Document de-registration

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8548170
  • Patent Number
    8,548,170
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, May 25, 2004
    20 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, October 1, 2013
    10 years ago
Abstract
A document accessible over a network can be registered. A registered document, and the content contained therein, cannot be transmitted undetected over and off of the network. In one embodiment, a plurality of stored signatures are maintained in a signature database, each signature being associated with one of a plurality of registered documents. In one embodiment, the signature database is maintained by de-registering documents by removing the signatures associated with de-registered documents. In one embodiment, the database is maintained by removing redundant and high detection rate signatures. In one embodiment, the signature database is maintained by removing signatures based on the source text used to generate the signature.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to computer networks, and in particular, to registering documents in a computer network.


BACKGROUND

Computer networks and systems have become indispensable tools for modem business. Modern enterprises use such networks for communications and for storage. The information and data stored on the network of a business enterprise is often a highly valuable asset. Modern enterprises use numerous tools to keep outsiders, intruders, and unauthorized personnel from accessing valuable information stored on the network. These tools include firewalls, intrusion detection systems, and packet sniffer devices. However, once an intruder has gained access to sensitive content, there is no network device that can prevent the electronic transmission of the content from the network to outside the network. Similarly, there is no network device that can analyze the data leaving the network to monitor for policy violations, and make it possible to track down information leaks. What is needed is a comprehensive system to capture, store, and analyze all data communicated using the enterprises network.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

A document accessible over a network can be registered. A registered document, and the content contained therein, cannot be transmitted undetected over and off of the network. In one embodiment, the invention includes maintaining a plurality of stored signatures in a signature database, each signature being associated with one of a plurality of registered documents. In one embodiment, the invention further includes maintaining the signature database by de-registering documents by removing the signatures associated with de-registered documents. In one embodiment, the invention further includes maintaining the database by removing redundant and high detection rate signatures. In one embodiment, the invention also includes maintaining the signature database by removing signatures based on the source text used to generate the signature.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present invention is illustrated by way of example, and not by way of limitation, in the figures of the accompanying drawings in which like reference numerals refer to similar elements and in which:



FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a computer network connected to the Internet;



FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating one configuration of a capture system according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating the capture system according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 4 is a block diagram illustrating an object assembly module according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 5 is a block diagram illustrating an object store module according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 6 is a block diagram illustrating an example hardware architecture for a capture system according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 7 is a block diagram illustrating a document registration system according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 8 is a block diagram illustrating registration module according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 9 is a flow diagram illustrating object capture processing according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 10 is a flow diagram illustrating document de-registration processing according to one embodiment of the present invention;



FIG. 11 is a flow diagram illustrating signature database maintenance according to one embodiment of the present invention; and



FIG. 12 is a flow diagram illustrating signature database maintenance according to another embodiment of the present invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Although the present system will be discussed with reference to various illustrated examples, these examples should not be read to limit the broader spirit and scope of the present invention. Some portions of the detailed description that follows are presented in terms of algorithms and symbolic representations of operations on data within a computer memory. These algorithmic descriptions and representations are the means used by those skilled in the computer science arts to most effectively convey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. An algorithm is here, and generally, conceived to be a self-consistent sequence of steps leading to a desired result. The steps are those requiring physical manipulations of physical quantities. Usually, though not necessarily, these quantities take the form of electrical or magnetic signals capable of being stored, transferred, combined, compared and otherwise manipulated.


It has proven convenient at times, principally for reasons of common usage, to refer to these signals as bits, values, elements, symbols, characters, terms, numbers or the like. It should be borne in mind, however, that all of these and similar terms are to be associated with the appropriate physical quantities and are merely convenient labels applied to these quantities. Unless specifically stated otherwise, it will be appreciated that throughout the description of the present invention, use of terms such as “processing”, “computing”, “calculating”, “determining”, “displaying” or the like, refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similar electronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms data represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system's registers and memories into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system memories or registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices.


As indicated above, one embodiment of the present invention is instantiated in computer software, that is, computer readable instructions, which, when executed by one or more computer processors/systems, instruct the processors/systems to perform the designated actions. Such computer software may be resident in one or more computer readable media, such as hard drives, CD-ROMs, DVD-ROMs, read-only memory, read-write memory and so on. Such software may be distributed on one or more of these media, or may be made available for download across one or more computer networks (e.g., the Internet). Regardless of the format, the computer programming, rendering and processing techniques discussed herein are simply examples of the types of programming, rendering and processing techniques that may be used to implement aspects of the present invention. These examples should in no way limit the present invention, which is best understood with reference to the claims that follow this description.


Networks



FIG. 1 illustrates a simple prior art configuration of a local area network (LAN) 10 connected to the Internet 12. Connected to the LAN 10 are various components, such as servers 14, clients 16, and switch 18. There are numerous other known networking components and computing devices that can be connected to the LAN 10. The LAN 10 can be implemented using various wireline or wireless technologies, such as Ethernet and 802.11b. The LAN 10 may be much more complex than the simplified diagram in FIG. 1, and may be connected to other LANs as well.


In FIG. 1, the LAN 10 is connected to the Internet 12 via a router 20. This router 20 can be used to implement a firewall, which are widely used to give users of the LAN 10 secure access to the Internet 12 as well as to separate a company's public Web server (can be one of the servers 14) from its internal network, i.e., LAN 10. In one embodiment, any data leaving the LAN 10 towards the Internet 12 must pass through the router 20. However, there the router 20 merely forwards packets to the Internet 12. The router 20 cannot capture, analyze, and store, in a searchable manner, the content contained in the forwarded packets.


One embodiment of the present invention is now illustrated with reference to FIG. 2. FIG. 2 shows the same simplified configuration of connecting the LAN 10 to the Internet 12 via the router 20. However, in FIG. 2, the router 20 is also connected to a capture system 22. In one embodiment, the router 20 splits the outgoing data stream, and forwards one copy to the Internet 12 and the other copy to the capture system 22.


There are various other possible configurations. For example, the router 12 can also forward a copy of all incoming data to the capture system 22 as well. Furthermore, the capture system 22 can be configured sequentially in front of, or behind the router 20, however this makes the capture system 22 a critical component in connecting to the Internet 12. In systems where a router 20 is not used at all, the capture system can be interposed directly between the LAN 10 and the Internet 12. In one embodiment, the capture system 22 has a user interface accessible from a LAN-attached device, such as a client 16.


In one embodiment, the capture system 22 intercepts all data leaving the network. In other embodiments, the capture system can also intercept all data being communicated inside the network 10. In one embodiment, the capture system 22 reconstructs the documents leaving the network 10, and stores them in a searchable fashion. The capture system 22 can then be used to search and sort through all documents that have left the network 10. There are many reasons such documents may be of interest, including network security reasons, intellectual property concerns, corporate governance regulations, and other corporate policy concerns.


Capture System


One embodiment of the present invention is now described with reference to FIG. 3. FIG. 3 shows one embodiment of the capture system 22 in more detail. The capture system 22 is also sometimes referred to as a content analyzer, content or data analysis system, and other similar names. In one embodiment, the capture system 22 includes a network interface module 24 to receive the data from the network 10 or the router 20. In one embodiment, the network interface module 24 is implemented using one or more network interface cards (NIC), e.g., Ethernet cards. In one embodiment, the router 20 delivers all data leaving the network to the network interface module 24.


The captured raw data is then passed to a packet capture module 26. In one embodiment, the packet capture module 26 extracts data packets from the data stream received from the network interface module 24. In one embodiment, the packet capture module 26 reconstructs Ethernet packets from multiple sources to multiple destinations for the raw data stream.


