Security concerns for all types of processor based electronic devices and particularly for computing devices have become significant. Malicious code such as viruses, worms, malware, and other code can have effects ranging from relatively benign, such as displaying messages on a screen to taking control of a device, running processes, transmitting and or deleting files, etc. Many of these attacks are directed at computing devices, such as workstations, servers, desktop computers, notebook and handheld computers, and other similar devices. Many of these computing devices can run one or more application programs which a user may operate to perform a set of desired functions.
A number of methodologies have been used in an attempt to reduce or eliminate both attacks and the influence of malicious or defective code. Generally, these methodologies include detection, prevention, and mitigation and can include attempts to scan and identify and isolate malicious code. Additionally, some methodologies have been used to limit the amount of damage malicious code is capable of performing by restricting the amount of access granted to un-trusted applications. Prior methodologies, however, lack a unified and systemic approach that provides a consistent and persistent method of accessing resources outside of the restricted environment, especially if the name or location of those resources should change.
Embodiments of the invention relate generally to the field of secure computing, and more particularly to restricting resources used by a program. According to one aspect of the invention, identifiers are provided to allow access to files or folders in a sandboxed environment in which one or more applications are sandboxed by an access control system. Such access control system can be part of a trusted software component, such as a trusted software component of an operating system. The identifier can be a bookmark, or some other identifier, and can allow an application to access a file even if the file is renamed or moved by a user while the application has been terminated. Previously, if a file or folder outside of a sandboxed environment were to be moved or renamed, an application using that file or folder would not have any knowledge about the renaming or moving of the file or folder and would not be able to obtain access.
However, embodiments of the invention allow a resource manager, or some other trusted access control system, to interact with an application (or “app”) and enable the use of bookmarks in that environment. In a sandbox environment, a sandbox application controls access to the files in a manner such that that each application must make a request, in one embodiment, to the sandbox application in order to obtain access to a particular file or folder. Specifically, embodiments of the invention will not allow an application to access a file or folder without some indication that it is the user's intent to access such file or folder to prevent situations where malicious code will attempt surreptitious access to sensitive system resources. However, once user intent is specified by the selection of a file, the selection can persist, in some embodiments, across application sessions.
It is to be noted that the invention is not limited to the embodiments disclosed in the above summary, as the summary does not include an exhaustive list of all aspects of the present invention. Other features of the present invention will be apparent from the accompanying drawings and from the detailed description which follows. Moreover, it is contemplated that the invention includes all systems and methods that can be practiced from all suitable combinations of the various aspects summarized above, and also those disclosed in the Detailed Description below.
Embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example, and not limitation, in the figures of the accompanying drawings in which like references indicate similar elements.
Various embodiments for managing file access for one or more sandboxed applications are described in the description and drawings below. The following description and drawings are illustrative of the invention and are not to be construed in a liming manner. Numerous specific details are described to provide a thorough understanding of various embodiments of the present invention. However, in certain instances, well-known or conventional details are not described in order to provide a concise discussion of embodiments of the present invention.
Reference in the specification to “one embodiment” or “an embodiment” means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in conjunction with the embodiment can be included in at least one embodiment of the invention. The appearances of the phrase “in one embodiment” in various places in the specification do not necessarily all refer to the same embodiment. Although the processes are described below in terms of some sequential operations, it should be appreciated that some of the operations described may be performed in a different order. Moreover, some operations may be performed in parallel rather than sequentially.
Restricted operating environments are one way to limit the damage potential of programs executing malicious code. A restricted operating environment can include such environments in which an operating system enforces sandboxing mechanisms on applications, which execute on the operating system. These sandboxing mechanisms can include restrictions on the memory that an application can access, such as the DRAM or other main memory of a computing device, as well as restrictions on access to files stored on a non-volatile storage device, such as a hard drive, or a flash memory device such as a solid state disk. Examples of restricted operating environments are described in co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/007,472, filed Jan. 14, 2011, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/790,451, filed May 28, 2010, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/007,480, filed Jan. 14, 2011, and all of these patent applications are hereby incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.
When a sandboxing application restricts access to files, it can do so by requiring a demonstration of user intent through trusted facilities, such as a user's selection of a file through a trusted system resource such as an open file dialog box or panel provided by a trusted element of an operating system. Hence, when an application is executing, the user can provide the necessary indication of trust by selecting files through an open dialog box or a saved dialog box or other dialog box or panel which is provided by a trusted system resource.
However, there are certain instances where an application seeks access to a file or folder, but does so without a user interaction that indicates the trustworthiness of the file or folder. For example, an email application may wish to access a download folder in order to store a download in an email. This can occur upon launching the email program, but the launching of the email program does not include the user's selection of a particular download folder. Hence, in this case, the email application would be denied access to the folder after it has been re-launched. Another example in which an application would be denied access in a restricted environment is if the application uses a project or collection file, such as the project file used for the “Final Cut Pro” movie editing software application. The project or collection file can be considered a directory, which contains metadata and path names specifying various movies and other content, which are used together to provide a presentation. In a typical use of the project file, the user opens the project file from within the application through the use of an open dialog box. In this case, the system does not need to verify the trustworthiness of the file because the user is assumed to be trusted and the user's action to select the file indicates the trustworthiness of the file. However, the application will or may need access to the files referred to within the project or collection, and access to those files will be denied in a restricted operating environment, which requires a user indication of trustworthiness for a particular file.
