Patent Grant
10645097
Field of the Invention
The field of the invention relates to computer systems and computer networks, and more particularly, to systems and methods for detecting content of computer and network traffic.
Background of the Invention
The generation and spreading of computer viruses are major problems in computer systems and computer networks. A computer virus is a program that is capable of attaching to other programs or sets of computer instructions, replicating itself, and/or performing unsolicited or malicious actions on a computer system. Viruses may be embedded in email attachments, files downloaded from Internet, and macros in MS Office files. The damage that can be done by a computer virus may range from mild interference with a program, such as a display of unsolicited messages or graphics, to complete destruction of data on a user's hard drive or server.
To provide protection from viruses, most organizations have installed virus scanning software on computers in their network. However, these organizations may still be vulnerable to a virus attack until every host in their network has received updated anti-virus software. With new attacks reported almost weekly, organizations are constantly exposed to virus attacks, and spend significant resources ensuring that all hosts are constantly updated with new anti-virus information. Furthermore, anti-virus programs that operate at the application-level require enormous computing resources, making such anti-virus programs expensive to deploy and manage.
Besides virus attacks, many organizations also face the challenge of dealing with inappropriate content, such as email spam, misuse of networks in the form of browsing or downloading inappropriate content, and use of the network for non-productive tasks. Many organizations are struggling to control access to appropriate content without unduly restricting access to legitimate material and services. Currently, the most popular solution for blocking unwanted web activity is to block access to a list of banned or blacklisted web sites and pages based on their URLs. However, such approach may be unnecessarily restrictive, preventing access to valid content in web sites that may contain only a limited amount of undesirable material. As with virus scanning, the list of blocked URLs requires constant updating.
Many email spam elimination systems also use blacklists to eliminate unwanted email messages. These systems match incoming email messages against a list of mail servers that have been pre-identified to be spam hosts, and prevent user access of messages from these servers. However, spammers often launch email spam from different hosts every time, making it difficult to maintain a list of spam servers.
Accordingly, improved systems and methods for detecting content of computer and network traffic would be useful.
A device for detecting network traffic content is provided. The device includes a first input port configured to receive one or more signatures, each of the one or more signatures associated with content desired to be detected, a second input port configured to receive data associated with network traffic content. The device also includes a processor configured to process the one or more signatures and the data to determine whether the network traffic content matches the content desired to be detected, and an output port configured to couple the device to a computer system of an intended recipient of the network traffic content. The output port passes the network traffic content to the computer system when it is determined that the network traffic content does not match the content desired to be detected. In alternative embodiments, the device can include a plurality of input ports and/or a plurality of output ports.
In some embodiments of the invention, a method for detecting network traffic content includes receiving one or more signatures, wherein each of the one or more signatures is associated with content desired to be detected, receiving data associated with network traffic content, and processing the one or more signature and the data to determine whether the network traffic content matches the content desired to be detected. The processing is performed by a device associated with a firewall of a computer system.
Other aspects and features of the invention will be evident from reading the following detailed description of the preferred embodiments, which are intended to illustrate, not limit, the invention.
The drawings illustrate the design and utility of preferred embodiments of the present invention, in which similar elements are referred to by common reference numerals. In order to better appreciate how advantages and objects of the present inventions are obtained, a more particular description of the present inventions briefly described above will be rendered by reference to specific embodiments thereof, which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings. Understanding that these drawings depict only typical embodiments of the invention and are not therefore to be considered limiting its scope, the invention will be described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings.
Various embodiments of the present invention are described hereinafter with reference to the figures. It should be noted that the figures are not drawn to scale and that elements of similar structures or functions are represented by like reference numerals throughout the figures. It should also be noted that the figures are only intended to facilitate the description of specific embodiments of the invention. They are not intended as an exhaustive description of the invention or as a limitation on the scope of the invention. In addition, an illustrated embodiment needs not have all the aspects or advantages of the invention shown. An aspect or an advantage described in conjunction with a particular embodiment of the present invention is not necessarily limited to that embodiment and can be practiced in any other embodiments of the present invention even if not so illustrated.