In one embodiment, the packets are then provided the object assembly module 28. The object assembly module 28 reconstructs the objects being transmitted by the packets. For example, when a document is transmitted, e.g. as an email attachment, it is broken down into packets according to various data transfer protocols such as Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) and Ethernet. The object assembly module 28 can reconstruct the document from the captured packets.


One embodiment of the object assembly module 28 is now described in more detail with reference to FIG. 4. When packets first enter the object assembly module, they are first provided to a reassembler 36. In one embodiment, the reassembler 36 groups—assembles—the packets into unique flows. For example, a flow can be defined as packets with identical Source IP and Destination IP addresses as well as identical TCP Source and Destination Ports. That is, the reassembler 36 can organize a packet stream by sender and recipient.


In one embodiment, the reassembler 36 begins a new flow upon the observation of a starting packet defined by the data transfer protocol. For a TCP/IP embodiment, the starting packet is generally referred to as the “SYN” packet. The flow can terminate upon observation of a finishing packet, e.g., a “Reset” or “FIN” packet in TCP/IP. If no finishing packet is observed by the reassembler 36 within some time constraint, it can terminate the flow via a timeout mechanism. In an embodiment using the TPC protocol, a TCP flow contains an ordered sequence of packets that can be assembled into a contiguous data stream by the reassembler 36. Thus, in one embodiment, a flow is an ordered data stream of a single communication between a source and a destination.


The flow assembled by the reassembler 36 can then be provided to a protocol demultiplexer (demux) 38. In one embodiment, the protocol demux 38 sorts assembled flows using the TCP Ports. This can include performing a speculative classification of the flow contents based on the association of well-known port numbers with specified protocols. For example, Web Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (HTTP) packets—i.e., Web traffic—are typically associated with port 80, File Transfer Protocol (FTP) packets with port 20, Kerberos authentication packets with port 88, and so on. Thus in one embodiment, the protocol demux 38 separates all the different protocols in one flow.


In one embodiment, a protocol classifier 40 also sorts the flows in addition to the protocol demux 38. In one embodiment, the protocol classifier 40—operating either in parallel or in sequence with the protocol demux 38—applies signature filters to the flows to attempt to identify the protocol based solely on the transported data. Furthermore, the protocol demux 38 can make a classification decision based on port number which is subsequently overridden by protocol classifier 40. For example, if an individual or program attempted to masquerade an illicit communication (such as file sharing) using an apparently benign port such as port 80 (commonly used for HTTP Web browsing), the protocol classifier 40 would use protocol signatures, i.e., the characteristic data sequences of defined protocols, to verify the speculative classification performed by protocol demux 38.


In one embodiment, the object assembly module 28 outputs each flow organized by protocol, which represent the underlying objects. Referring again to FIG. 3, these objects can then be handed over to the object classification module 30 (sometimes also referred to as the “content classifier”) for classification based on content. A classified flow may still contain multiple content objects depending on the protocol used. For example, protocols such as HTTP (Internet Web Surfing) may contain over 100 objects of any number of content types in a single flow. To deconstruct the flow, each object contained in the flow is individually extracted, and decoded, if necessary, by the object classification module 30.


The object classification module 30 uses the inherent properties and signatures of various documents to determine the content type of each object. For example, a Word document has a signature that is distinct from a PowerPoint document, or an Email document. The object classification module 30 can extract out each individual object and sort them out by such content types. Such classification renders the present invention immune from cases where a malicious user has altered a file extension or other property in an attempt to avoid detection of illicit activity.


In one embodiment, the object classification module 30 determines whether each object should be stored or discarded. In one embodiment, this determination is based on a various capture rules. For example, a capture rule can indicate that Web Traffic should be discarded. Another capture rule can indicate that all PowerPoint documents should be stored, except for ones originating from the CEO's IP address. Such capture rules can be implemented as regular expressions, or by other similar means.


In one embodiment, the capture rules are authored by users of the capture system 22. The capture system 22 is made accessible to any network-connected machine through the network interface module 24 and user interface 34. In one embodiment, the user interface 34 is a graphical user interface providing the user with friendly access to the various features of the capture system 22. For example, the user interface 34 can provide a capture rule authoring tool that allows users to write and implement any capture rule desired, which are then applied by the object classification module 30 when determining whether each object should be stored. The user interface 34 can also provide pre-configured capture rules that the user can select from along with an explanation of the operation of such standard included capture rules. In one embodiment, the default capture rule implemented by the object classification module 30 captures all objects leaving the network 10.


If the capture of an object is mandated by the capture rules, the object classification module 30 can also determine where in the object store module 32 the captured object should be stored. With reference to FIG. 5, in one embodiment, the objects are stored in a content store 44 memory block. Within the content store 44 are files 46 divided up by content type. Thus, for example, if the object classification module determines that an object is a Word document that should be stored, it can store it in the file 46 reserved for Word documents. In one embodiment, the object store module 32 is integrally included in the capture system 22. In other embodiments, the object store module can be external—entirely or in part—using, for example, some network storage technique such as network attached storage (NAS) and storage area network (SAN).


In one embodiment, the content store is a canonical storage location, simply a place to deposit the captured objects. The indexing of the objects stored in the content store 44 is accomplished using a tag database 42. In one embodiment, the tag database 42 is a database data structure in which each record is a “tag” that indexes an object in the content store 44, and contains relevant information about the stored object. An example of a tag record in the tag database 42 that indexes an object stored in the content store 44 is set forth in Table 1:










TABLE 1





Field Name
Definition







MAC Address
Ethernet controller MAC address unique to each



capture system


Source IP
Source Ethernet IP Address of object


Destination IP
Destination Ethernet IP Address of object


Source Port
Source TCP/IP Port number of object


Destination Port
Destination TCP/IP Port number of the object


Protocol
IP Protocol that carried the object


Instance
Canonical count identifying object within a protocol



capable of carrying multiple data within a single TCP/



IP connection


Content
Content type of the object


Encoding
Encoding used by the protocol carrying object


Size
Size of object


Timestamp
Time that the object was captured


Owner
User requesting the capture of object (rule author)


Configuration
Capture rule directing the capture of object


Signature
Hash signature of object


Tag Signature
Hash signature of all preceding tag fields









There are various other possible tag fields, and some embodiments can omit numerous tag fields listed in Table 1. In other embodiments, the tag database 42 need not be implemented as a database; other data structures can be used. The mapping of tags to objects can, in one embodiment, be obtained by using unique combinations of tag fields to construct an object's name. For example, one such possible combination is an ordered list of the Source IP, Destination IP, Source Port, Destination Port, Instance and Timestamp. Many other such combinations including both shorter and longer names are possible. In another embodiment, the tag can contain a pointer to the storage location where the indexed object is stored.


Referring again to FIG. 3, in one embodiment, the objects and tags stored in the object store module 32 can be interactively queried by a user via the user interface 34. In one embodiment the user interface can interact with a web server (not shown) to provide the user with Web-based access to the capture system 22. The objects in the content store module 32 can thus be searched for specific textual or graphical content using exact matches, patterns, keywords, and various other advanced attributes.


For example, the user interface 34 can provide a query-authoring tool (not shown) to enable users to create complex searches of the object store module 32. These search queries can be provided to a data mining engine (not shown) that parses the queries, scans the tag database 42, and retrieves the found object from the content store 44. Then, these objects that matched the specific search criteria in the user-authored query can be counted and displayed to the user by the user interface 34.


Searches can also be scheduled to occur at specific times or at regular intervals, that is, the user interface 34 can provide access to a scheduler (not shown) that can periodically execute specific queries. Reports containing the results of these searches can be made available to the user at a later time, mailed to the administrator electronically, or used to generate an alarm in the form of an e-mail message, page, syslog or other notification format.


