This invention relates generally to computer security, and more particularly to managing security policies through a centralized server.
A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever. The following notice applies to the software and data as described below and in the drawings hereto: Copyright © 2001, Networks Associates Technology, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Organizations often manage their computer security policies from a central location, typically employing a single computer server to manage the security polices on networked user (client) computers. The clients poll the server several times a day to check for, and optionally download, updated security policies and to upload their status to the server. Assuming a client and the server exchange a large amount of data several times a day, the data traffic between the server and even a small number clients can cause significant degradation for overall network communications.
A master policy server manages security polices for client computers through a network of local policy servers. Each local policy server is responsible for the security policies on a group of clients and maintains a data store containing the security policies and security information pertaining to the clients. Periodically, the master policy server and the local policy server synchronize, at which time the master policy server replicates updated policies to the local policy servers and the local policy servers upload client security statistics to the master policy server for consolidation into a global status. A local policy server may also request an updated security policy outside of the synchronization timeframe. Similarly, the master policy server may also request the client statistics from a local policy server outside of the synchronization timeframe.
Because the local policy servers consolidate the statistics from the clients prior to uploading it to the master policy server, the amount of data flowing through the network to the master policy server is greatly reduced. Similarly, because the master policy server replicates the security policies to a few local policy servers instead of to each client, the amount of data flowing through the network from the master policy server is also reduced.
The present invention describes systems, clients, servers, methods, and computer-readable media of varying scope. In addition to the aspects and advantages of the present invention described in this summary, further aspects and advantages of the invention will become apparent by reference to the drawings and by reading the detailed description that follows.
In the following detailed description of embodiments of the invention, reference is made to the accompanying drawings in which like references indicate similar elements, and in which is shown by way of illustration specific embodiments in which the invention may be practiced. These embodiments are described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the invention, and it is to be understood that other embodiments may be utilized and that logical, mechanical, electrical, functional, and other changes may be made without departing from the scope of the present invention. The following detailed description is, therefore, not to be taken in a limiting sense, and the scope of the present invention is defined only by the appended claims.
A system level overview of the operation of an embodiment of the invention is described by reference to
Each local policy server has a local data store 109, 111, 113 that contains the security policies and security information collected from the client computers it manages. Each type of hardware and software platform acting as a client computer may be associated with a exemplary security policy or may share exemplary security policies with other platforms. The security policy may contain configuration parameters for anti-virus programs, firewalls, and other security software that protect a client computer from compromise by a third-party.
Communication between the local policy servers 103, 105, 107 and the master policy server 101 through network 129 is intermittent. Each local policy server 103, 105, 107 is responsible for periodically querying the master policy server 101 to determine if the security policies applicable to its clients have changed. The local policy servers also periodically, or upon request, send client security statistics derived from the security information on local data stores 109, 111, 113 to the master policy server 101, which acts as a consolidation point for status information regarding the overall security of the system 100. The statistics from the local policy servers are stored in a global data store 127. When a global status for the system 100 is requested, the master policy server 101 derives the status from the statistics in the global data store 127 and, optionally, from additional statistics obtained from the local policy servers. More detailed status information for particular clients or groups of clients is obtained from the appropriate local policy server.
In one embodiment, the master policy server 101 and the local policy servers 103, 105, 107 synchronize security policies and statistics at times when less data traffic is generally experienced on the network 129. When the local policy servers are physically located in different time zones, the synchronization may occur at several points during a twenty-four hour period. In an alternate embodiment, the local policy servers can schedule checks for updated policies in addition to the synchronization process. Furthermore, it will be appreciated that the synchronization at a local policy server may happen more than once a day. The network 129 connecting the master policy server and the local policy servers is secured using any of several well-known secure transmission protocols when the security policies are being uploaded to the master policy server 101 or replicated to the local policy servers 103, 105, 107. Otherwise, no particular network transmission protocols are required in the system 100.
When the system 100 is installed, the system administrator may create the initial security policies at one of the local policy servers 103, 105, 107 for transfer to the master policy server 101 and subsequent replication to the other local policy servers, or directly at the master policy server 101. Similarly, updates to the security policies may be performed at a local policy server or at the master policy server. In one embodiment, the master policy server 101 maintains global level security policy configurations and the local policy servers 103, 105, 107 derive their local level configuration and set-up policies for their clients from the global level configurations.
The number of local policy servers is dependent upon the number of clients at each site and the physical locations of the sites. Because the master policy server 101 only sends and receives data from the local policy servers 103, 105, 107 instead of each of the clients, a single master policy server and common TCP/IP wide-area networks are generally able to handle the amount of data being transferred in the system 100. Alternate embodiments in which additional levels of servers are incorporated between the local policy servers 103,105, 107 and the master policy server 101 are also contemplated and are considered within the scope of the invention.
The operations of an embodiment of a security policy distribution system 100 have been described in terms of a single master policy server and three local policy servers as illustrated in
Referring first to
A local server method 230 is illustrated in
The methods performed by a master policy server and local policy server have been shown by reference to flowcharts in
The following description of
The web server 9 is typically at least one computer system which operates as a server computer system and is configured to operate with the protocols of the World Wide Web and is coupled to the Internet. Optionally, the web server 9 can be part of an ISP which provides access to the Internet for client systems. The web server 9 is shown coupled to the server computer system 11 which itself is coupled to web content 10, which can be considered a form of a media database. It will be appreciated that while two computer systems 9 and 11 are shown in
Client computer systems 21, 25, 35, and 37 can each, with the appropriate web browsing software, view HTML pages provided by the web server 9. The ISP 5 provides Internet connectivity to the client computer system 21 through the modem interface 23 which can be considered part of the client computer system 21. The client computer system can be a personal computer system, a network computer, a Web TV system, or other such computer system. Similarly, the ISP 7 provides Internet connectivity for client systems 25, 35, and 37, although as shown in
Alternatively, as well-known, a server computer system 43 can be directly coupled to the LAN 33 through a network interface 45 to provide files 47 and other services to the clients 35, 37, without the need to connect to the Internet through the gateway system 31.