Memory 22 is adapted for storing data to be processed by processor 24. Data may be transmitted to memory 22 via input port 202 from a user or an administrator. For example, a user or an administrator can transmit data to memory 22 via a wire, a telephone line, a T1-line, a cable of a cable modem, or other types of transmitter connected to port 202. Data may also be transmitted to memory 22 via an infrared transmitter, in which case, port 202 would include an infrared receiver. In the illustrated embodiments, memory 22 is adapted for storing one or more signatures, each of which associated with content desired to be detected by detection device 10. The signatures will be described in detail below.
In the illustrated embodiments, the processor 24 includes an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), such as a semi-custom ASIC processor or a programmable ASIC processor. ASICs, such as those described in Application-Specific Integrated Circuits by Michael J.S. Smith, Addison-Wesley Pub Co. (1st Edition, June 1997), are well known in the art of circuit design, and therefore will not be described in further detail herein. Processor 24 is configured to receive packets from Internet 12, process packets based on data stored in memory 22; and generate a result based on the processing of the packets. It should be noted that processor 24 is not limited to those described previously, and that processor 24 can also be any of a variety of circuits or devices that are capable of performing the functions described herein. For example, in alternative embodiments, processor 24 can include a general purpose processor, such as a Pentium processor.
A method 400 for detecting network traffic content using detection device 10 will now be described with reference to
Column 504 shows formats in which predicates A-Z are used. For examples, predicate “D” has “label” as its argument, and predicate “M” has “name” as its argument. In some embodiments, the argument of a predicate may include one or a combination of bytes, with each of the bytes having two characters. In alternative embodiments, the argument can also include a number, a letter, a combination of letters, a sentence, a mathematical operator, a logical operator, a punctuation, and/or combination thereof. In other embodiments, a predicate may not require an argument.
In the illustrated embodiments, each predicate of a signature is compiled into a byte stream that controls a logic of processor 24. Column 510 describes functions that are performed by processor 24 based on respective predicates. Appendix A provides exemplary specifications for the predicates illustrated in
The predicates may be categorized by the types of function they perform (Column 508). In the illustrated embodiments, CPRL includes five families of predicates, namely, “Test”, “Decision”, “Iteration”, “Function”, and “Pointer”. A “test” type predicate provides instruction that causes processor 24 to test one or more variables using a prescribed operation. A “decision” type predicate provides instruction that causes processor 24 to decide which operation to perform based on a prescribed condition. An “iteration” type predicate provides instruction that causes processor 24 to repeat a prescribed function. A “function” type predicate provides instruction that causes the processor 24 to execute a prescribed function. A “pointer” type predicate provides instruction that causes processor 24 to position or reset a buffer stream pointer. Although five types of predicates are shown, in alternative embodiments, CPRL may have other different types of predicates.
Like predicate logic, the signature codified using CPRL is treated as a formula made up of logical elements and is rule-based. Accordingly, each signature must meet these rules in order to form a well-formed formula (wff). Codifying signature using a predicate-based system is advantageous in that the codified signature is much more readable and intuitive than memorizing and using an extensive collection of pattern recognition directives in a form of hexadecimal code instructions embedded in a signature stream. In some embodiments, the predicates can be formalized such that they are similar to inline macros, thereby allowing a user to easily create signatures without having to learn a completely new set of programming language.
Unlike traditional virus signatures, which are used to detect virus using byte-by-byte comparison, a signature created using CPRL represent one or more instructions that control an operation of a processor being used to detect content. For examples, a signature created using CPRL may provide instructions for calling functions, pointing to a different signature, calling an interpreter of the signature recursively, responding to a returned information, and/or performing other functions. As such, CPRL is a true pattern recognition language, and is far more powerful than traditional antivirus signatures. It should be understood by those skilled in the art that the scope of the invention is not limited to the examples of CPRL described previously, and that other languages or symbolic models may also be used to codify signatures.