In several embodiments, the capture system 22 has been described above as a stand-alone device. However, the capture system of the present invention can be implemented on any appliance capable of capturing and analyzing data from a network. For example, the capture system 22 described above could be implemented on one or more of the servers 14 or clients 16 shown in FIG. 1. The capture system 22 can interface with the network 10 in any number of ways, including wirelessly.


In one embodiment, the capture system 22 is an appliance constructed using commonly available computing equipment and storage systems capable of supporting the software requirements. In one embodiment, illustrated by FIG. 6, the hardware consists of a capture entity 46, a processing complex 48 made up of one or more processors, a memory complex 50 made up of one or more memory elements such as RAM and ROM, and storage complex 52, such as a set of one or more hard drives or other digital or analog storage means. In another embodiment, the storage complex 52 is external to the capture system 22, as explained above. In one embodiment, the memory complex stored software consisting of an operating system for the capture system device 22, a capture program, and classification program, a database, a filestore, an analysis engine and a graphical user interface.


Document Registration


The capture system 22 described above can also be used to implement a document registration scheme. In one embodiment, the a user can register a document with the system 22, which can then alert the user if all or part of the content in the registered document is leaving the network. Thus, one embodiment of the present invention aims to prevent un-authorized documents of various formats (e.g., Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, source code of any kind, text) from leaving an enterprise. There are great benefits to any enterprise that can keep its intellectual property, or other critical, confidential, or otherwise private and proprietary content from being mishandled.


In one embodiment of the present invention, sensitive documents are registered with the capture system 22, although data registration can be implemented using a separate device in other embodiments. One embodiment of implementing registration capability in the capture system 22 is now described with reference to FIG. 7. For descriptive purposes, the capture system 22 is renamed the capture/registration system 22 in FIG. 7, and is also sometimes referred to as the registration system 22 in the description herein. The capture/registration system 22 has components similar or identical to the capture system 22 shown in FIG. 3, including the network interface module 24, the object store module 32, the user interface 34, and the packet capture 26, object assembly 28, and object classification 30 modules, which are grouped together as object capture modules 31 in FIG. 7.


In one embodiment, the capture/registration system 22 also includes a registration module 54 interacting with a signature database 56 to facilitate a registration scheme. In one embodiment, the user can register a document via the user interface 34. There are numerous ways to register documents. For example, a document can be electrically mailed (e-mailed), or uploaded to the registration system 22. The registration system 22 can also periodically scan a file server (registration server) for documents to be registered. The registration process can be integrated with the enterprise's document management systems. Document registration can also be automated and transparent based on registration rules, such as “register all documents,” or “register all documents by specific author or IP address,” and so on.


After being received, in one embodiment, a document to be registered is passed to the registration module 54. The registration module 54 calculates a signature of the document, or a set of signatures. The set of signatures associated with the document can be calculated in various ways. For example, the signatures can be made up of hashes over various portions of the document, such as selected or all pages, paragraphs, tables and sentences. Other possible signatures include, but are not limited to, hashes over embedded content, indices, headers or footers, formatting information or font utilization. The signatures can also include computations and met-data other than hash digests, such as Word Relative Frequency Methods (RFM)—Statistical, Karp-Rabin Greedy-String-Tiling-Transposition, vector space models, and diagrammatic structure analysis.


The set of signatures is then stored in the signature database 56. The signature database 56 need not be implemented as a database; the signatures can be maintained using any appropriate data structure. In one embodiment, the signature database 56 is part of the storage complex 52 in FIG. 6.


In one embodiment, the registered document is also stored as an object in the object store module 32. In one embodiment, the document is only stored in the content store 44 with no associated tag, since many tag fields do not apply to registered documents. In one embodiment, one file of files 46 is a “Registered Documents” file.


In one embodiment, the document received from the user is now registered. As set forth above, in one embodiment, the object capture modules 31 continue to extract objects leaving the network, and store various objects based on capture rules. In one embodiment, all extracted objects—whether subject to a capture rule or not—are also passed to the registration module for a determination whether each object is, or includes part of, a registered document.


In one embodiment, the registration module 54 calculates the set of signatures of an object received from the object capture modules 31 in the same manner as of a document received from the user interface 34 to be registered. This set of signatures is then compared against all signatures in the signature database 56. In other embodiment, parts of the signature database can be excluded from this search to save time.


In one embodiment, an unauthorized transmission is detected if any one or more signatures in the set of signatures of an extracted object matches one or more signature in the signature database 56 associated with a registered document. Other detection tolerances can be configured for different embodiment, e.g., at least two signatures must match. Also, special rules can be implemented that make the transmission authorized, e.g., if the source address is authorized to transmit any documents off the network.


One embodiment of the registration module 54 is now described with reference to FIG. 8. As discussed above, a document to be registered 68 arrives via the user interface 34. The registration engine 58 generates signatures 60 for the document 68 and forwards the document 68 to the content store 44 and the signatures 60 to the signature database 54. The signatures 60 are associated with the document, e.g., by including a pointer to the document 68, or to some attribute from which the document 68 can be identified.


A captured object 70 arrives via the object capture modules 31. The registration engine calculates the signatures 62 of the captured object, and forwards them to the search engine 64. The search engine 64 queries the signature database 54 to compare the signatures 62 to the signatures stored in the signature database 54. Assuming for the purposes of illustration, that the captured object 70 is a Word document that contains a pasted paragraph from registered PowerPoint document 68, at least one signature of signatures 62 will match a signature of signatures 60. Such an event can be referred to as the detection of an unauthorized transfer, a registered content transfer, or other similarly descriptive terms.


In one embodiment, when a registered content transfer is detected, the transmission can be halted with or without warning to the sender. In one embodiment, in the event of a detected registered content transfer, the search engine 64 activates the notification module 66, which sends an alert 72 to the user via the user interface 34. In one embodiment, the notification module 66 sends different alerts—including different user options—based on the user preference associated with the registration, and the capabilities of the registration system 22.


In one embodiment, the alert 72 can simply indicate that the registered content, i.e., the captured object 70, has been transferred off the network. In addition, the alert 72 can provide information regarding the transfer, such as source IP, destination IP, any other information contained in the tag of the captured object, or some other derived information, such as the name of the person who transferred the document off the network. The alert 72 can be provided to one or more users via e-mail, instant message (IM), page, or any other notification method. In one embodiment, the alert 72 is only sent to the entity or user who requested registration of the document 68.


In another embodiment, the delivery of the captured object 70 is halted—the transfer is not completed—unless the user who registered the document 68 consents. In such an embodiment, the alert 72 can contain all information described above, and in addition, contain a selection mechanism, such as one or two buttons—to allow the user to indicate whether the transfer of the captured object 70 may be completed. If the user elects to allow the transfer, for example because he is aware that someone is emailing a part of a registered document 68 (e.g., a boss asking his secretary to send an email), the transfer is executed and the object 70 is allowed to leave the network.


If the user disallows the transfer, the captured object 70 is not allowed off the network, and delivery is permanently halted. In one embodiment, halting delivery can be accomplished by implementing an intercept technique by having the registration system 22 proxy the connection between the network and the outside. In other embodiments, delivery can be halted using a black hole technique—discarding the packets without notice if the transfer is disallowed—or a poison technique—inserting additional packets onto the network to cause the sender's connection to fail.



FIG. 9 provides a flow chart to further illustrate object capture/intercept processing according to one embodiment of the present invention. All blocks of FIG. 9 have already been discussed herein. The example object capture processing shown in FIG. 9 assumes that various documents have already been registered with the registration system 22. The process shown in FIG. 9 can be repeated for all objects captured by the system 22.


Document De-Registration and Signature Database Maintenance


In one embodiment, documents can also be de-registered when their content is no longer considered worthy of registration by a user. Various other signature database 54 maintenance processes can be implemented. Referring again to FIG. 8, in one embodiment, the registration engine 58 is also used to de-register documents. De-registration can be performed similarly to registration and interception, with the end result being the removal, as opposed to the addition of, the signatures generated.


