| 4025851 | Haselwood et al. | May 1977 | A |
| 4230990 | Lert, Jr. et al. | Oct 1980 | A |
| 4258386 | Cheung | Mar 1981 | A |
| 4420769 | Novak | Dec 1983 | A |
| 4450531 | Kenyon et al. | May 1984 | A |
| 4574304 | Watanabe et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
| 4677466 | Lert, Jr. et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
| 4697209 | Kiewit et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
| 4739398 | Thomas et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
| 4833449 | Gaffigan | May 1989 | A |
| 4843562 | Kenyon et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
| 4888638 | Bohn | Dec 1989 | A |
| 4918730 | Schulze | Apr 1990 | A |
| 4955070 | Welsh et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
| 4967273 | Greenberg | Oct 1990 | A |
| 4993059 | Smith et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
| 5014125 | Pocock et al. | May 1991 | A |
| 5019899 | Boles et al. | May 1991 | A |
| 5105184 | Pirani | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5155591 | Wachob | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5223924 | Strubbe | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5319453 | Copriviza et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5321750 | Nadan | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5436653 | Ellis et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5481294 | Thomas et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5522077 | Cuthbert et al. | May 1996 | A |
| 5539658 | McCullough | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5557334 | Legate | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5572246 | Ellis et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5612729 | Ellis et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
| 5636346 | Saxe | Jun 1997 | A |
| 5724521 | Dedrick | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5732219 | Blumer et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5742768 | Gennaro et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5745884 | Carnegie et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5761601 | Nemirofsky et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5761648 | Golden et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5761655 | Hoffman | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5774170 | Hite et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5774673 | Beuk et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5805974 | Hite et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5815665 | Teper et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5822525 | Tafoya et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5838301 | Okamoto et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5838317 | Bolnick et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5848396 | Gerace | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5850517 | Verkler et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5892900 | Ginter et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5903729 | Reber et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5905942 | Stoel et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5907279 | Bruins et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5940073 | Klosterman et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5948061 | Merriman et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5966705 | Koneru et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5977962 | Chapman et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5978835 | Ludwig et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6002393 | Hite et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6002443 | Iggulden | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6009409 | Adler et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6009410 | LeMole et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6026368 | Brown et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6026369 | Capek | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6032181 | Bedgedjian et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6043817 | Bolnick et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6055510 | Henrick et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6064980 | Jacobi et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6084628 | Sawyer | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6105122 | Muller et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6112181 | Shear et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6118864 | Chang et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6119098 | Guyot et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6137892 | Powell et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6141010 | Hoyle | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6157941 | Verkler et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6167427 | Rabinovich et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6169542 | Hooks et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6188398 | Collins-Rector et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6192476 | Gong | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6195696 | Baber et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6216141 | Straub et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6219696 | Wynblatt et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6247077 | Muller et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6286104 | Buhle et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6304523 | Jones et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6304852 | Loncteaux | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6308327 | Liu et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6310889 | Parsons et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6332127 | Bandera et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6349289 | Peterson et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6351467 | Dillon | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6360254 | Linden et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6381362 | Deshpande et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6400265 | Saylor et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6400996 | Hoffberg et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6438594 | Bowman-Amuah | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6463585 | Hendricks et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6469749 | Dimitrova et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6481010 | Nishikawa et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
| 6484148 | Boyd | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6505169 | Bhagavath et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6526491 | Suzuoki et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6530082 | Del Sesto et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6532218 | Shaffer et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6536041 | Knudson et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6546554 | Schmidt et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6564260 | Baber et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6564263 | Bergman et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6574793 | Ngo et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6577346 | Perlman | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6597405 | Iggulden | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6622171 | Gupta et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6628801 | Powell et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6631523 | Matthews, III et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6651251 | Shoff et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6718551 | Swix et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6728784 | Mattaway | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6738978 | Hendricks et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6757685 | Raffaele et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6769009 | Reisman | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6771316 | Iggulden | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6799196 | Smith | Sep 2004 | B1 |
| 6804659 | Graham et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6832239 | Kraft et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6834308 | Ikezoye et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6836888 | Basu et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6845452 | Roddy et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 6907458 | Tomassetti et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
| 6946715 | Hong | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6959288 | Medina et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
| 6959320 | Shah et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6978470 | Swix et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 6981022 | Boundy | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 6983478 | Grauch et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
| 6983481 | Fellenstein et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6990453 | Wang et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6993326 | Link, II et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7020304 | Alattar et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7028033 | Bright | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7028327 | Dougherty et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
| 7043524 | Shah et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7051351 | Goldman et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7064796 | Roy et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7080400 | Navar | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7088687 | Ayyagari et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7089575 | Agnihotri et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7089585 | Dharmarajan | Aug 2006 | B1 |
| 7100183 | Kunkel et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7111230 | Euchner et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7113090 | Saylor et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
| 7116661 | Patton | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7117439 | Barrett et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7136875 | Anderson et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7139882 | Suzuoki et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7146627 | Ismail et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
| 7158666 | Deshpande et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7162539 | Garcie-Luna-Aceves | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7167857 | Roberts | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7181415 | Blaser et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7185353 | Schlack | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7194421 | Conkwright et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7210157 | Devara | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7228280 | Scherf et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
| 7243362 | Swix et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7243364 | Dunn et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7296091 | Dutta et al. | Nov 2007 | B1 |
| 7299195 | Tawakol et al. | Nov 2007 | B1 |
| 7308489 | Weast | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7328448 | Eldering et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7330875 | Parasnis et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
| 7346606 | Bharat | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7346649 | Wong | Mar 2008 | B1 |
| 7349967 | Wang | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7349980 | Darugar et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
| 7359889 | Wang et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7360173 | Tuli | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7366975 | Lipton | Apr 2008 | B1 |
| 7373381 | Rust | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7380258 | Durden et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7383243 | Conkwright et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7421723 | Harkness et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7437301 | Kageyama et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7444658 | Matz et al. | Oct 2008 | B1 |
| 7444660 | Dudkiewicz | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7444666 | Edwards et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7454515 | Lamkin et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