The signature(s) may be codified by one or more service providers. For example, when a new virus is discovered, a service provider may codify the corresponding signature and send the signature to the detection device 10 as an update. Alternatively, or additionally, one or more users may also codify the signature if a new virus is discovered. The codifying of the signature(s) may be performed on a computer platform. For example, a suitable editor may be used for writing and/or editing the signature(s). In some embodiments, an integrated development environment (IDE) may be employed for writing and/or editing the signature(s). A graphical interface may also be used to assist writing and/or editing the signature(s). The signature, (i.e., resulting code) may be stored in a computer readable medium for future processing.
Returning to
In the illustrated embodiments, the compiling is performed by a compiler that is not a part of detection device 10. In alternative embodiments, the detection device 10 may include a compiler 602 for compiling the signature (
Next, detection device 10 receives network traffic packets to be screened (Step 406). For examples, web content, emails, and other data transmitted through a network may be decrypted and converted into packets, which are then sent to processor 24 of detection device 10 via input port 204 for processing. 1/0 buffer and logic 308 may be used to translate decrypted network traffic content into a format such that the decrypted network traffic content can be processed by processor 24. In some embodiments, processor 24 may receive a plurality of sessions (of network traffic) concurrently. In such case, processor 24 may execute one or more instruction on a first session, execute one or more instruction on a second session, and then switch back and execute additional instruction on the first session.
Based on the compiled signatures, processor 24 executes one or more functions to determine whether the network traffic content matches the content desired to be detected (Step 408). For example, processor 24 may execute scanning logic 314 based on one or more instructions prescribed by a CPRL signature, and determine whether the network traffic content matches or is associated with the content desired t9 be detected.
Processor 24 may detect a variety of contents based on instructions prescribed by CPRL signatures. For example, a signature may provide instruction that causes processor 24 to perform worm scanning. When configured to perform worm scanning, processor 24 may scan HTTP requests by scanning their originating web page for known viral patterns such as Code Red, which is programmed to gain entry to a server. To scan email attachments for worms, processor 24 may look for filenames, such as readme.exe and sample.exe, known to be used by worms.
In other embodiments, based on instructions prescribed by CPRL signatures, processor 24 may also detect virus by performing signature scanning, macro scanning, and heuristic scanning (e.g., static heuristic scanning or dynamic heuristic scanning). To perform signature scanning, processor 24 may scan target file for byte-strings that are known to identify viruses. If all of the byte strings for a particular virus are matched, the virus is considered present in the file. To perform macro scanning, processor 24 may extract one or more macros from MS Office file and scan them for known macro virus strings. Processor 24 may also analyze macros for peculiar behavior such as importing code, exporting code, writing to a registry, and/or attempting to disable a security feature. If any of the macro tests produces a positive result, a macro virus is deemed present in the MS Office file. To perform heuristic scanning, processor 24 may scan files for known byte strings that indicate a presence of a virus. For example, in the program byte, “B409 BA 2001 CD 21 B8023D BA 1234 CD 21 CC B8 FF 4C CD 21”, processor 24 can match the signature, “88023D BA ?? ?? CD 21” (representing a program that opens a file), and the signature, “B8 ?? 4C CD 21” (representing a program that terminates itself).
In other embodiments, based on instructions prescribed by CPRL signatures, processor 24 may also detect a hacking of a computer system. For example, a CPRL signature may provide one or more instructions to processor 24 that causes processor to detect a SYN packet, which may be sent by a hacker to determine which ports of a gateway are opened. It should be understood by those skilled in the art that the types of content that can be detected by processor 24 are not limited to those discussed previously, and that other types of content, such as a web content, an email spam, a Trojan agent, or other undesirable content may also be detected by controlling the logic of processor 24 using a·CPRL signature.
In further embodiments of the invention, processor 24 may also search for a variety of target files, such as files that may be executable (e.g., .exe, .bat, and .com), visual basic files (.vbs), compressed files (.zip, .gzip, .tar, .hta, and rar), screen saver files (.scr), dynamic link libraries (.dll), MS Office files, or other types of files. Processor 24 may also be configured such that it is capable to parse Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) files to find target file(s). In alternative embodiments, a separate processor, such as a general purpose processor may be used to search for target files that may contain content desired to be detected. The target files are then transmitted to processor 24, which determines whether the target files contain content desired to be detected.