Thus, in one embodiment, when the registration engine 58 receives a document to be de-registered it generates a set of signatures associated with the document, and provides these signatures to the search engine 64. The search engine 64 identifies the signatures in the signature database 54 that match any of the signatures associated with the document to be de-registered. Then, these matching signatures are removed from the signature database, resulting in the de-registration of the document. A simplified flowchart illustrating such an embodiment is provided in FIG. 10. The next time the document is intercepted, none of its signatures will match any in the database.


Document de-registration can also be performed, in one embodiment, using the name of the document the user wishes to de-register. As explained above, the name of a document or object can be constructed to be unique in a number of ways, such as combining several tag fields. Since the signatures in the signature database 54 are associated with documents in the object store module 32, the set of signatures associated with a uniquely identified document are readily ascertainable. Thus, in one embodiment, the user can provide a name of a document to be de-registered via the user interface 34, in response to which all signatures associated with that document are removed from the signature database 54.


Document de-registration can be automated. In one embodiment, the registration rules also include temporal registration parameters. Thus, certain documents only stay registered for some period of time after which they become automatically de-registered by any of the de-registration procedures described herein. Other such de-registration rules can be authored and implemented by the system.


In one embodiment, aspects of signature database 54 maintenance are also automated. One embodiment of automated database maintenance is now described with reference to FIG. 11. In block 1110, the signature detection rate is observed for each signature. In one embodiment, the signature detection rate signifies how often a signature is detected in captured objects. It can be implemented as a canonical count, as some number of occurrences during specified periods of time, a percentage of captured objects that triggers the signature, or some other rate of occurrence indicator.


In block 1120, a signature—or set of signatures—with a high rate of detection is identified. This can be done by observing that the detection rate of some signatures exceeds a configurable rate threshold. For example, it is observed that a signature is found in 50 percent of all captured objects, and the rate threshold is 10 percent. This signature would be identified as a high-rate signature. Finally, in block 1130, the identified high-rate signatures are removed from the signature database.


In one embodiment, database maintenance is further automated by periodic examination of the source data resulting in the signatures. For example, a signature may result from source data contained in the registered document that is irrelevant text (e.g., copyright notice), unparsable text, or text contained on a signature blacklist identifying text that should not generate signatures.


For example, the signature blacklist may contain specific words, phrases, or set of words that are known to result in unusable signatures (e.g., high-rate signatures). Similarly, a whitelist is maintained, in one embodiment, containing text that should be used for signatures. For example, if a signature resulted from source data contained in the whitelist, it may not be removed for other reasons, such as being a high-rate signature.


In one embodiment, maintaining the signature database 54 includes periodically eliminating redundant signatures from the database 54. Redundant signatures are identical, but are associated with different registered documents. For example, if a registration rule registers all source code files, then the comment header will result in an identical signature (based on the identical comment header) being associated with all these registered documents.


One problem that can arise from such a situation, is that when a source code file is intercepted, one signature (based on the comment header) will match a great number of signatures associated with different registered documents. In one embodiment, this is solved by removing redundant signatures from the database 54. In one embodiment, redundant signatures are defined as a set of identical signatures common to more than a threshold number of registered documents. For example, if more than five registered documents have an associated identical signature, then all of these redundant signatures are removed from the database 54.


In one embodiment, signatures stored in the signature database 54 are accessible via the user interface 34. Thus, a user can individually select and remove signatures from the database 34. For example, if a user observes that a signature is generating too many false-positives (noticing irrelevant registered content), then the user can remove that signature from the database 34. An illustration of removing redundant signatures is provided in the form of a simplified flowchart in FIG. 12.


Thus, a capture system and a document/content registration system have been described. In the forgoing description, various specific values were given names, such as “objects,” and various specific modules, such as the “registration module” and “signature database” have been described. However, these names are merely to describe and illustrate various aspects of the present invention, and in no way limit the scope of the present invention. Furthermore, various modules, such as the search engine 64 and the notification module 66 in FIG. 8, can be implemented as software or hardware modules, or without dividing their functionalities into modules at all. The present invention is not limited to any modular architecture either in software or in hardware, whether described above or not.