| 7472398 | Corell et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7486827 | Kim | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7500007 | Ikezoye et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7509402 | Moorer et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7516074 | Bilobrov | Apr 2009 | B2 |
| 7516213 | Cunningham et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
| 7525955 | Velez-Rivera et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
| 7529659 | Wold | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7545940 | Alessi et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7546619 | Anderson et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7552228 | Parasnis et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7555165 | Luo et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7559017 | Datar et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7565158 | Aholainen | Jul 2009 | B1 |
| 7574723 | Putterman et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7584491 | Bruckner et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7590998 | Hanley | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7593988 | Oreizy et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7596620 | Colton et al. | Sep 2009 | B1 |
| 7602748 | Sinnreich et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7623823 | Zito et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7624142 | Jungck | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7631325 | Rys et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7634533 | Rudolph et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7639387 | Hull et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7650616 | Lee | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7653008 | Patrick et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7664081 | Luoma et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7665082 | Wyatt et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7672003 | Dowling et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7689920 | Robbin et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7690006 | Birnbaum et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7694319 | Hassell et al. | Apr 2010 | B1 |
| 7698165 | Tawakol et al. | Apr 2010 | B1 |
| 7701882 | Jones et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7711748 | Bright et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7711838 | Boulter et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
| 7716161 | Dean et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7720914 | Goodman et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7729366 | Mok et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7734624 | Anderson et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7739140 | Vinson et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7769756 | Krikorian et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7774348 | Delli Santi et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7774715 | Evans | Aug 2010 | B1 |
| 7789757 | Gemelos et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7793318 | Deng | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7797433 | Kennedy et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7805740 | Gilboa et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7822809 | Dhupelia et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7831426 | Bennett | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7856644 | Nicholson et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7861260 | Shkedi | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7870592 | Hudson et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7870596 | Schackow et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7873716 | Maes | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7877461 | Rimmer | Jan 2011 | B1 |
| 7877774 | Basso et al. | Jan 2011 | B1 |
| 7890957 | Campbell | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7904503 | Van De Sluis | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7904925 | Jiang | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7907211 | Oostveen et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7908273 | DiMaria et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7908618 | Bruckner et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7912822 | Bethlehem et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7921037 | Hertling et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7929551 | Dietrich et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7930207 | Merriman et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7930546 | Rhoads et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7933451 | Kloer | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7937405 | Anderson et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7941197 | Jain et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7941816 | Harkness et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7950055 | Blinn et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7962007 | Abe et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
| 7966309 | Shacham et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
| 7978876 | Powell et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
| 7979570 | Chapweske et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
| 7995503 | Yu | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8001124 | Hugh Svendsen | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8020000 | Oostveen et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8035656 | Blanchard et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8041643 | Mukerji et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8046839 | Lo | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8055784 | Kalama et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8060399 | Ullah | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8060912 | Sato | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8065700 | Lee | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8069247 | Ruiz-Velasco et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8069348 | Bacon | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8071869 | Chen et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8079045 | Krapf et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8087047 | Olague et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8090706 | Bharat | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8091031 | Evans | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8122484 | Karjoth et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
| 8126963 | Rimmer | Feb 2012 | B1 |
| 8131585 | Nicholas et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8131705 | Chevalier et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8131734 | Austin et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8140965 | Dean et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8141111 | Gilley et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8145645 | Delli Santi et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8145705 | Rust | Mar 2012 | B1 |
| 8150729 | Wilhelm | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8150985 | Nakamura | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8155696 | Swanburg et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8161511 | Kwak et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8171030 | Pereira et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8171510 | Kamen et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8175413 | Ioffe et al. | May 2012 | B1 |
| 8180708 | Hurtado et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8180891 | Harrison | May 2012 | B1 |
| 8189945 | Stojancic et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8191091 | Harvey et al. | May 2012 | B1 |
| 8195689 | Ramanathan et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8195692 | Baek et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8201080 | Basson et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8209397 | Ahn et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8209404 | Wu | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8214256 | Riedl et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8219411 | Matz et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8225347 | Flickinger et al. | Jul 2012 | B1 |
| 8229227 | Stojancic et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8229751 | Cheung | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8239340 | Hanson | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8244707 | Lin et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8245270 | Cooperstein et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8255949 | Bayer et al. | Aug 2012 | B1 |
| 8260665 | Foladare et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8261341 | Stirbu | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8271649 | Kalofonos et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8275791 | Raffaele et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8281288 | Spencer | Oct 2012 | B1 |
| 8285880 | Ye et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8290351 | Plotnick et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8296763 | Peercy et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
| 8301596 | Lin et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8301732 | Chapweske et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8302170 | Kramer et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8307093 | Klemets et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8316450 | Robinson et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8326872 | Zwilling et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8332885 | Williamson et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8335786 | Pereira et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8339991 | Biswas et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8341242 | Dillon et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8352980 | Howcroft | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8355711 | Heins et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8358966 | Zito et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8364541 | Roth | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8364703 | Ramanathan et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8364959 | Bhanoo et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8365217 | Legrand | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8375131 | Rogers et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
| 8381026 | Talla et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
| 8385644 | Stojancic | Feb 2013 | B2 |
| 8406607 | Nesvadba et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
| 8407240 | Denton | Mar 2013 | B2 |
| 8418191 | Honishi et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
| 8433306 | Rodriguez | Apr 2013 | B2 |
| 8433574 | Jablokov et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
| 8443420 | Brown et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
| 8451762 | Liu et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
| 8452864 | Vendrow | May 2013 | B1 |
| 8463100 | Tse et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8468357 | Roberts et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8472289 | Scherf et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8473575 | Marchwicki et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8479246 | Hudson et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8488838 | Sharma | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8489701 | Manion et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8494907 | Lerman et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8495611 | McCarthy et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8495675 | Philpott et al. | Jul 2013 | B1 |
| 8495746 | Fissel et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8504551 | Anderson et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8510317 | Boetje et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8510661 | Dharmaji et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8510779 | Slothouber et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8516533 | Davis et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8520909 | Leung et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8527594 | Lahaix | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8533192 | Moganti et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8537157 | Adimatyam et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8539025 | Husain et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8539072 | Harrison | Sep 2013 | B1 |