If it is determined that network traffic content matches with content desired to be detected, processor 24 then prevents such network traffic content from being transmitted to users (Step 412). In some embodiments of the invention, processor 24 may cause a message to be sent to a user, notifying the user that a prescribed content has been detected. In other embodiments of the invention, processor 24 may cause a detected content to be erased, or remove undesirable portion(s) of the network traffic content before transmitting it to a user.
If it is determined network traffic content does not match with content desired to be detected, processor 24 then passes such content to a user (Step 414).
During use, network traffic is sent to processor 702 via port 204. Protocol differentiator 704 examines headers of the network traffic and determines the types of content being screened. In some embodiments of the invention, each type of network traffic content is pre-assigned to a port of a network gateway by a default configuration. For example, HTTP, SMTP, POP, IMAP, and FTP data may each be pre-assigned to be transmitted through a designated port. In such case, protocol differentiator 704 can determine a type of content based on an identification of a port transmitting the network content. In other embodiments of the invention, protocol differentiator 704 can be configured to scan all available ports in order to determine a type of the network traffic content being screened.
Next, depending on the type of content received or the content protocol, protocol differentiator 704 passes network traffic data to either packet processing module 706 or stack 708. For example, certain types of network traffic content, such as DNS data or telnet data, may be considered as “safe” traffic content, while other types of network traffic content, such as HTTP content or emails, may be considered as “unsafe” traffic content (i.e., content that may contain virus, worms, or undesirable material); In the illustrated embodiments, protocol differentiator 704 is configured to pass safe traffic content to packet processing module 706,and unsafe traffic content to stack 708. In alternative embodiments, protocol differentiator 704 is configured to pass potentially undesirable network traffic content to both packet processing module 706 and stack 708. In such case, network traffic content that can be screened by conventional content filtering techniques may be passed to packet processing module 706, while other network traffic content, such as those that may contain virus or worms, may be passed to stack 708. In some embodiments of the invention, processor 702 may be programmable or configurable such that a user can prescribe certain types of network traffic content to be passed to packet processing module 706 or to stack 708.
After network traffic content is transmitted to packet processing module 706, packet processing module 706 processes the network traffic content to determine whether to pass the network traffic content to a user. In the illustrated embodiments, packet processing module 706 is configurable to have different content filtering settings. In such case, packet processing module 706 either blocks or allows content stream to be passed to a user, depending on the content filtering settings of packet processing module 706. For example, packet processing module 706 can scan web and email traffic for undesirable non-program content, such as a key word or a phrase, and blocks the entire message or the particular page that contains the undesirable content when a match is found. Alternatively, or additionally, packet processing module 706 can also send a message notifying a user. In some embodiments, packet processing module 706 may also perform one or more basic functions of a network gateway. For example, packet processing module 706 may include a firewall module that performs stateful inspection. Alternatively, or additionally, packet processing module 706 may also include a decryption module for decrypting incoming network content before transmitting the content to a user. Packet processing module 706 may also be configured to perform other basic or known functions of a network gateway. In alternative embodiments, firewall module and/or decryption module may be implemented as part(s) of processor 24. Those skilled in the art understands that protocol differentiator 704, packet processing module 706, stack 708, fire module, and decryption module may be implemented using hardware, software, or any combination thereof.
As discussed previously, unsafe traffic content are transmitted from protocol differentiator 704 to stack 708. Stack 708 converts the traffic content into content stream such that it can be processed by processor 24. In the illustrated embodiments, as network traffic content are received in stack 708, they may be organized and stored in stack 708 according to their service or protocol type. For example, HTTP stream, FTP stream, and email stream may each be stored in a designated memory slot of stack 708. In alternative embodiments, network traffic content may be stored in stack 708 in accordance with the order in which they are received, according to certain prescribed protocol or traffic shaping rules, or in accordance with other prescribed arrangements.