Claims
  • 1. A method to be performed in an electronic environment in which network communications occur involving packets and at least one processor and a memory element, comprising: monitoring security of a plurality of registered digital documents in a system, the monitoring including determining whether signatures associated with the registered digital documents are included in data propagating in network traffic of the system, wherein the signatures of the registered documents are maintained in a signature database, each signature being associated with at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents, and respective signatures are removed from the database upon determining that respective signatures are detected within the network traffic at a rate in excess of a threshold detection rate designated as a threshold percentage of all data objects detected in the network traffic;receiving a particular document, in the plurality of the registered digital documents, to be de-registered in response to an expiration of a time interval associated with an initial registration of the particular document;calculating a set of signatures associated with the received particular document;identifying, in the signatures stored in the signature database, at least one signature included in the set of calculated signatures; andremoving from the signature database the at least one identified signature included in the set of calculated signatures associated with the particular document, wherein data in the network traffic detected to include a signature of a registered document is intercepted and data in the network traffic determined to not include a signature of a registered document is allowed to propagate unintercepted to its intended destination.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the document to be de-registered has exceeded a temporal registration threshold for the document.
  • 3. A method to be performed in an electronic environment in which network communications occur involving packets and at least one processor and a memory element, comprising: monitoring security of a plurality of registered digital documents in a system using a capture system, the monitoring including determining whether signatures associated with the registered digital documents are included in data propagating in network traffic of the system, wherein the signatures of the registered documents are maintained in a signature database, each signature being associated with at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents, and respective signatures are removed from the database upon determining that respective signatures are detected within the network traffic at a rate in excess of a threshold detection rate designated as a threshold percentage of all data objects detected in the network traffic;receiving a request to de-register an identified document from the plurality of registered digital documents in response to an expiration of a time interval associated with an initial registration of the identified document; andde-registering the identified document by removing all signatures associated with the identified document from the signature database, wherein the capture system that maintains the stored signatures is configured to allow a received document to be forwarded from the capture system to its intended destination at a network node unless a capture rule prohibits forwarding the received document based on the detection of one or more of the signatures of the registered documents included in the received document.
  • 4. The method of claim 3, wherein the request identifies the identified document by a unique name.
  • 5. The method of claim 3, further comprising determining that the identified document exceeds a temporal registration threshold.
  • 6. A method to be performed in an electronic environment in which network communications occur involving packets and at least one processor and a memory element, comprising: monitoring security of a plurality of registered digital documents in a system, the monitoring including determining whether signatures associated with the registered digital documents are included in data propagating in network traffic of the system, wherein the signatures of the registered documents are maintained in a signature database, each signature being associated with at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents, wherein respective signatures are removed from the database after determining that the respective signatures are detected within the network traffic at a rate in excess of a threshold detection rate, which is designated as a threshold percentage of data objects detected in the network traffic;identifying at least one redundant signature maintained in the signature database, wherein a redundant signature is a signature shared by multiple different digital documents in the plurality of registered digital documents; andremoving the at least one redundant signature from the signatures maintained in the signature database;identifying a particular document in the plurality of digital documents that is to be deregistered; andde-registering the particular document by removing all signatures associated with the particular document from the signature database;wherein registered data that is detected as including a signature of at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents is intercepted prior to its intended destination and data that is detected as not including a signature of at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents is allowed to be forwarded to its intended destination at a network node.
  • 7. The method of claim 6, wherein identifying the set of redundant signatures comprises identifying a plurality of identical signatures.
  • 8. The method of claim 6, wherein identifying the set of redundant signatures comprises identifying a threshold number of identical signatures associated with a threshold number of different registered documents.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the threshold detection rate of the particular signature further includes a number of times the particular signature is generated from data objects detected in the network traffic during a time window.
  • 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the threshold detection rate of the particular signature further includes a rate of signature appearance per day.
  • 11. A method to be performed in an electronic environment in which network communications occur involving packets and at least one processor and a memory element, comprising: providing a database of stored signatures, each signature being associated with one of a plurality of registered documents, wherein a particular signature is removed from the signature database based on identifying that the particular signature was detected within network traffic of a particular network in excess of a threshold detection rate designated as a threshold percentage of all data objects detected in the network traffic;monitoring security of the plurality of registered documents, the monitoring including identifying attempts to forward registered documents to nodes outside of the particular network by identifying data propagating within the particular network that includes one or more signatures maintained in the signature database and associated with the plurality of registered documents;receiving a selected document, included in the plurality of registered documents, that is to be de-registered in response to an expiration of a time interval associated with an initial registration of the selected document; andde-registering the selected document by removing all signatures associated with the selected document from the signature database;wherein data propagating within the particular network that is detected as not including a signature of at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents is allowed to be forwarded outside of the particular network.
  • 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the set of signatures comprises signatures generated from unparsable source text.
  • 13. The method of claim 11, wherein the set of signatures comprises signatures generated from source text appearing on a signature blacklist.
  • 14. A non-transitory machine-readable medium storing data representing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising: monitoring security of a plurality of registered digital documents in a system, the monitoring including determining whether signatures associated with the registered digital documents are included in data propagating in network traffic of the system, wherein the signatures of the registered documents are maintained in a signature database, each signature being associated with at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents, and respective signatures are removed from the database upon determining that respective signatures are detected within the network traffic at a rate in excess of a threshold detection rate designated as a threshold percentage of all data objects detected in the network traffic;receiving a particular document, in the plurality of the registered digital documents, to be de-registered in response to an expiration of a time interval associated with an initial registration of the particular document;calculating a set of signatures associated with the received particular document;identifying, in the signatures stored in the signature database, at least one signature included in the set of calculated signatures; andremoving from the signature database the at least one identified signature included in the set of calculated signatures associated with the particular document, wherein data in the network traffic detected to include a signature of a registered document is intercepted and data in the network traffic determined to not include a signature of a registered document is allowed to propagate unintercepted to its intended destination.
  • 15. The machine-readable medium of claim 14, wherein the document to be de-registered has exceeded a temporal registration threshold for the document.
  • 16. A non-transitory machine-readable medium storing data representing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising: monitoring security of a plurality of registered digital documents in a system using a capture system, the monitoring including determining whether signatures associated with the registered digital documents are included in data propagating in network traffic of the system, wherein the signatures of the registered documents are maintained in a signature database, each signature being associated with at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents, and respective signatures are removed from the database upon determining that respective signatures are detected within the network traffic at a rate in excess of a threshold detection rate designated as a threshold percentage of all data objects detected in the network traffic;receiving a request to de-register an identified document from the plurality of registered digital documents in response to an expiration of a time interval associated with an initial registration of the identified document;de-registering the identified document by removing all signatures associated with the identified document from the signature database; andallowing an attempt to forward the identified document to a particular network destination subsequent to the de-registering of the identified document, wherein the detection of one or more of the signatures of the registered documents in particular data propagating in network traffic prompts interception of the particular data.
  • 17. The machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the request identifies the identified document by a unique name.
  • 18. The machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the instructions further cause the processor to determine that the identified document exceeds a temporal registration threshold.
  • 19. A non-transitory machine-readable medium storing data representing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising: monitoring security of a plurality of registered digital documents in a system, the monitoring including determining whether signatures associated with the registered digital documents are included in data propagating in network traffic of the system, wherein the signatures of the registered documents are maintained in a signature database, each signature being associated with at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents, wherein respective signatures are removed from the database after determining that the respective signatures are detected within the network traffic at a rate in excess of a threshold detection rate, which is designated as a threshold percentage of data objects detected in the network traffic;identifying at least one redundant signature maintained in the signature database, wherein a redundant signature is a signature shared by multiple different digital documents in the plurality of registered digital documents; andremoving the at least one redundant signature from the signatures maintained in the signature database;identifying a particular document in the plurality of digital documents that is to be deregistered; andde-registering the particular document by removing all signatures associated with the particular document from the signature database;wherein registered data that is detected as including a signature of at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents is intercepted prior to its intended destination and data that is detected as not including a signature of at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents is allowed to be forwarded to its intended destination at a network node.
  • 20. The machine-readable medium of claim 19, wherein identifying the set of redundant signatures comprises identifying a plurality of identical signatures.
  • 21. The machine-readable medium of claim 19, wherein identifying the set of redundant signatures comprises identifying a threshold number of identical signatures associated with a threshold number of different registered documents.
  • 22. The machine-readable medium of claim 14, wherein the threshold detection rate of the particular signature further includes a number of times the particular signature is generated from data objects detected in the network traffic during a time window.
  • 23. The machine-readable medium of claim 22, wherein the threshold detection rate of the particular signature further includes a rate of signature appearance per day.
  • 24. A non-transitory machine-readable medium storing data representing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising: providing a database of stored signatures, each signature being associated with one of a plurality of registered documents, wherein a particular signature is removed from the signature database based on identifying that the particular signature was detected within network traffic of a particular network in excess of a threshold detection rate designated as a threshold percentage of all data objects detected in the network traffic;monitoring security of the plurality of registered documents, the monitoring including identifying attempts to forward registered documents to nodes outside of the particular network by identifying data propagating within the particular network that includes one or more signatures maintained in the signature database and associated with the plurality of registered documents;receiving a selected document, included in the plurality of registered documents, that is to be de-registered in response to an expiration of a time interval associated with an initial registration of the selected document; andde-registering the selected document by removing all signatures associated with the selected document from the signature database;wherein data propagating within the particular network that is detected as not including a signature of at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents is allowed to be forwarded outside of the particular network.
  • 25. The machine-readable medium of claim 24, wherein the set of signatures comprises signatures generated from unparsable source text.
  • 26. The machine-readable medium of claim 24, wherein the set of signatures comprises signatures generated from source text appearing on a signature blacklist.
  • 27. An apparatus to be used in an electronic environment in which network communications occur involving packets and at least one processor and a memory element, comprising: a network interface module to connect the apparatus to a network;a storage medium including a signature database storing a plurality of signatures, each signature being associated with one of a plurality of registered digital documents, wherein a particular signature is removed from the signature database based on identifying that a detection rate, which reflects how often the particular signature is detected in particular captured objects propagating in network traffic, exceeds and over inclusive signatures are removed from the signature database upon determining that respective signatures are detected within the network traffic at a rate in excess of a threshold detection rate designated as a threshold percentage of all data objects detected in the network traffic;a user interface to receive a particular digital document to be de-registered in response to an expiration of a time interval associated with an initial registration of the particular document; anda registration module comprising: a registration engine to generate a set of signatures associated with the received particular document, anda search engine to identify signatures in the signature database matching any of the signatures in the set of signatures associated with the received particular document,wherein the registration module is configured to remove the signatures matching any of the signatures in the set of signatures associated with the received particular document form the signature database;wherein data in the network traffic detected to include at least one of the plurality of signatures associated with at least one registered document is intercepted and data in the network traffic determined to not include at least one of the plurality of signatures is allowed to propagate unintercepted to its intended destination.
  • 28. The apparatus of claim 27, wherein the threshold detection rate of the particular signature further includes a number of times the particular signature is generated from data objects detected in the network traffic during a time window.
  • 29. The apparatus of claim 28, wherein the threshold detection rate of the particular signature further includes a rate of signature appearance per day.
  • 30. An apparatus to be used in an electronic environment in which network communications occur involving packets and at least one processor and a memory element, comprising: a storage medium including a signature database to store a plurality of signatures, each signature being associated with one of a plurality of registered documents, wherein a particular signature is removed from the signature database based on identifying that the particular signature was detected within network traffic of a particular network in excess of a threshold detection rate designated as a threshold percentage of all data objects detected in the network traffic;a security monitor to monitor security of the plurality of registered documents, the monitoring including identifying attempts to forward registered documents to nodes outside of the particular network by identifying data propagating within the particular network that includes one or more signatures maintained in the signature database and associated with the plurality of registered documents; anda registration module to maintain the signature database by removing a set of signatures from the database based on identification of a selected document to be de-registered in response to an expiration of a time interval associated with an initial registration of the selected document, and wherein data propagating within the particular network that is detected as not including a signature of at least one of the plurality of registered digital documents is allowed to be forwarded outside of the particular network.
  • 31. The apparatus of claim 30, wherein the set of signatures comprises signatures generated from unparsable source text.
  • 32. The apparatus of claim 30, wherein the set of signatures comprises signatures generated from source text appearing on a signature blacklist.
PRIORITY AND RELATED APPLICATIONS