| 8539523 | Philpott et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8548820 | Matz et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8549052 | Miles | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8549066 | Donahue et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
| 8549110 | Jerbi et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8549550 | Lopatecki et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8566154 | Merriman et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8566158 | Cansler et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8566867 | Yang et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
| 8577996 | Hughes et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
| 8595781 | Neumeier et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
| 8607267 | Shkedi | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8611701 | Zhang | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8613045 | Shigapov | Dec 2013 | B1 |
| 8621585 | Danieli et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8635106 | Sarukkai et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
| 8635316 | Barnhill, Jr. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
| 8639826 | Slothouber et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
| 8645209 | Mandyam et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
| 8645992 | Russell et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
| 8645994 | Vemparala et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
| 8646063 | Dowlatkhah | Feb 2014 | B2 |
| 8655716 | Barnes et al. | Feb 2014 | B1 |
| 8656422 | Kumar et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
| 8661010 | Lin et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
| 8666168 | Stojancic et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
| 8667142 | Takei et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
| 8677253 | Duquene et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
| 8694656 | Douillet et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8695032 | Shkedi | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8700699 | Shen et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8700795 | Boulter et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8701134 | Whinmill et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8707351 | Dharmaji | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8712833 | Quach et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8719396 | Brindley et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8719870 | Davies et al. | May 2014 | B1 |
| 8732182 | Bethlehem et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8736764 | Amundsen | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8738779 | Binding et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8739208 | Davis et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8751942 | Lopez et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8756686 | Plattner et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8763033 | Dittus | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8763097 | Bhatnagar et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8745272 | Casalaina et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8769584 | Neumeier et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8775391 | Kalavade | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8776112 | Roberts et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8776154 | Kim et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8776244 | Kroeger et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8793730 | Mowrey et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8799357 | Clift et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8804039 | Kim et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8804721 | He et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8805657 | Wells et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8805854 | Chen et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8812451 | Shukla et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8813232 | Sreedharan et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8817757 | Luo | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8819249 | Harrison | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8819255 | Harrison | Aug 2014 | B1 |
| 8825526 | Peters et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8826327 | Adimatyam et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8832729 | Nussel et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8838149 | Hasek | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8838556 | Reiner et al. | Sep 2014 | B1 |
| 8838808 | Addala et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8843584 | Arini et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8847994 | Choi | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8849821 | Schloter | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8855796 | Otsuka et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8855798 | DiMaria et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8856028 | Yang et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8856087 | Greene et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8856874 | Pieczul et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8863165 | Gordon | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8863168 | Craner | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8863174 | Neil et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8875178 | Cansler et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8898714 | Neumeier et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
| 8904021 | Harrison | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 8910199 | Slaney et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 8930980 | Neumeier et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
| 8949872 | Slaney et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
| 8966525 | Mehta et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
| 8972485 | French et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
| 8996538 | Cremer et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
| 8997164 | Gordon et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 9009066 | Long et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
| 9015741 | Gordon | Apr 2015 | B2 |
| 9026668 | Harrison | May 2015 | B2 |
| 9032451 | Cansino et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
| 9036083 | Zhu et al. | May 2015 | B1 |
| 9043712 | Santoro et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
| 9049496 | Raesig et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
| 9055309 | Neumeier et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
| 9106804 | Roberts et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9113107 | Jolna et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9118945 | Rudman et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9131279 | Raveendran et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
| 9143718 | Nagorski et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
| 9146990 | Scherf et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
| 9152727 | Balducci et al. | Oct 2015 | B1 |
| 9154942 | Harrison et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
| 9160837 | Jeffrey et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
| 9167419 | Harrison | Oct 2015 | B2 |
| 9183560 | Abelow | Nov 2015 | B2 |
| 9185462 | Das et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
| 9204275 | Johnson et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9213747 | Cremer et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9215217 | Abu-Hakima et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9232279 | Beeson et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
| 9258383 | Harrison | Feb 2016 | B2 |
| 9271052 | Holden | Feb 2016 | B2 |
| 9286902 | Han et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9300996 | Jeong et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9323840 | Harron et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
| 9356914 | Jeffrey et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
| 9361606 | Hertel et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 9372531 | Benson et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 9378512 | Singh et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 9380383 | Brenner et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 9386356 | Harrison | Jul 2016 | B2 |
| 9398262 | Li et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
| 9465995 | Harron et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
| 9495451 | Harron | Nov 2016 | B2 |
| 9501568 | Rafii | Nov 2016 | B2 |
| 9510044 | Pereira et al. | Nov 2016 | B1 |
| 9510057 | Harron et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
| 20010001160 | Shoff et al. | May 2001 | A1 |
| 20010011226 | Greer et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010016501 | King | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010016947 | Nishikawa et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010029583 | Palatov et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010036224 | Demelloet et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010039658 | Walton | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010049620 | Blasko | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20010054155 | Hagan et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020012347 | Fitzpatrick | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020015105 | Abe et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020019769 | Barritz et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020026635 | Wheeler et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020032906 | Grossman | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020042914 | Walker et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020044659 | Ohta | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020044683 | Deshpande et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020052965 | Dowling | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020059633 | Harkness et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020066100 | Hoang | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020069100 | Arberman | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020072966 | Eldering et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020072982 | Barton et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020078456 | Hudson et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083435 | Blasko et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083441 | Flickinger et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083443 | Eldering et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087401 | Leapman et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087545 | Bright et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087975 | Schlack | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087976 | Kaplan et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087978 | Nicholson et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020091763 | Shah et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020104083 | Hendricks et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020116195 | Pitman et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020116549 | Raffaele | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020120498 | Gordon et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020120925 | Logan | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020123928 | Eldering et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020133490 | Conkwright et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020133534 | Forslow | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020138842 | Chong et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020143782 | Headings et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020144262 | Plotnick et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020147611 | Greene et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020151992 | Hoffberg et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020152474 | Dudkiewicz | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161741 | Wang et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020162117 | Pearson et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020162118 | Levy et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174197 | Schimke et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020178447 | Plotnick et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020196789 | Patton | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030001883 | Wang | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030009538 | Shah et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030023489 | McGuire et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030028433 | Merriman et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030030752 | Begeja et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030031176 | Sim | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030036949 | Kaddeche et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030070167 | Holtz et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030079226 | Barrett | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097426 | Parry | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097657 | Zhou et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030101451 | Bentolila et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030101454 | Ozer et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030121037 | Swix et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030121046 | Roy et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030135513 | Quinn et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030135853 | Goldman et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030145323 | Hendricks et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030149975 | Eldering et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030154475 | Rodriguez et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030163583 | Tarr | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030163828 | Agnihotri et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030172374 | Vinson et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030188318 | Liew et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030188321 | Shoff et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030226141 | Krasnow et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20030229765 | Suzuoki et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040006693 | Vasnani et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040006706 | Erlingsson | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040025034 | Alessi et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040025174 | Cerrato | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040031052 | Wannamaker et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040045020 | Witt et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040059708 | Dean et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078809 | Drazin | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040088348 | Yeager et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143349 | Roberts et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040148625 | Eldering et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040158858 | Paxton et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040163101 | Swix et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040207719 | Tervo et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040210630 | Simonnet et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040215509 | Perry | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040215515 | Perry | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040216171 | Barone, Jr. et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225686 | Li et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040226035 | Hauser | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040237102 | Konig et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040240562 | Bargeron et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040260791 | Jerbi et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040267723 | Bharat | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050002640 | Putterman et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050015795 | Iggulden | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050015796 | Bruckner et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050021670 | Maes | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050028200 | Sardera | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050028201 | Klosterman et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050028206 | Cameron et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050071224 | Fikes et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050080876 | Peiffer et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050080878 | Cunningham et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091301 | Oreizy et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108213 | Riise et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108745 | Linzer | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050120391 | Haynie et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050165696 | Jakobsson et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050183143 | Anderholm et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050204381 | Ludvig et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050210502 | Flickinger et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050232411 | Srinivasan et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050235318 | Grauch et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050251491 | Medina et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050251577 | Guo et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050251820 | Stefanik et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050259819 | Oomen et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050267896 | Goodman et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050283796 | Flickinger | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060029368 | Harville | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060031381 | Van Luijt et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060064299 | Uhle et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060064583 | Birnbaum et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060072144 | Dowling et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060072542 | Sinnreich et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060085383 | Mantle et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060085642 | Multerer et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060092834 | Honishi et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060133414 | Luoma et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060136964 | Diez et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060143188 | Bright et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060149624 | Baluja et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060153296 | Deng | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060156362 | Perrot | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060168291 | van Zoest et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060168616 | Candelore | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060195860 | Eldering et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060212908 | Hunter et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060218617 | Bradstreet et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060230130 | Cho et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060245724 | Hwang et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060247011 | Gagner | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060247937 | Binding et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060248558 | Barton et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060253330 | Maggio et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060265493 | Brindley et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060287912 | Raghuvamshi | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070047781 | Hull et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070050832 | Wright et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070050854 | Cooperstein et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070056008 | Nagamoto et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070061724 | Slothouber et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070061831 | Savoor et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070072676 | Baluja | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070073581 | Kempe et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070078706 | Datta et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070083908 | McCarthy et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070088801 | Levkovitz et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070088852 | Levkovitz | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070089158 | Clark et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070100690 | Hopkins | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070106405 | Cook et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070106721 | Schloter | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070108721 | Bayne et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070109449 | Cheung | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070113243 | Brey | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070113263 | Chatani | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070116365 | Kloer | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070124756 | Covell et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070129108 | Swanburg et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070143796 | Malik | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070156726 | Levy | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070157231 | Eldering et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070168389 | Lipscomb | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070174059 | Rhoads et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070180459 | Smithpeters et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070186240 | Ward et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070192450 | Lewis | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070198339 | Shen et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070208619 | Branam et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070208711 | Rhoads et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070220024 | Putterman et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070220575 | Cooper et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070234382 | Swix et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070244750 | Grannan et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250590 | Flannery et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250716 | Brunk et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070253594 | Lu et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070260520 | Jha et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070266403 | Ou et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070271300 | Ramaswamy | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070274537 | Srinivasan | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070283384 | Haeuser et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070283402 | Yu | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070288985 | Candelore et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070291747 | Stern et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070291761 | Kauniskangas et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070300264 | Turner | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070300273 | Turner | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070300280 | Turner et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080004957 | Hildreth et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080010133 | Pyhalammi et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080040666 | Wang et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080040767 | McCarthy et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080046945 | Hanley | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080052195 | Roth et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080059285 | Hamoui | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080060002 | Noll et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080066080 | Campbell | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080066098 | Witteman et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080089551 | Heather et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080109307 | Ullah | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080109376 | Walsh et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080109844 | Baldeschwieler et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080109888 | Ullah | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080127263 | Klosterman et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080140476 | Anand et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080154678 | Botelho | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080155588 | Roberts et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080155591 | Mahajan et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080155627 | O'Connor et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080172243 | Kelly | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080172747 | Hurtado et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080174570 | Jobs et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080181225 | Zampiello | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080186933 | Willman et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080189757 | Schackow et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080195457 | Sherman et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080195749 | Krig | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080201222 | Lahaix | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080201734 | Lyon et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080221987 | Sundaresan et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080222045 | Mukerji et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080222711 | Michaelis | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080228581 | Yonezaki et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080229335 | Robbin et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080243535 | Binding et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080244418 | Manolescu et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080263600 | Olague et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080268828 | Nagaraja | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080276265 | Topchy et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080276266 | Huchital et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080276270 | Kotaru et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080288631 | Faisal et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080300011 | Rhoads et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080306820 | Passmore | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080307460 | Knudson et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080310731 | Stojancic et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080313140 | Pereira et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080313648 | Wang et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080317278 | Lefebvre et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090006207 | Datar et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090011744 | Daley et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090044223 | Jiang et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090049384 | Yau | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090052784 | Covell et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090055537 | Takei et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090061841 | Chaudhri | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090063691 | Kalofonos et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090070473 | Baum et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090076821 | Brenner et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090077580 | Konig et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090083417 | Hughes et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090088878 | Otsuka et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090089251 | Johnston et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090094093 | Phan | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090100361 | Abello et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090100460 | Hicks, III | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090119576 | Pepper et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090147718 | Liu et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090153289 | Hope et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090163227 | Collins | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090164483 | Miles | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090164641 | Rogers et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090164904 | Horowitz et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090165140 | Robinson et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090172728 | Shkedi et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090172746 | Aldrey et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090185723 | Kurtz et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090197524 | Haff et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090199236 | Barrett et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090199283 | Jain | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090210899 | Lawrence-Apfelbaum et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090210902 | Slaney et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090216768 | Zwilling et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090231485 | Steinke | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090232305 | Alessi et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090234738 | Britton et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090235312 | Morad et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090240821 | Juncker et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090248736 | Adelman et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090254554 | Hicken | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090254572 | Redlich et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090259612 | Hanson | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090271398 | Scherf et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090276313 | Wilhelm | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090292610 | Quach et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20090298480 | Khambete et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090299817 | Fok et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090299843 | Shkedi | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090300109 | Porter | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090307048 | Grossman | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090327076 | Sinyagin et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090327496 | Klemets et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100007797 | Stojancic | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100022231 | Heins et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100023392 | Merriman et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100023499 | Johnson et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100023582 | Pedersen et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100049711 | Singh et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100050220 | Rys et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100058380 | Yu et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100063970 | Kim | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100071070 | Jawa et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100083303 | Redei et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100094897 | Sumrall et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100099359 | Lee et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100107189 | Steelberg et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100119208 | Davis et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100121891 | Zampiello | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100131973 | Dillon et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100145938 | Boetje et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100146552 | Hassell et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100158391 | Cunningham et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100161424 | Sylvain | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100174605 | Dean et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100175078 | Knudson et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100180216 | Bates et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100185513 | Anderson et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100199188 | Abu-Hakima et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100205166 | Boulter et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100205562 | de Heer | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100205628 | Davis et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100226582 | Luo et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100228611 | Shenfield | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100228625 | Priyadarshan et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100251278 | Agarwal et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100251289 | Agarwal et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100257052 | Zito et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
| 20100269138 | Krikorian et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
| 20100287026 | Smith | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100287049 | Rousso et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100306193 | Pereira et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100306773 | Lee et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100306805 | Neumeier et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100306808 | Neumeier et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100311345 | Santori et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100318628 | Pacella et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100318917 | Holladay et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100319062 | Danieli et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100324992 | Birch | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100325495 | Talla et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100325552 | Sloo et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20110010737 | Bouazizi et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110029555 | Gao et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110029666 | Lopatecki et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110032334 | Raveendran et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110043652 | King et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110061073 | Nicholson et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110078753 | Christianson et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110082939 | Montemurro et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110082940 | Montemurro et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110088075 | Eyer | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110099065 | Georgis et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110099609 | Malhotra et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110107385 | Hudson et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110119139 | Dean et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110122836 | Kim | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110125586 | Evans | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110131597 | Cera et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110136539 | Jain et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110138059 | Schleifer et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110145926 | Dalcher et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110154498 | Fissel et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110179010 | Lin et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110179447 | Harkness et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110191178 | Newberg et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110191352 | Jones et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110213881 | Stavenow et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110219322 | Ramamurthy et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110238379 | Misra et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110247044 | Jacoby | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110251987 | Buchheit | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110251992 | Bethlehem et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110265114 | Legrand | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110265116 | Stern et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110270672 | Hillard et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110273625 | McMahon et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110274179 | Holden | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110279445 | Murphy et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110283322 | Hamano | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110289114 | Yu et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110289524 | Toner et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110289532 | Yu et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110289544 | Goosen et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110296303 | Duquene et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110304771 | Blanchard et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110310100 | Adimatyam et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110314051 | Cavet et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110317885 | Leung et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110321003 | Doig et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110321109 | Hudson et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20120011541 | McCarthy | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120017240 | Shkedi | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120023522 | Anderson et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120047277 | Keidar et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120054300 | Marchwicki et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120054440 | Doig et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120069131 | Abelow | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120072291 | Bharat | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120072420 | Moganti et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120076049 | Rudolf et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120084814 | Olague et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120086857 | Kim et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120089700 | Safruti et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120101907 | Dodda | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120102515 | Ramaswamy | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120109755 | Birch et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120124498 | Santoro et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120130822 | Patwa et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120130825 | Evans | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120131095 | Luna et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120144416 | Wetzer et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120150944 | Steelberg et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120151015 | Plastina et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120151521 | Gilley et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120159542 | Minwalla | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120163770 | Kaiser et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120163776 | Hassell et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120167001 | Ortiz et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120167132 | Mathews et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120174155 | Mowrey et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120191716 | Omoigui | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120207402 | Stojancic et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120209706 | Ramer et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120209726 | Dean et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120210224 | Wong et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120215622 | Ramer et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120233163 | Kirkpatrick | Sep 2012 | A1 |
| 20120240151 | Tapper | Sep 2012 | A1 |
| 20120245722 | Yamamura | Sep 2012 | A1 |
| 20120257110 | Amundsen | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120260184 | Dawes et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120265616 | Cao et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120272134 | Steelberg et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120278825 | Tran et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120280908 | Rhoads et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120284746 | Evans et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120284757 | Rajapakse | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120297406 | Bartholomay et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120303710 | Roberts et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120311074 | Arini et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120311629 | Zaslavsky et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120311702 | Krstic et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120315014 | Shuster | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120317175 | Husain et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120317178 | Husain et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120317181 | Husain et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120324495 | Matthews et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20120324566 | Baum et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20130013665 | Sng et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130019262 | Bhatia et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130019268 | Fitzsimmons et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130036434 | Shkedi et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130041664 | McKoen et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130042262 | Riethmueller | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130045681 | Dua | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130051300 | He et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130055309 | Dittus | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130060905 | Mickens et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130061259 | Raman et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130061267 | Cansino et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130078946 | Pecen et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130080242 | Alhadeff et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
| 20130085865 | Zhou et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130094423 | Wengrovitz et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130104160 | Beeson et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130104232 | Johnson et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130117782 | Mehta et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130139209 | Urrabazo et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130139210 | Huang et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130151728 | Currier | Jun 2013 | A1 |
| 20130185153 | Howcroft | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130185422 | Rogers et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130202150 | Sinha et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130205317 | Sinha et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130205319 | Sinha et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130205348 | Hudson et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130238702 | Sheth et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130254884 | Dalcher et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130263166 | Fleischman | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130290502 | Bilobrov et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130297727 | Levy | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130311168 | Lehmann Li | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130318157 | Harrison | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130326554 | Shkedi | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130340011 | Rodriguez | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130340050 | Harrison | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140002247 | Harrison et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140007155 | Vemparala et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140007156 | Harrison et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140007157 | Harrison et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140007162 | Harrison | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140007187 | Harrison | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140007262 | Metsäpelto et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140029847 | Frye et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140032286 | Lansford et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140040027 | Anderson et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140040443 | Sheng-Jie Syu et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140047480 | Knudson et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140074621 | Chai et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140074839 | Popp et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140082663 | Neumeier et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140090008 | Li et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140130076 | Moore et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140141714 | Ghosh et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140143043 | Wickramasuriya et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140150006 | Vemparala et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140181856 | Lewis | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20140184827 | Chartrand | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140195584 | Harrison | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140195620 | Srinivasan et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140195649 | Harrison | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140195690 | Harrison et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140195934 | Harrison | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140196085 | Dunker et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140201645 | Mo et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140201769 | Neumeier et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140201772 | Neumeier et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140201773 | Neumeier et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140201774 | Neumeier et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140201787 | Neumeier et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140218620 | Griffin et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140229271 | Clapp et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140237496 | Julian | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140244351 | Symons | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140244863 | Bradley et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140280304 | Scherf et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140282673 | Neumeier et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140282735 | Davis et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140289315 | Harrison | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20150003799 | Oostveen et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150074526 | Brenner et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
| 20150074703 | Cremer et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
| 20150082331 | Neumeier et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
| 20150089526 | Gordon | Mar 2015 | A1 |
| 20150095972 | Sharma et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150178280 | DiMaria et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150181263 | Gordon | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150181268 | Harrison et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150181311 | Harrison et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150194151 | Jeyachandran et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150195597 | Gordon | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150228306 | Roberts et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150229690 | Raesig et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150245090 | Davis et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150262229 | Brenner et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
| 20150302086 | Roberts et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