Next, processor 24 receives network content stream from stack 708 and analyzes the network content to determine if they contain a virus, a worm, a web content, a Trojan agent, an email spam, a packet transmitted by a hacker, or other undesirable content. Particularly, processor 24 may execute one or more functions to determine whether the network traffic content matches content desired to be detected, which is codified by a signature using CPRL, as discussed previously. The operations of processor 24 and memory 22 are described above in reference to
In the previously described embodiments, network traffic content transmitted to protocol differentiator 704 are either passed to packet processing module 706 or to stack 708. However, this needs not be the case. In alternative embodiments, in addition to traffic content that doesn't need to be processed by processor 24, protocol differentiator 704 may also pass at least a portion of traffic content that needs to be processed by processor 24 to packet processing module 706 (
The above described configuration is advantageous in that a packet (e.g., packet B) can be advanced through a traffic stream while it is being examined by processor 24 to determine if it contains undesirable content, thereby improving an efficiency of detection device 700. In alternative embodiments of the invention, instead of having protocol differentiator 704 transmit a copy of packet B to stack 708, packet processing module 706 can be configured to make a copy of packet B and transmit packet B to stack 708.
In the previously described embodiments, protocol differentiator 704 passes a portion of packet B to packet processing module 706 (or to a separate module if one is provided). However this needs not be the case. In alternative embodiments, instead of transmitting a portion of packet B, the entire packet B may be transmitted from protocol differentiator 704 to packet processing module 706. In such case, protocol differentiator 704 may flag packet B (e.g., by modifying a header, adding a header, or inserting data, e.g., a flag data, to packet B) before transmitting packet B to packet processing module 706 (or to buffer). The flag data added to packet B is designed to signal packet processing module 706 not to pass packet B to user until it is determined that packet B is a safe traffic content. Towards this end, signal packet processing module 706 is configured such that it passes non-flagged data and prevents flagged data from being sent to a user. When processor 24 determines that packet B does not contain an undesirable content, processor 24 can then signal packet processing module 706 to pass packet B to user.
Although detection device 10 or 700 has been described as a hardware unit that is configured to be coupled to a user interface, such as a computer, those skilled in the art understand that a computer system may also be used to implement detection device to perform the same or similar functions described herein.
Computer system 1200 may be coupled via bus 1202 to a display 1212, such as a cathode ray tube (CRT), for displaying information to a user. An input device 1214, including alphanumeric and other keys, is coupled to bus 1202 for communicating information and command selections to processor 1204. Another type of user input device is cursor control 1216, such as a mouse, a trackball, or cursor direction keys for communicating direction information and command selections to processor 1204 and for controlling cursor movement on display 1212. This input device typically has two degrees of freedom in two axes, a first axis (e.g., x) and a second axis (e.g., y), that allows the device to specify positions in a plane.
The invention is related to the use of computer system 1200 for processing network traffic content. According to some embodiments of the invention, such use may be provided by computer system 1200 in response to processor 1204 executing one or more sequences of one or more instructions contained in the main memory 1206. Such instructions may be read into main memory 1206 from another computer-readable medium, such as storage device 1210. Execution of the sequences of instructions contained in main memory 1206 causes processor 1204 to perform the process steps described herein. One or more processors in a multi-processing arrangement may also be employed to execute the sequences of instructions contained in main memory 1206. In alternative embodiments, hard-wired circuitry may be used in place of or in combination with software instructions to implement the invention. Thus, embodiments of the invention are not limited to any specific combination of hardware circuitry and software.
The term “computer-readable medium” as used herein refers to any medium that participates in providing instructions to processor 1204 for execution. Such a medium may take many forms, including but not limited to, non-volatile media, volatile media, and transmission media. Non-volatile media includes, for example, optical or magnetic disks, such as storage device 1210. Volatile media includes dynamic memory, such as main memory 1206. Transmission media includes coaxial cables, copper wire and fiber optics, including the wires that comprise bus 1202. Transmission media can also take the form of acoustic or light waves, such as those generated during radio wave and infrared data communications.