This patent application is related to, incorporates by reference, and claims the priority benefit of U.S. Provisional Application 60/528,631, entitled “DOCUMENT REGISTRATION”, filed Dec. 10, 2003.

US Referenced Citations (373)
Number Name Date Kind
4286255 Siy Aug 1981 A
4710957 Bocci et al. Dec 1987 A
5249289 Thamm et al. Sep 1993 A
5465299 Matsumoto et al. Nov 1995 A
5479654 Squibb Dec 1995 A
5497489 Menne Mar 1996 A
5542090 Henderson et al. Jul 1996 A
5557747 Rogers et al. Sep 1996 A
5623652 Vora et al. Apr 1997 A
5768578 Kirk Jun 1998 A
5781629 Haber et al. Jul 1998 A
5787232 Greiner et al. Jul 1998 A
5794052 Harding Aug 1998 A
5813009 Johnson et al. Sep 1998 A
5873081 Harel Feb 1999 A
5937422 Nelson et al. Aug 1999 A
5943670 Prager Aug 1999 A
5987610 Franczek et al. Nov 1999 A
5995111 Morioka et al. Nov 1999 A
6026411 Delp Feb 2000 A
6073142 Geiger et al. Jun 2000 A
6078953 Vaid et al. Jun 2000 A
6094531 Allison et al. Jul 2000 A
6108697 Raymond et al. Aug 2000 A
6122379 Barbir Sep 2000 A
6161102 Yanagihara et al. Dec 2000 A
6175867 Taghadoss Jan 2001 B1
6192472 Garay et al. Feb 2001 B1
6243091 Berstis Jun 2001 B1
6243720 Munter et al. Jun 2001 B1
6278992 Curtis et al. Aug 2001 B1
6292810 Richards Sep 2001 B1
6336186 Dyksterhouse et al. Jan 2002 B1
6343376 Saxe et al. Jan 2002 B1
6356885 Ross et al. Mar 2002 B2
6363488 Ginter et al. Mar 2002 B1
6389405 Oatman et al. May 2002 B1
6389419 Wong et al. May 2002 B1
6408294 Getchius et al. Jun 2002 B1
6408301 Patton et al. Jun 2002 B1
6411952 Bhrat et al. Jun 2002 B1
6457017 Watkins et al. Sep 2002 B2
6460050 Pace et al. Oct 2002 B1
6493761 Baker et al. Dec 2002 B1
6499105 Yoshiura et al. Dec 2002 B1
6502091 Chundi et al. Dec 2002 B1
6515681 Knight Feb 2003 B1
6516320 Odom et al. Feb 2003 B1
6523026 Gillis Feb 2003 B1
6556964 Haug et al. Apr 2003 B2
6556983 Altschuler et al. Apr 2003 B1
6571275 Dong et al. May 2003 B1
6584458 Millett et al. Jun 2003 B1
6598033 Ross et al. Jul 2003 B2
6629097 Keith Sep 2003 B1
6662176 Brunet et al. Dec 2003 B2
6665662 Kirkwood et al. Dec 2003 B1
6675159 Lin et al. Jan 2004 B1
6691209 O'Connell Feb 2004 B1
6754647 Tackett et al. Jun 2004 B1
6757646 Marchisio Jun 2004 B2
6771595 Gilbert et al. Aug 2004 B1
6772214 McClain et al. Aug 2004 B1
6785815 Serret-Avila et al. Aug 2004 B1
6804627 Marokhovsky et al. Oct 2004 B1
6820082 Cook et al. Nov 2004 B1
6857011 Reinke Feb 2005 B2
6937257 Dunlavey Aug 2005 B1
6950864 Tsuchiya Sep 2005 B1
6976053 Tripp et al. Dec 2005 B1
6978297 Piersol Dec 2005 B1
6978367 Hind et al. Dec 2005 B1
7007020 Chen et al. Feb 2006 B1
7020654 Najmi Mar 2006 B1
7020661 Cruanes et al. Mar 2006 B1
7062572 Hampton Jun 2006 B1
7072967 Saulpaugh et al. Jul 2006 B1
7082443 Ashby Jul 2006 B1
7093288 Hydrie et al. Aug 2006 B1
7158983 Willse et al. Jan 2007 B2
7185073 Gai et al. Feb 2007 B1
7185192 Kahn Feb 2007 B1
7194483 Mohan et al. Mar 2007 B1
7219131 Banister et al. May 2007 B2
7243120 Massey Jul 2007 B2
7246236 Stirbu Jul 2007 B2
7254562 Hsu et al. Aug 2007 B2
7254632 Zeira et al. Aug 2007 B2
7266845 Hypponen Sep 2007 B2
7272724 Tarbotton et al. Sep 2007 B2
7277957 Rowley et al. Oct 2007 B2
7290048 Barnett et al. Oct 2007 B1
7293067 Maki et al. Nov 2007 B1
7293238 Brook et al. Nov 2007 B1
7296011 Chaudhuri et al. Nov 2007 B2
7296070 Sweeney et al. Nov 2007 B2
7296088 Padmanabhan et al. Nov 2007 B1
7296232 Burdick et al. Nov 2007 B1
7299277 Moran et al. Nov 2007 B1
7373500 Ramelson et al. May 2008 B2
7424744 Wu et al. Sep 2008 B1
7426181 Feroz et al. Sep 2008 B1
7434058 Ahuja et al. Oct 2008 B2
7467202 Savchuk Dec 2008 B2
7477780 Boncyk et al. Jan 2009 B2
7483916 Lowe et al. Jan 2009 B2
7493659 Wu et al. Feb 2009 B1
7505463 Schuba et al. Mar 2009 B2
7506055 McClain et al. Mar 2009 B2
7506155 Stewart et al. Mar 2009 B1
7509677 Saurabh et al. Mar 2009 B2
7516492 Nisbet et al. Apr 2009 B1
7539683 Satoh et al. May 2009 B1
7551629 Chen et al. Jun 2009 B2
7577154 Yung et al. Aug 2009 B1
7581059 Gupta et al. Aug 2009 B2
7596571 Sifry Sep 2009 B2
7599844 King et al. Oct 2009 B2
7664083 Cermak et al. Feb 2010 B1
7685254 Pandya Mar 2010 B2
7730011 Deninger et al. Jun 2010 B1
7739080 Beck et al. Jun 2010 B1
7760730 Goldschmidt et al. Jul 2010 B2
7760769 Lovett et al. Jul 2010 B1
7774604 Lowe et al. Aug 2010 B2
7814327 Ahuja et al. Oct 2010 B2
7818326 Deninger et al. Oct 2010 B2
7844582 Arbilla et al. Nov 2010 B1
7849065 Kamani et al. Dec 2010 B2
7899828 de la Iglesia et al. Mar 2011 B2
7907608 Liu et al. Mar 2011 B2
7921072 Bohannon et al. Apr 2011 B2
7930540 Ahuja et al. Apr 2011 B2
7949849 Lowe et al. May 2011 B2
7958227 Ahuja et al. Jun 2011 B2
7962591 Deninger et al. Jun 2011 B2
7984175 de la Iglesia et al. Jul 2011 B2
7996373 Zoppas et al. Aug 2011 B1
8005863 de la Iglesia et al. Aug 2011 B2
8010689 Deninger et al. Aug 2011 B2
8055601 Pandya Nov 2011 B2
8166307 Ahuja et al. Apr 2012 B2
8176049 Deninger et al. May 2012 B2
8200026 Deninger et al. Jun 2012 B2
8205242 Liu et al. Jun 2012 B2
8271794 Lowe et al. Sep 2012 B2
8301635 de la Iglesia et al. Oct 2012 B2
8307007 de la Iglesia et al. Nov 2012 B2
8307206 Ahuja et al. Nov 2012 B2
20010013024 Takahashi et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010032310 Corella Oct 2001 A1
20010037324 Agrawal et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010046230 Rojas Nov 2001 A1
20020032677 Morgenthaler et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020032772 Olstad et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020052896 Streit et al. May 2002 A1
20020065956 Yagawa et al. May 2002 A1
20020078355 Samar Jun 2002 A1
20020091579 Yehia et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020103876 Chatani et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020107843 Biebesheimer et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020116124 Garin et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020126673 Dagli et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020128903 Kernahan Sep 2002 A1
20020129140 Peled et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020159447 Carey et al. Oct 2002 A1
20030009718 Wolfgang et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030028493 Tajima Feb 2003 A1
20030028774 Meka Feb 2003 A1
20030046369 Sim et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030053420 Duckett et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030055962 Freund et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030065571 Dutta Apr 2003 A1
20030084300 Koike May 2003 A1
20030084318 Schertz May 2003 A1
20030084326 Tarquini May 2003 A1
20030093678 Bowe et al. May 2003 A1
20030099243 Oh et al. May 2003 A1
20030105716 Sutton et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030105739 Essafi et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030105854 Thorsteinsson et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030131116 Jain et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030135612 Huntington Jul 2003 A1
20030167392 Fransdonk Sep 2003 A1
20030185220 Valenci Oct 2003 A1
20030196081 Savarda et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030204741 Schoen et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030221101 Micali Nov 2003 A1
20030225796 Matsubara Dec 2003 A1
20030225841 Song et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030231632 Haeberlen Dec 2003 A1
20030233411 Parry et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040001498 Chen et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040010484 Foulger et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040015579 Cooper et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040036716 Jordahl Feb 2004 A1
20040054779 Takeshima et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040059736 Willse et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040059920 Godwin Mar 2004 A1
20040071164 Baum Apr 2004 A1
20040111406 Udeshi et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040111678 Hara Jun 2004 A1
20040114518 McFaden et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040117414 Braun et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040120325 Ayres Jun 2004 A1
20040122863 Sidman Jun 2004 A1
20040122936 Mizelle et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040139120 Clark et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040181513 Henderson et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040181690 Rothermel et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040193594 Moore et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040194141 Sanders Sep 2004 A1
20040196970 Cole Oct 2004 A1
20040205457 Bent et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040215612 Brody Oct 2004 A1