Any one of the methods described herein can be implemented on a variety of different data processing devices, including, but not limited to general purpose computer systems, special purpose computer systems, embedded computer systems, etc. For example, the data processing system, which may use any one of the methods described herein, may include a desktop computer or a laptop computer; a mobile device such as a tablet computer, a smart phone, or a cellular telephone; a personal digital assistant (PDA); or some other form of embedded electronic device or a consumer electronic device.
As shown in
The data processing system 100 can also include one or more input/output (I/O) controllers 140 which provide interfaces for one or more I/O devices, such as one or more mice, touch screens, touch pads, joysticks, and other input devices including those known in the art and output devices (e.g. speakers). The input/output devices 142 are coupled through one or more I/O controllers 140 as is known in the art. While
As is known in the art, the one or more buses 125 may include one or more bridges or controllers or adapters to interconnect between various buses. In one embodiment, the I/O controller 140 includes a USB adapter for controlling USB peripherals and can control an Ethernet port or a wireless transceiver or combination of wireless transceivers. It will be apparent from this description that aspects of the present invention may be embodied, at least in part, in software. That is, the techniques may be carried out in a data processing system in response to its processor executing a sequence of instructions contained in a memory such as the memory 120 or the non-volatile memory 122 or a combination of such memories which together may embody the non-transitory machine readable storage medium. In various embodiments, hardwired circuitry may be used in combination with software instructions to implement the present invention. Thus the techniques are not limited to any specific combination of hardware circuitry and software, or to any particular source for the instructions executed by the data processing system.
The methods shown in
The method shown in
In the case of the methods shown in
On the other hand, the methods shown in
In the foregoing specification, the invention has been described with reference to specific exemplary embodiments thereof. It will be evident that various modifications may be made thereto without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the following claims. The specification and drawings are, accordingly, to be regarded in an illustrative sense rather than a restrictive sense. The various aspects, embodiments, implementations, or features of the embodiment can be used separately or in any combination.
The described embodiments can also be embodied as computer readable code on a non-transitory computer readable medium. A non-transitory computer readable medium is any data storage device that can store data which can thereafter be read by a computer system, other than medium designed specifically for propagating transitory signals. Examples of non-transitory computer readable media include floppy disks, flash memory devices, optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical disks, read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs), erasable programmable ROMs (EPROMs), electrically erasable programmable ROMs (EEPROMs), magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions. In various embodiments, software-instructions stored on a machine-readable storage medium can be used in combination with hardwired circuitry to implement the present invention. Thus, the techniques are not limited to any specific combination of hardware circuitry and software instructions, or to any particular source for the instructions executed by the data processing system associated with an apparatus for performing one or more of the operations described herein.
This application is a continuation of co-pending U.S. application Ser. No. 13/631,715 filed on Sep. 28, 2012, which claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/632,101, filed Jan. 17, 2012, and this provisional application is hereby incorporated herein by reference. This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/007,472, filed Jan. 14, 2011, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/790,451, filed May 28, 2010, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/007,480, filed Jan. 14, 2011.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5551038 | Martin | Aug 1996 | A |
6466983 | Strazza | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6535867 | Waters | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6691113 | Harrison et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6691230 | Bardon | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6836888 | Basu et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
7587426 | Fujiwara et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7725737 | Konanka et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
8103779 | Belkin | Jan 2012 | B2 |
20020046281 | Cope | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020066022 | Calder | May 2002 | A1 |
20040133777 | Kiriansky | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050149726 | Joshi | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20060021029 | Brickell et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060075464 | Golan et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20070136279 | Zhou et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070289006 | Ramachandran et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080005472 | Kahlidi | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080127292 | Cooper et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080184336 | Sarukkai et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080263193 | Chalemin et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20100011447 | Jothimani | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100312749 | Brahmadesam et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100312966 | De Atley et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20120023091 | Fox et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20130074158 | Koskimies | Mar 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1961272 | May 2007 | CN |
0 940 960 | Sep 1999 | EP |
Entry |
---|
PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2013/021486, Mailing Date Apr. 2, 2013 (12 pages). |
PCT International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2013/021486, mailed Jul. 31, 2014. |
Hubbard, Jordan, “Mac os X—From the Server Room to Your”, Apple Inc., downloaded from http://www.slideshare.net/quest4c923d/jordan-hubbard-talk-lisapresentation, Nov. 17, 2008, 117 pages. |
Mazzoleni, P. et al., “XACML Policy Integration Algorithms (Not to be confused with XACML Policy Combination Algorithms!)”, SACMAT '06, Lake Tahoe, CA, Jun. 7-9, 2006, 9 pages. |
Yee, Ka-Ping “Secure Interaction Design and the Principle of Least Authority”, CHI 2003, Fort Lauderdale, FL, Apr. 5-10, 2003, 4 pages. |
Chinese Search Report for CN Counterpart Application No. 201380005743.1, 16 pgs., (Feb. 23, 2016). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150199510 A1 | Jul 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61632101 | Jan 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13631715 | Sep 2012 | US |
Child | 14605085 | US |