Common forms of computer-readable media include, for example, a floppy disk, a flexible disk, hard disk, magnetic tape, or any other magnetic medium, a CD-ROM, any other optical medium, punch cards, paper tape, any other physical medium with patterns of holes, a RAM, a PROM, and EPROM, a FLASH-EPROM, any other memory chip or cartridge, a carrier wave as described hereinafter, or any other medium from which a computer can read.
Various forms of computer-readable media may be involved in carrying one or more sequences of one or more instructions to processor 1204 for execution. For example, the instructions may initially be carried on a magnetic disk of a remote computer. The remote computer can load the instructions into its dynamic memory and send the instructions over a telephone line using a modem. A modem local to computer system 1200 can receive the data on the telephone line and use an infrared transmitter to convert the data to an infrared signal. An infrared detector coupled to bus 1202 can receive the data carried in the infrared signal and place the data on bus 1202. Bus 1202 carries the data to main memory 1206, from which processor 1204 retrieves and executes the instructions. The instructions received by main memory 1206 may optionally be stored on storage device 1210 either before or after execution by processor 1204.
Computer system 1200 also includes a communication interface 1218 coupled to bus 1202. Communication interface 1218 provides a two-way data communication coupling to a network link 1220 that is connected to a local network 1222. For example, communication interface 1218 may be an integrated services digital network (ISDN) card or a modem to provide a data communication connection to a corresponding type of telephone line. As another example, communication interface 1218 may be a local area network (LAN) card to provide a data communication connection to a compatible LAN. Wireless links may also be implemented. In any such implementation, communication interface 1218 sends and receives electrical, electromagnetic or optical signals that carry data streams representing various types of information.
Network link 1220 typically provides data communication through one or more networks to other devices. For example, network link 1220 may provide a connection through local network 1222 to a host computer 1224. The data streams transported over the network link 1220 can comprise electrical, electromagnetic or optical signals. The signals through the various networks and the signals on network link 1220 and through communication interface 1218, which carry data to and from computer system 1200, are exemplary forms of carrier waves transporting the information. Computer system 1200 can send messages and receive data, including program code, through the network(s), network link 1220, and communication interface 1218. Although one network link 1220 is shown, in alternative embodiments, communication interface 1218 can provide coupling to a plurality of network links, each of which connected to one or more local networks. In some embodiments, computer system 1200 may receive data from one network, and transmit the data to another network. Computer system 1200 may process and/or modify the data before transmitting it to another network.
Although the methods and the detection devices have been described with reference to detecting a virus, a worm, a web content, a Trojan agent, an email spam, and a packet transmitted by a hacker, it should be understood that the same or similar methods and devices may also be used to detect other content. Particularly, the predicates described herein, or similar predicates, may also be used to codify other types of content (as defined by a user) that is desired to be detected. In addition, although examples of predicates have been described, in alternative embodiments, other types of predicates, languages, or symbolic models, may be used to create a signature to thereby codify content desired to be detected. Also, the operations performed by processor 14 and processor 702 can be performed by any combination of hardware and software within the scope of the invention, and should not be limited to particular embodiments comprising a particular definition of “processor”. Furthermore, it should be noted that the configuration of detection device should not be limited to the examples shown previously, and that detection device may have other configurations as long as it can perform the functions described herein. For example, in some embodiments, the functions performed by processor 24 and processor 702 may be implemented using a single processor. In addition, protocol differentiator 704, packet processing module 706, stack 708, fire module, and decryption module may be implemented in processor 24, processor 702, or another processor, which may or may not include a memory unit.
Although particular embodiments of the present inventions have been shown and described, it will be understood that it is not intended to limit the present inventions to the preferred embodiments, and it will be obvious to those skilled in the art that various changes and modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the present inventions. The specification and drawings are, accordingly, to be regarded in an illustrative rather than restrictive sense. The present inventions are intended to cover alternatives, modifications, and equivalents, which may be included within the spirit and scope of the present inventions as defined by the claims.