| 20150331660 | Kalampoukas et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| 20150331661 | Kalampoukas et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| 20150331938 | Kalampoukas et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| 20150332669 | Kalampoukas et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| 20150332687 | Kalampoukas et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| 20150350725 | Zhu et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20150356178 | Scherf et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20150365456 | Harrison | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20160007083 | Gurha | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160019598 | Harrison | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160019876 | Jeffrey et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160110537 | Harrison | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| 20160112770 | Harrison | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| 20160124953 | Cremer et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
| 20160139756 | Benson et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
| 20160140122 | Harrison | May 2016 | A1 |
| 20160182971 | Ortiz | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160196105 | Vartakavi et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
| 20160196270 | DiMaria et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
| 20160196344 | Cremer et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
| 20160217799 | Han et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
| 20160241540 | Jeffrey et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160267180 | Harron et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
| 20160323533 | Nagorski et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
| 20160373197 | Brenner et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2553159 | Oct 1998 | CA |
| 2413944 | Jun 2003 | CA |
| 2884534 | Mar 2014 | CA |
| 1726489 | Jan 2006 | CN |
| 101147378 | Mar 2008 | CN |
| 101622599 | Jan 2010 | CN |
| 101909201 | Jun 2013 | CN |
| 69815695 | Jun 2004 | DE |
| 602004008936 | Jun 2008 | DE |
| 1010098 | Jun 2000 | EP |
| 1010098 | Jun 2003 | EP |
| 1324567 | Jul 2003 | EP |
| 1324567 | Aug 2003 | EP |
| 1347661 | Sep 2003 | EP |
| 1410380 | Apr 2004 | EP |
| 1421521 | May 2004 | EP |
| 1573462 | Oct 2005 | EP |
| 1592198 | Nov 2005 | EP |
| 1605416 | Dec 2005 | EP |
| 1779659 | May 2007 | EP |
| 1803270 | Jul 2007 | EP |
| 1934828 | Jun 2008 | EP |
| 1362485 | Aug 2008 | EP |
| 1934828 | Oct 2008 | EP |
| 2001583 | Dec 2008 | EP |
| 1550297 | Mar 2009 | EP |
| 2100216 | Sep 2009 | EP |
| 1314110 | Oct 2009 | EP |
| 2100216 | Dec 2009 | EP |
| 2136306 | Dec 2009 | EP |
| 1324567 | Jan 2010 | EP |
| 2145411 | Jan 2010 | EP |
| 2169854 | Mar 2010 | EP |
| 1410380 | Apr 2010 | EP |
| 1797552 | Apr 2010 | EP |
| 2206114 | Jul 2010 | EP |
| 2001583 | Sep 2010 | EP |
| 2226757 | Sep 2010 | EP |
| 2206114 | Jul 2012 | EP |
| 1887754 | Dec 2012 | EP |
| 2541961 | Jan 2013 | EP |
| 2136306 | Mar 2013 | EP |
| 2541961 | Apr 2013 | EP |
| 1969810 | Aug 2013 | EP |
| 2520084 | Nov 2013 | EP |
| 2285066 | May 2014 | EP |
| 2747370 | Jun 2014 | EP |
| 2200258 | Nov 2014 | EP |
| 2895971 | Jul 2015 | EP |
| 2944051 | Nov 2015 | EP |
| 2895971 | May 2016 | EP |
| 3084646 | Oct 2016 | EP |
| 2944051 | Nov 2016 | EP |
| 3090330 | Nov 2016 | EP |
| 3090429 | Nov 2016 | EP |
| 3117390 | Jan 2017 | EP |
| 2457694 | Aug 2009 | GB |
| 2007220137 | Aug 2007 | JP |
| 2007257820 | Oct 2007 | JP |
| 2007280382 | Oct 2007 | JP |
| 2009075603 | Apr 2009 | JP |
| 2013013092 | Jan 2013 | JP |
| 20030005279 | Jan 2003 | KR |
| 20040021684 | Mar 2004 | KR |
| 20040024870 | Mar 2004 | KR |
| 20040029452 | Apr 2004 | KR |
| 20040086350 | Oct 2004 | KR |
| 20050046815 | May 2005 | KR |
| 20050061566 | Jun 2005 | KR |
| 20050061594 | Jun 2005 | KR |
| 20050086470 | Aug 2005 | KR |
| 20050113614 | Dec 2005 | KR |
| 20050117558 | Dec 2005 | KR |
| 20070095282 | Sep 2007 | KR |
| 20080043358 | May 2008 | KR |
| 100961461 | Jun 2010 | KR |
| 20150054861 | May 2015 | KR |
| 20150106904 | Sep 2015 | KR |
| 1020160101979 | Aug 2016 | KR |
| 20160135751 | Nov 2016 | KR |
| 1995012278 | May 1995 | WO |
| 2000052929 | Sep 2000 | WO |
| 2000054504 | Sep 2000 | WO |
| 2001044992 | Jun 2001 | WO |
| 2001082625 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| 2001089213 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| 2001089217 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| 200231742 | Apr 2002 | WO |
| 2003009277 | Jan 2003 | WO |
| 2003012695 | Feb 2003 | WO |
| 2003019560 | Mar 2003 | WO |
| 2003025762 | Mar 2003 | WO |
| 2003009277 | Sep 2003 | WO |
| 2003019560 | Jan 2004 | WO |
| 2003012695 | Mar 2004 | WO |
| 2004040416 | May 2004 | WO |
| 2004044820 | May 2004 | WO |
| 2005041455 | May 2005 | WO |
| 2005050620 | Jun 2005 | WO |
| 2004040416 | Aug 2005 | WO |
| 2005125198 | Dec 2005 | WO |
| 2006018790 | Feb 2006 | WO |
| 2006041928 | Apr 2006 | WO |
| 2007022533 | Feb 2007 | WO |
| 2007022533 | Jun 2007 | WO |
| 2007103583 | Sep 2007 | WO |
| 2007114796 | Oct 2007 | WO |
| 2008029188 | Mar 2008 | WO |
| 2007103583 | May 2008 | WO |
| 2008052205 | May 2008 | WO |
| 2008086104 | Jul 2008 | WO |
| 2008112858 | Sep 2008 | WO |
| 2008131247 | Oct 2008 | WO |
| 2008137756 | Nov 2008 | WO |
| 2009023647 | Feb 2009 | WO |
| 2009042858 | Apr 2009 | WO |
| 2009091338 | Jul 2009 | WO |
| 2009114622 | Sep 2009 | WO |
| 2009131861 | Oct 2009 | WO |
| 2009132084 | Oct 2009 | WO |
| 2008137756 | Dec 2009 | WO |
| 2009150425 | Dec 2009 | WO |
| 2010046123 | Apr 2010 | WO |
| 2010072986 | Jul 2010 | WO |
| 2010129693 | Nov 2010 | WO |
| 2010151421 | Dec 2010 | WO |
| 2011011002 | Jan 2011 | WO |
| 2011030231 | Mar 2011 | WO |
| 2011090540 | Jul 2011 | WO |
| 2011090541 | Jul 2011 | WO |
| 2012005994 | Jan 2012 | WO |
| 2012013893 | Feb 2012 | WO |
| 2012021538 | Feb 2012 | WO |
| 2012028976 | Mar 2012 | WO |
| 2012051115 | Apr 2012 | WO |
| 2012109666 | Aug 2012 | WO |
| 2012120253 | Sep 2012 | WO |
| 2012154541 | Nov 2012 | WO |
| 2013028899 | Feb 2013 | WO |
| 2013032787 | Mar 2013 | WO |
| 2013068619 | May 2013 | WO |
| 2013089674 | Jun 2013 | WO |
| 2013147587 | Oct 2013 | WO |
| 2014042826 | Mar 2014 | WO |
| 2014052015 | Apr 2014 | WO |
| 2014042826 | May 2014 | WO |
| 2014107311 | Jul 2014 | WO |
| 2014142758 | Sep 2014 | WO |
| 2014145929 | Sep 2014 | WO |
| 2014145938 | Sep 2014 | WO |
| 2014145947 | Sep 2014 | WO |
| 2015094558 | Jun 2015 | WO |
| 2015102921 | Jul 2015 | WO |
| 2015103384 | Jul 2015 | WO |
| 2015138601 | Sep 2015 | WO |
| 2015167901 | Nov 2015 | WO |
| 2015183914 | Dec 2015 | WO |
| 2016018472 | Feb 2016 | WO |
| 2016018472 | Mar 2016 | WO |
| 2016109500 | Jul 2016 | WO |
| 2016109553 | Jul 2016 | WO |
| 2016109682 | Jul 2016 | WO |
| 2016109553 | Aug 2016 | WO |
| 2016109682 | Sep 2016 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| “Secure Browsing with Ceedo”, Ceedo Flexible computing (pp. 2). |
| “Sandboxes and Silver Bullets: Vendors Promote New/Old Detection Techniques to Stop Zero-Day Threats”, IT Current Analysis Connection Blogs, Mar. 29, 2013 by Paula Musich (p. 1) http://itcblogs.currentanalysis.com/2013/03/29/sandboxes-and-silver-bullets-vendors-promote-newold-detection- techniques-to-stop-zero-day-threats/. |
| “Introduction to security” (pp. 8) http://help.adobe.com/en_US/flex/using/WS2db454920e96a9e51e63e3d11c0bf6167e-7fff.html#WS2db454920e96a9e51e63e3d11c0bf6167e-7ff9. |
| “Screenshot of Wikipedia page of Samba TV”, Jan. 5, 2015 (pp. 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samba_TV. |
| “Screenshot of Wikipedia page of Smart TV”, Jan. 5, 2015 (pp. 4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_TV. |
| “Screenshot of Wikipedia page of Interactive television”, From Wikipedia, Jan. 5, 2015 (pp. 8) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_television. |
| “Screenshot of Wikipedia page of Social television”, From Wikipedia, Jan. 5, 2015 (pp. 3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_television. |
| “Screenshot of Wikipedia page of Enhanced TV”, From Wikipedia, Jan. 5, 2015 (p. 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_TV. |
| “Screenshot of Wikipedia page of Digital video fingerprinting”, From Wikipedia, Jan. 5, 2015 (pp. 4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_video_fingerprinting. |
| “Screenshot of Wikipedia page of Second screen”, From Wikipedia, Jan. 5, 2015 (pp. 3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_screen. |
| Reverse Sandboxing with SafeCentral, SafeCentral (pp. 3) http://www.safecentral.com/pdfs/ReverseSandboxing.pdf. |
| “Collect, Manage, and Analyze everything occurring on your network”, RSA Security Analytics, Detect & Investigate Threats. (pp. 5) http://www.emc.com/collateral/data-sheet/security-analytics-infrastructure-ds.pdf. |
| “Metazen—metadata capture for metagenomes”, Standards in Genomic Sciences, by Jared Bischof et al. (pp. 6) http://www.standardsingenomics.com/content/pdf/1944-3277-9-18.pdf. |
| “Semantic Annotation of Images and Videos for Multimedia Analysis”, by Stephan Bloehdorn et al. (pp. 15) http://image.ntua.gr/papers/345.pdf. |
| “Architecture for Interoperability of Services between an ACAP Receiver and Home Networked Devices”, Jan. 15, 2006, by Yu-Seok Bae et al. (pp. 6). |
| “Smart SoftPhone Device for Networked AudioVisual QoS/QoE Discovery & Measurement”, Digital Media Laboratory, Information and Communications University, Republic of Korea, by Jinsul Kim, (pp. 23) http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/5446.pdf. |
| “Market Potential for Interactive Audio-visual Media”, IEEE Xplore, by Andra Leurdijk et al., (p. 1) http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1592082&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplorejeee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D1592082. |
| “Design of a multi-sender 3D videoconferencing application over an end system multicast protocol”, '03 Proceedings of the eleventh ACM international conference on Multimedia, New York, NY, USA, 2003 by Mojtaba Hosseini et al., (p. 1) http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=957119. |
| “Cisco Medianet Data Sheet”, Cisco 3900 Series Integrated Services Routers, (pp. 8) http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/routers/3900-series-integrated-services-routers-isr/data_sheet_c78-612429.html. |
| “Delivery of Personalized and Adaptive Content to Mobile Devices: A Framework and Enabling Technology”, Communications of the Association for Information Systems (vol. 12, 2003)183-202, by D. Zhang, (pp. 22) http://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3178&context=cais. |
| “Single Sign-On for Java Web Start Applications Using MyProxy”, by Terry Fleury et al. (pp. 7) http://grid.ncsa.illinois.edu/papers/sws-myproxy-jws.pdf. |
| “MonALISA : A Distributed Monitoring Service Architecture”, CHEP03, La Jolla, California, Mar. 24-28, 2003 by H.B. Newman et al. (pp. 8) http://monalisa.caltech.edu/documentation/MOET001.pdf. |
| “Exploratory geospatial analysis using GeoVISTA Studio: from a desktop to the Web”, IEEE Xplore, Dec. 3-6, 2001, by M. Takatsuka et al. (p. 1) http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=996715&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D996715. |
| “Comprehensive Multi-platform Collaboration”, Department of Computer Science, Columbia University, by kundan Singh et al. (pp. 36) http://www.cs.columbia.edu/˜library/TR-repository/reports/reports-2003/cucs-027-03.pdf. |
| “Privacy-Preserving Remote Diagnostics”, The University of Texas at Austin, by Justin Brickell et al. (pp. 10) https://www.cs.utexas.edu/˜shmat/shmat_ccs07.pdf. |
| “Supporting Dynamic Ad hoc Collaboration Capabilities”, LBNL, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA, by D. Agarwal et al. (pp. 6) http://arxiv.org/ftp/cs/papers/0307/0307037.pdf. |
| “A Framework for Classifying Peer-to-Peer Technologies”, IEEE Xplore, May 21-24, 2002, by K. Kant et al. (p. 1) http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1540491&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5% 2F10335%2F32898%2F01540491.pdf%3Farnumber%3D1540491. |
| “Cognitive Radio Technology”, from The Guest Editor in IEEE Signal Processing Magazine on Nov. 2008 by Maria Gabriella di Benedetto et al. (p. 1) http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=4644050. |
| “Automated Content Recognition creating content aware ecosystems”, in CSI Magazine in Sep. 2012 (pp. 16) http://www.csimagazine.com/csi/whitepapers/ACR%20Creating%20%20content-aware%20ecosystems%20-Civolution%20White%20Paper%20-%20Sept%202012.pdf. |