20040220944 Behrens et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040230572 Omoigui Nov 2004 A1
20040249781 Anderson Dec 2004 A1
20040267753 Hoche Dec 2004 A1
20050004911 Goldberg et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050021715 Dugatkin et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050021743 Fleig et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050022114 Shanahan et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050027881 Figueira et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050033726 Wu et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050033747 Wittkotter Feb 2005 A1
20050033803 Vleet et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050038788 Dettinger et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050038809 Abajian et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050044289 Hendel et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050050205 Gordy et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050055327 Agrawal et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050055399 Savchuk Mar 2005 A1
20050075103 Hikokubo et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050086252 Jones et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091443 Hershkovich et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091532 Moghe Apr 2005 A1
20050097441 Herbach et al. May 2005 A1
20050108244 Riise et al. May 2005 A1
20050114452 Prakash May 2005 A1
20050120006 Nye Jun 2005 A1
20050127171 Ahuja et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050128242 Suzuki Jun 2005 A1
20050131876 Ahuja et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050132034 de la Iglesia et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050132046 de la Iglesia et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050132079 de la Iglesia et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050132197 Medlar Jun 2005 A1
20050132297 Milic-Frayling et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050138110 Redlich et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050138242 Pope et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050138279 Somasundaram Jun 2005 A1
20050149494 Lindh et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050149504 Ratnaparkhi Jul 2005 A1
20050166066 Ahuja et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050177725 Lowe et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050180341 Nelson et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050182765 Liddy Aug 2005 A1
20050188218 Walmsley et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050203940 Farrar et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050204129 Sudia et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050228864 Robertson Oct 2005 A1
20050235153 Ikeda Oct 2005 A1
20050273614 Ahuja et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050289181 Deninger et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060005247 Zhang et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060021045 Cook Jan 2006 A1
20060021050 Cook et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060037072 Rao et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060041560 Forman et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060041570 Lowe et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060041760 Huang Feb 2006 A1
20060047675 Lowe et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060075228 Black et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060080130 Choksi Apr 2006 A1
20060083180 Baba et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060106793 Liang May 2006 A1
20060106866 Green et al. May 2006 A1
20060150249 Gassen et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060167896 Kapur et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060184532 Hamada et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060235811 Fairweather Oct 2006 A1
20060242126 Fitzhugh Oct 2006 A1
20060242313 Le et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060251109 Muller et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060253445 Huang et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060271506 Bohannon et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060272024 Huang et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060288216 Buhler et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070006293 Balakrishnan et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070011309 Brady et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070028039 Gupta et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070036156 Liu et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070050334 Deninger et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070050381 Hu et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070050467 Borrett et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070081471 Talley et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070094394 Singh et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070106660 Stern et al. May 2007 A1
20070106685 Houh et al. May 2007 A1
20070106693 Hough et al. May 2007 A1
20070110089 Essafi et al. May 2007 A1
20070112837 Hough et al. May 2007 A1
20070112838 Bjarnestam et al. May 2007 A1
20070116366 Deninger et al. May 2007 A1
20070124384 Howell May 2007 A1
20070136599 Suga Jun 2007 A1
20070143559 Yagawa Jun 2007 A1
20070162609 Pope et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070220607 Sprosts et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070226504 de la Iglesia et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070226510 de la Iglesia et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070248029 Merkey et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070271254 de la Iglesia et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070271371 Ahuja et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070271372 Deninger et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070280123 Atkins et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080027971 Statchuk Jan 2008 A1
20080028467 Kommareddy et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080030383 Cameron Feb 2008 A1
20080082497 Leblang et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080091408 Roulland et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080112411 Stafford et al. May 2008 A1
20080115125 Stafford et al. May 2008 A1
20080140657 Azvine et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080141117 King et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080159627 Sengamedu Jul 2008 A1
20080235163 Balasubramanian et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080263019 Harrison et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080270462 Thomsen Oct 2008 A1
20090070327 Loeser et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090070328 Loeser et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090070459 Cho et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090100055 Wang Apr 2009 A1
20090157659 Satoh et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090178110 Higuchi Jul 2009 A1
20090187568 Morin Jul 2009 A1
20090216752 Terui et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090222442 Hough et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090235150 Berry Sep 2009 A1
20090254532 Yang et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090288164 Adelstein et al. Nov 2009 A1
20090300709 Chen et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090326925 Crider et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100011016 Greene Jan 2010 A1
20100011410 Liu Jan 2010 A1
20100037324 Grant et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100088317 Bone et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100100551 Knauft et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100121853 de la Iglesia et al. May 2010 A1
20100174528 Oya et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100185622 Deninger et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100191732 Lowe et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100195909 Wasson et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100268959 Lowe et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100332502 Carmel et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110004599 Deninger et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110040552 Van Guilder et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110131199 Simon et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110149959 Liu et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110167212 Lowe et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110167265 Ahuja et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110196911 de la Iglesia et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110197284 Ahuja et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110208861 Deninger et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110219237 Ahuja et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110258197 de la Iglesia et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110276575 de la Iglesia et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110276709 Deninger et al. Nov 2011 A1