This application is a continuation of and claims priority to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/558,142, filed Dec. 2, 2014, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/798,350, filed Mar. 13, 2013, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,918,504 on Dec. 23, 2014 and further claims priority to U.S. patent application 10/624,914, filed Jul. 21, 2013, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,788,650 on Jul. 22, 2014, and further claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Nos. 60/397,147, 60/397,304, 60/397,033, 60/397,302, and 60/397,034, all filed Jul. 19, 2002, the disclosures of which are each expressly incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5440749 | Moore et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5491691 | Shtayer et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5530939 | Mansfield et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5539659 | McKee et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5557742 | Smaha et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5682386 | Arimilli et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5790799 | Mogul | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5889943 | Ji et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5892348 | Norman et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5896499 | McKelvey | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5946487 | Dangelo | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5991881 | Conklin et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6009467 | Ratcliff et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6067575 | Mcmanis et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6119175 | Hakkarainen et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6219706 | Fan et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6279113 | Vaidya | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6338141 | Wells et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6453345 | Trcka et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
| 6484315 | Ziese | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6487666 | Shanklin et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6513122 | Magdych et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6519703 | Joyce | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6574737 | Kingsford | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6577920 | Hypponen | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6637026 | Chen | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6654373 | Maher et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6654882 | Froutan et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6823697 | Fukuyama et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6873988 | Herrmann et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6954775 | Shanklin | Oct 2005 | B1 |
| 7007302 | Jagger | Feb 2006 | B1 |
| 7043757 | Hoefelmeyer et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7047288 | Cooper | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7080408 | Pak et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7096498 | Judge | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7134012 | Doyle et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7181765 | Patel et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7181769 | Kianini et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7185368 | Copeland | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7200105 | Milliken | Apr 2007 | B1 |
| 7243371 | Kasper et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
| 7424744 | Wu | Sep 2008 | B1 |
| 7519990 | Xie | Apr 2009 | B1 |
| 8239949 | Xie et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8244863 | Pahrump et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8788650 | Xie | Jul 2014 | B1 |
| 8789183 | Xie | Jul 2014 | B1 |
| 8918504 | Xie | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 9118705 | Xie | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 20010042214 | Radatti | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20020032773 | Jiang | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020038339 | Xu | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020059425 | Belfiore et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020073337 | Ioele et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020094090 | Iino | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020129264 | Rowland et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020129271 | Satanaway et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020162026 | Neuman | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020166063 | Lachman, III | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174350 | Franczek | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188839 | Noehring | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030004689 | Gupta et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030014662 | Gupta et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030033435 | Hanner | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030051162 | Kirchmann | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030061496 | Ananda | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030084319 | Tarquini et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030084322 | Schertz et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030145228 | Suuronen et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030149888 | Yadav | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030154399 | Zuk | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030188189 | Desai | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030204632 | Willebeek-LeMair | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20040003284 | Campbell et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040003290 | Malcolm | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040083388 | Nguyen | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20050021613 | Schemeidler et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050086499 | Hoefelmeyer et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050251570 | Heasman et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20070240217 | Tuvell | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20080250484 | Chong | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20090168651 | Xie | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20110238855 | Korsunsky | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20120102196 | Wells et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20130254382 | Xie | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130263271 | Xie | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| Entry |
|---|
| Chapman (Chapman et al., “Building Internet Firewalls”, 2nd Edition, ISBN: 978-1-56592-871-8, O'Reilly Media, Inc., Jun. 2000). |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20160381045 A1 | Dec 2016 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60397033 | Jul 2002 | US | |
| 60397034 | Jul 2002 | US | |
| 60397147 | Jul 2002 | US | |
| 60397302 | Jul 2002 | US | |
| 60397304 | Jul 2002 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 14558142 | Dec 2014 | US |
| Child | 15187560 | US | |
| Parent | 13798350 | Mar 2013 | US |
| Child | 14558142 | US | |
| Parent | 10624914 | Jul 2003 | US |
| Child | 13798350 | US |