| “A Confidence Based Recognition System for TV Commercial Extraction”, in 2008 by Yijun Li et al. (pp. 8) http://crpit.com/confpapers/CRPITV75Li.pdf. |
| “TV Retargeting”, Market View, wywy—Maximizing TV Advertising ROI, Dec. 31, 2015 (pp. 2) http://wywy.com/market-view/tv-retargeting/. |
| “The New Age of Second Screen: Enabling Interaction”, admonsters webpage, Jun. 5, 2013, Joshua R. Weaver (pp. 3) https://www.admonsters.com/blog/second-screen-enabling-interaction. |
| “Complaint for Patent Infringement”, Case 2:15-cv-01725-RWS Document 1, Nov. 6, 2015 (pp. 7). |
| “OpenX Ad Server: Beginner's Guide”, Packt Publishing by Murat Yilmaz (pp. 26) https://www.packtpub.com/sites/default/files/0202_OpenX%20Ad%20Server%20Beginner's%20Guide_SampleChapter.pdf. |
| “HTML & CSS: The Complete Reference”, The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2010 by Thomas A. Powell (pp. 857) http://www.pdfiles.com/pdf/files/English/Web_Apps_Programming_&_Internet/HTML_&_CSS_The_Complete_Reference.pdf. |
| “Web Services Essentials”, O'Reilly, Feb. 2002 by Ethan Cerami (pp. 286) http://spurrier.gatorglory.com/PDFs/O'Reilly%20-%20Web%20Services%20Essentials.pdf. |
| “UPnP Device Architecture 1.0”, UPnP Forum, Oct. 15, 2008 (pp. 81) http://upnp.org/specs/arch/UPnP-arch-DeviceArchitecture-v1.0.pdf. |
| “Mac OS X Snow Leopard: The Missing Manual”, O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2009 by David Pogue (pp. 903) http://crypto.cs.mcgill.ca/˜simonpie/webdav/ipad/EBook/MacOSX/Mac%20OS%20X%20Snow%20Leopard%20The%20Missing%20Manual.pdf. |
| “The Common Object Request Broker: Architecture and Specification Revision 2.0”, Feb. 1997 (pp. 634) http://www.omg.org/spec/CORBA/2.0/PDF. |
| “Internet: The Complete Reference”, Tata McGraw-Hill Education Pvt. Ltd., 2002 by Margaret Levine Young http://www.abebooks.com/Internet-Complete-Reference-Second-Edition-Margaret/5122896620/bd. |
| “HTML 4.0 Sourcebook”, John Wiley & Sons, Apr. 1998 by Ian S. Graham (pp. 656) http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0471257249.html. |
| “Zero Configuration Networking: The Definitive Guide”, O'Reilly Media, Dec. 2005 by Daniel H Steinberg et al. (pp. 254) http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596101008.do#tab_04_2. |
| https://web.archive.org/web/20110722022038/http://www.flingo.tv/. |
| https://web.archive.org/web/20120616002448/http://www.flingo.tv/. |
| https://web.archive.org/web/20130423033122/http://flingo.tv/. |
| https://web.archive.org/web/20101015033305/http://flingo.org/. |
| https://web.archive.org/web/20110609062427/http://www.flingo.org/. |
| “Security in the Large: Is Java's Sandbox Scalable?”, HP Hewlett Packard Apr. 1998, by Qun Zhong et al.(pp. 9) http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/98/HPL-98-79.pdf. |
| “For Developers”, Flingo Article, Oct. 2010, by Flingo https://web.archive.org/web/20101028221214/flingo.org/developers.html. |
| “Anomaly Detection in Dynamic Execution Environments”, NSPW 2002, by Hajime Inoue et al. (pp. 9) http://www.nspw.org/papers/2002/nspw2002-inoue.pdf. |
| “iPhone Security Analysis”, Department of Computer Science San Jose State University, May 2008, by Vaibhav Pandya. (pp. 44) http://www.cs.sjsu.edu/faculty/stamp/students/pandya_vaibhav.pdf. |
| “I, Me and My Phone: Identity and Personalization using Mobile Devices”, HP Invest, Nov. 2007 by Riddhiman Ghosh et al. (pp. 14) http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2007/HPL-2007-184.pdf. |
| “Extending the web to support personal network services”, SAC '13, Mar. 2013, by John Lyle et al, (pp. 6) https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/files/5273/sac2013.pdf. |
| “Java and Java Virtual Machine Security Vulnerabilities and their Exploitation Techniques”, Black Hat Briefings, Singapore, Oct. 2002, by Delirium. (pp. 91) http://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-asia-02/LSD/bh-asia-02-lsd.pdf. |
| “Shazam Announces Application for iPhone”, by Shazam, Jul. 2008. http://news.shazam.com/pressreleases/shazam-announces-application-for-iphone-890432. |
| “Shazam Launches Android Application Integrated with MySpace and Amazon MP3”, by Shazam, Oct. 2008. http://news.shazam.com/pressreleases/shazam-launches-android-application-integrated-with-myspace-and-amazon-mp3-890456. |
| “The Shazam music recognition service” ,Communications of the ACM—Music information retrieval, Aug. 2006, by Shazam. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220423945_The_Shazam_music_recognition_service. |
| “An Industrial-Strength Audio Search Algorithm”, International Conference on Music Information Retrieval, 2003, by Avery Wang. https://www.ee.columbia.edu/˜dpwe/papers/Wang03-shazam.pdf. |
| “It Just Works: UPnP in the Digital Home”, The Journal of Spontaneous Networking, Oct. 2004, by Michael Jeronimo. http://www.artima.com/spontaneous/upnp_digihome.html. |
| “Data-Confined HTML5 Applications”, European Symposium on Research in Computer Security, London Mar. 2013, by Devdatta Akhawe (pp. 18) http://devd.me/papers/dcs-esorics.pdf. |
| “A Component-based Software Infrastructure for Ubiquitous Computing”, Parallel and Distributed Computing, 2005, by Areski Flissi et al. (pp. 22) http://www.lifi.fr/ispdc2005/presentations/flissi_ispdc_slides.pdf. |
| “A robust image fingerprinting system using the Radon transform”, Signal Processing: Image Communication 19 (2004) 325-339, May 2004, by Jin Seo et al. http://www.123seminarsonly.com/Seminar-Reports/027/60224236-Finger-Printing.pdf. |
| “An Authentication and Authorization Architecture for Jini Services”, CiteSeer, by Oct. 2000, by Thomas Schoch et al. http://www.vs.inf.ethz.ch/publ/papers/da-schoch.pdf. |
| “Analysis and Prediction of Set-Top-Box Reliability in Multi-Application Environments using Artificial Intelligence Techniques”, Spring Technical Forum, 2004,Louis Slothouber et al. (pp. 9) file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/2004-analysis-and-prediction-of-set-top-box-reliability-in-multi-application-environments-using-artificial-intelligence-techniques%20(1).pdf. |
| “Artificial Intelligence in Cable TV Applications”, Advancing Technology's Agends, Louis Slothouber et al., 2003, (pp. 8) file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/2003-artifcial-intelligence-in-cable-tv-applications%20(2).pdf. |
| “Exploiting Cross Context Scripting Vulnerabilities in Firefox”, Security-Assessment.com Addendum, Apr. 2010, by Nick Freeman et al. (pp. 8) http://www.security-assessment.com/files/whitepapers/Exploiting_Cross_Context_Scripting_vulnerabilities_in_Firefox.pdf. |
| “Design and Implementation of Fingerprinting-based Broadcasting Content Identification System”, Creative Content Research Laboratory, ETRI(Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute), Feb. 2014, by Jihyun Park et al. http://www.icact.org/upload./2014/0249/20140249_biography.pdf. |
| “Efficient Software-Based Fault Isolation”, SOSP '93 Proceedings of the fourteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles, Dec. 1993, by Robert Wahbe et al. (pp. 14) https://crypto.stanford.edu/cs155/papers/sfi.pdf. |
| “Java and .NET Security”,Secure Computer Systems, Oct. 2005 by Martin Russold et al. (pp. 6) https://www.it.uu.se/edu/course/homepage/sakdat/ht05/assignments/pm/programme/Java_and_NET.pdf. |
| “Java™ Web Start Overview”, White Paper, May 2005, by Sun Microsystems, Inc. (pp. 14) http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/ws-white-paper-150004.pdf. |
| “Programming the Grid with gLite”, Enabling Grids for E-Science, Mar. 2006, by Laure et al. (pp. 18) http://cds.cern.ch/record/936685/files/egee-tr-2006-001.pdf. |
| “Shazam Turns Up the Volume on Mobile Music”, Nov. 2007, by Shazam. http://news.shazam.com/pressreleases/shazam-turns-up-the-volume-on-mobile-music-890300. |
| “The Evolution of the JAVA Security Model”, International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies—CompSysTech' 2005, by Nikolaj Cholakov et al. (pp. 6) http://ecet.ecs.uni-ruse.bg/cst05/Docs/cp/SIII/IIIB.12.pdf. |
| “The iPhone Developer's Cookbook—Building Applications with the iPhone SDK”, Developer's Library, 2008, by Erica Sadun. (pp. 360) http://www.ebooksbucket.com/uploads/itprogramming/iosappdevelopment/The_iPhone_Developers_Cookbook.pdf. |
| “Towards Distributed Service Discovery in Pervasive Computing Environments”, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 5, No. , pp. 97-112, Feb. 2006, by Dipanjan Chakraborty. https://www.computer.org/csdl/trans/tm/2006/02/h0097-abs.html. |
| “Twisted Python and Bonjour”, Indelible.org, Jan., 2009, by Parise. http://www.indelible.org/ink/twisted-bonjour/. |
| “UPnP in Digital Home Networking”, QuEST, by Quest Global Services, 2015. (pp. 7) https://www.quest-global.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/UPnP-in_Digital_Home_Networking.pdf. |
| “Cross Context Scripting with Firefox”, Security-Assessment.com White Paper, Apr. 2010, by Roberto Liverani. (pp. 24) http://www.security-assessment.com/files/documents/whitepapers/Cross_Context_Scripting_with_Firefox.pdf. |
| “Vulnerabilities and Threats to Mobile Device Security From a Practitioner's Point of View”, Issues in Information Systems, vol. XII, No. 2, pp. 181-193, 2011, by Joseph Laverty et al.. (pp. 13) http://iacis.org/iis/2011/181-193_AL2011_1693.pdf. |
| “Android (operating system)”, Sep. 2008, by Spice. (pp. 9) “http://www.si2imobility.com/spicemobiles/pdf/Support-%20FAQs/Android.pdf”. |
| “Flingo is about to make your smart TV even smarter”, Jul. 7, 2011, by Ryan Lawler (pp. 6) https://gigaom.com/2011/07/07/flingo-launch/. |
| “The TV That Watches You”, Aug. 19, 2011, by Tom Simonite (pp. 5) https://www.technologyreview.com/s/425081/the-tv-that-watches-you/. |
| “WAP Architecture” by Wireless Application Protocol Forum, Published on Jul. 12, 2001 (pp. 24) http://www.openmobilealliance.org/tech/affillates/wap/wap-210-waparch-20010712-a.pdf. |
| “EFI Framework” by wireless Application Protocol Forum, Published on Dec. 17, 2001 (pp. 50) http://www.openmobilealliance.org/tech/affiliates/wap/wap-231-efi-20011217-a.pdf. |
| “Push OTA Protocol” by Wireless Application Protocol Forum, Published on Apr. 25, 2001 (pp. 44) http://www.openmobilealliance.org/tech/affillates/wap/wap-235-pushota-20010425-a.pdf. |
| “Pandora on the iPhone” uploaded on YouTube on Jul. 14, 2008 by Radiopandora, found online on May 24, 2017 (pp. 28) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNMSntXtPc0. |
| “Pioneer Brings Pandora into Your Car” uploaded on YouTube on Aug. 4, 2010 by Pioneerelectronics, found online on May 24, 2017 (pp. 16) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdyOKPhBoi4. |
| “iDA-X305S: Control Pandora from your dash” uploaded on YouTube on Mar. 26, 2010 by AlpineTV, found online on May 24, 2017 (pp. 14) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TkWI_ILVzU. |
| “Sync + Retarget, Extend your TV campaign to all screen in real-time” by Samba TV, found online on May 24, 2017 (pp. 4) https://samba.tv/advertising/sync-retarget/. |
| “Pandora system everywhere”, by Pandora, found online on May 24, 2017 (pp. 9) https://www.pandora.com/everywhere. |
| Title: Content Interaction Methods and Systems Employing Portable Devices, U.S. Appl. No. 61/112,573, Name of inventor: Bruce L. Davis, filed Nov. 7, 2008. |
| Title: Second Screen Methods and Arrangements, U.S. Appl. No. 61/152,226, Name of inventor: Bruce L. Davis, filed Feb. 12, 2009. |
| Title: Second Screen Methods and Arrangements, U.S. Appl. No. 61/160,660, Name of inventor: Bruce L. Davis, filed Mar. 16, 2009. |
| Title: Second Screen Methods and Arrangements, U.S. Appl. No. 61/167,828, Name of inventor: Bruce L. Davis, dated Apr. 8, 2009. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20160227265 A1 | Aug 2016 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 62183756 | Jun 2015 | US | |
| 61696711 | Sep 2012 | US | |
| 62026017 | Jul 2014 | US | |
| 61652153 | May 2012 | US | |
| 61584168 | Jan 2012 | US | |
| 61118286 | Nov 2008 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 13943866 | Jul 2013 | US |
| Child | 14274800 | US | |
| Parent | 13904015 | May 2013 | US |
| Child | 13943866 | US | |
| Parent | 13736031 | Jan 2013 | US |
| Child | 13943866 | US | |
| Parent | 12592377 | Nov 2009 | US |
| Child | 13470814 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 14017445 | Sep 2013 | US |
| Child | 15011696 | US | |
| Parent | 14744045 | Jun 2015 | US |
| Child | 14017445 | US | |
| Parent | 15011696 | US | |
| Child | 14017445 | US | |
| Parent | 14981938 | Dec 2015 | US |
| Child | 15011696 | US | |
| Parent | 14274800 | May 2014 | US |
| Child | 14981938 | US | |
| Parent | 13470814 | May 2012 | US |
| Child | 13943866 | Jul 2013 | US |