20120114119 Ahuja et al. May 2012 A1
20120179687 Liu Jul 2012 A1
20120180137 Liu Jul 2012 A1
20120191722 Deninger et al. Jul 2012 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (3)
Number Date Country
2499806 Sep 2012 EP
WO 2004008310 Jan 2004 WO
WO 2012060892 May 2012 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (46)
Entry
“Computer program product for analyzing network traffic”, Ethereal. Computer program product for analyzing network traffic, pp. 17-26. http://web.archive.org/web/20030315045117/www.ethereal.com/distribution/docs/user-guide.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/190,536, filed Aug. 12, 2008, entitled “Configuration Management for a Capture/Registration System,” Inventor(s) Jitendra B. Gaitonde et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/352,720, filed Jan. 13, 2009, entitled “System and Method for Concept Building,” Inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/354,688, filed Jan. 15, 2009, entitled “System and Method for Intelligent Term Grouping,” Inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Ahuja et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/358,399, filed Jan. 23, 2009, entitled “System and Method for Intelligent State Management,” Inventor(s) William Deninger et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/410,875, filed Mar. 25, 2009, entitled “System and Method for Data Mining and Security Policy Management,” Inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/410,905, filed Mar. 25, 2009, entitled “System and Method for Managing Data and Policies,” Inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja et al.
Preneel, Bart, “Cryptographic Hash Functions”, Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on State and Progress of Research in Cryptography, 1993, pp. 161-171.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/360,537, filed Jan. 27, 2009, entitled “Database for a Capture System,” Inventor(s) Rick Lowe et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/254,436, filed Oct. 19, 2005, entitled “Attributes of Captured Objects in a Capture System,” Inventor(s) William Deninger et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/472,150, filed May 26, 2009, entitled “Identifying Image Type in a Capture System,” Inventor(s) William Deninger et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/900,964, filed Sep. 14, 2007, entitled “System and Method for Indexing a Capture System,” Inventor(s) Ashok Doddapaneni et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/171,232, filed Jul. 10, 2008, entitled “System and Method for Data Mining and Security Policy Management,” Inventor(s) Weimin Liu et al.
Microsoft Outlook, Out look, copyright 1995-2000, 2 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,860, filed Sep. 1, 2010, entitled “A System and Method for Word Indexing in a Capture System and Querying Thereof,” Inventor(s) William Deninger, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/829,220, filed Jul. 1, 2010, entitled “Verifying Captured Objects Before Presentation,” Inventor(s) Rick Lowe, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/873,061, filed Aug. 31, 2010, entitled “Document Registration,” Inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/939,340, filed Nov. 3, 2010, entitled “System and Method for Protecting Specified Data Combinations,” Inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/967,013, filed Dec. 13, 2010, entitled “Tag Data Structure for Maintaining Relational Data Over Captured Objects,” Inventor(s) Erik de la Iglesia, et al.
Han, OLAP Mining: An Integration of OLAP with Data Mining, 1997, pp. 1-18.
Niemi, Constructing OLAP Cubes Based on Queries, 2001, pp. 1-7.
Schultz, Data Mining for Detection of New Malicious Executables, 2001, pp. 1-13.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/099,516, filed May 3, 2011, entitled “Object Classification in a Capture System,” Inventor(s) William Deninger, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/024,923, filed Feb. 10, 2011, entitled “High Speed Packet Capture,” Inventor(s) Weimin Liu, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/047,068, filed Mar. 14, 2011, entitled “Cryptographic Policy Enforcement,” Inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/049,533, filed Mar. 16, 2011, entitled “File System for a Capture System,” Inventor(s) Rick Lowe, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/089,158, filed Apr. 18, 2011, entitled “Attributes of Captured Objects in a Capture System,” Inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja, et al.
Mao et al. “MOT: Memory Online Tracing of Web Information System,” Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering (WISE '01); pp. 271-277, (IEEE0-0-7695-1393-X/02) Aug. 7, 2002 (7 pages).
U.S. Appl. No. 13/168,739, filed Jun. 24, 2011, entitled “Method and Apparatus for Data Capture and Analysis System,” Inventor(s) Erik de la Iglesia, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/187,421, filed Jul. 20, 2011, entitled “Query Generation for a Capture System,” Inventor(s) Erik de la Iglesia, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/188,441 filed Jul. 21, 2011, entitled “Locational Tagging in a Capture System,” Inventor(s) William Deninger et al.
International Search Report and Written Opinion and Declaration of Non-Establishment of International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US2011/024902 mailed Aug. 1, 2011 (8 pages).
T. Werth, A. Dreweke, I. Fischer, M. Philippsen; DAG Mining in Procedural Abstraction; Programming Systems Group; Computer Science Department, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany, Sep. 19, 2011 Nonfinal Rejection.
Webopedia, definition of “filter”, 2002, p. 1.
Chapter 1. Introduction, “Computer Program product for analyzing network traffic,” Ethereal. Computer program product for analyzing network traffic, pp. 17-26, http://web.archive.org/web/20030315045117/www.ethereal.com/distribution/docs/user-guide, approximated copyright 2004-2005, printed Mar. 12, 2009.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/751,876, filed Mar. 31, 2010, entitled “Attributes of Captured Objects in a Capture System,” Inventor(s) William Deninger, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/422,791, filed Mar. 16, 2012, entitled “System and Method for Data Mining and Security Policy Management”, Inventor, Weimin Liu.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/424,249, filed Mar. 19, 2012, entitled “System and Method for Data Mining and Security Policy Management”, Inventor, Weimin Liu.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/431,678, filed Mar. 27, 2012, entitled “Attributes of Captured Objects in a Capture System”, Inventors William Deninger, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/436,275, filed Mar. 30, 2012, entitled “System and Method for Intelligent State Management”, Inventors William Deninger, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/337,737, filed Dec. 27, 2011 and entitled “System and Method for Providing Data Protection Workflows in a Network Environment”, inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/338,060, filed Dec. 27, 2011 and entitled “System and Method for Providing Data Protection Workflows in a Network Environment”, inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/338,159, filed Dec. 27, 2011 and entitled “System and Method for Providing Data Protection Workflows in a Network Environment”, inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/338,195, filed Dec. 27, 2011 and entitled “System and Method for Providing Data Protection Workflows in a Network Environment”, inventor(s) Ratinder Paul Singh Ahuja, et al.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability in PCT International Patent Application Serial No. PCT/US2011/024902 mailed on May 7, 2013 (5 pages).
Allasia, et al. “Indexing and Retrieval of Multimedia Metadata on a Secure DHT”, University of Torinao, Italy, Department of Computer Science, Aug. 31, 2008.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20050132198 A1 Jun 2005 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60528631 Dec 2003 US