It will be appreciated that the computer system 51 is one example of many possible computer systems which have different architectures. For example, personal computers based on an Intel microprocessor often have multiple buses, one of which can be an input/output (I/O) bus for the peripherals and one that directly connects the processor 55 and the memory 59 (often referred to as a memory bus). The buses are connected together through bridge components that perform any necessary translation due to differing bus protocols.
Network computers are another type of computer system that can be used with the present invention. Network computers do not usually include a hard disk or other mass storage, and the executable programs are loaded from a network connection into the memory 59 for execution by the processor 55. A Web TV system, which is known in the art, is also considered to be a computer system according to the present invention, but it may lack some of the features shown in
It will also be appreciated that the computer system 51 is controlled by operating system software which includes a file management system, such as a disk operating system, which is part of the operating system software. One example of an operating system software with its associated file management system software is the family of operating systems known as Windows® from Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, Wash., and their associated file management systems. The file management system is typically stored in the non-volatile storage 65 and causes the processor 55 to execute the various acts required by the operating system to input and output data and to store data in memory, including storing files on the non-volatile storage 65.
A security policy distribution system that is managed by a master security policy server has been described. Although specific embodiments have been illustrated and described herein, it will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill in the art that any arrangement which is calculated to achieve the same purpose may be substituted for the specific embodiments shown. This application is intended to cover any adaptations or variations of the present invention.
The terminology used in this application with respect to network communications is meant to include all communication media and environments, including local and wide area networks, public and private communications environments, and wired and wireless communications media. Therefore, it is manifestly intended that this invention be limited only by the following claims and equivalents thereof.
This application is a continuation (and claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120) of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/855,963, filed Sep. 14, 2007, by Richard B. Singleton entitled “MASTER SECURITY POLICY SERVER,” which is a continuation (and claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120) of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/969,686, filed Oct. 2, 2001, by Richard B. Singleton entitled “MASTER SECURITY POLICY SERVER.” The disclosures of both of the prior applications are considered part of (and are incorporated by reference in) the disclosure of this application in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5796942 | Esbensen | Aug 1998 | A |
5987610 | Franczek et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6035423 | Hodges | Mar 2000 | A |
6073142 | Geiger et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6158010 | Moriconi et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6209101 | Mitchem et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6216231 | Stubblebine | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6460050 | Pace et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6487552 | Lei et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6678827 | Rothermel | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6697857 | Dixon et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
7032022 | Shanumgam | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7305562 | Bianco et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7506155 | Stewart et al. | Mar 2009 | B1 |
8776230 | Singleton | Jul 2014 | B1 |
8954716 | Singleton | Feb 2015 | B2 |
20010007133 | Moriconi | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20020048579 | Noelle et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020142841 | Boushy | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030021283 | See | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030167418 | Zhu et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20040049574 | Watson | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20080005780 | Singleton | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20150106874 | Singleton | Apr 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO 0078004 | Dec 2000 | WO |
WO 2003029940 | Apr 2003 | WO |
WO 2003029941 | Apr 2003 | WO |
Entry |
---|
USPTO Mar. 14, 2008 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
USPTO Aug. 7, 2008 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
USPTO Oct. 21, 2008 Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
USPTO Jan. 9, 2009 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
USPTO Jul. 22, 2009 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
USPTO Nov. 25, 2009 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
USPTO May 3, 2005 Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/969,686. |
USPTO Dec. 23, 2005 Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/969,686. |
USPTO May 26, 2010 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
USPTO Sep. 15, 2010 Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
USPTO May 9, 2011 Examiner's Answer to Appeal Brief from U.S. Appl. No. 11/855,963. |
ePolicy Orchestrator, Product Guide, Version 2.0, May 2001/ePolicy Orchestrator version 2.0.0, Copyright 2001 Networks Associates Technology, Inc, cover pages, pp. iii-vi, pp. 11, 12, 15 and 16. |
ePolicy Orchestrator, A Whole New Level of Anti-Virus Management from McAfee, An Executive White Paper, pp. 1-16, Copyright 2000 Networks Associates Technology, Inc., 6-AVD-EPO-00111/00. |
Keeping Passwords in Sync Across Multiple Domains, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, IBM Corp., New York, US, vol. 38, No. 1, 1995, p. 265. |
Symantec Corporation, “E-Security Begins with Sound Security Policies,” Security, URL:http://enterprisesecurity.symanted.com/SecurityServices/factsheets/esecurityhandbook.pdf, Jun. 14, 2001, pp. 1-20. |
Symantec Corporation: “Norton Antivirus Corporation Edition Implementation Guide,” Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition 7.0, URL:ftp://symantec.com/public/english_international/Manuals_WhitePapers/navcorped7_ig.pdf, Oct. 12, 1999, pp. 14, 16-32, 45-48, 75-76, 93-94, 107, 143-147, 155-156, 159-160, 183-184. |
International Search Report from PCT/US02/28513 dated Feb. 18, 2004. |
USPTO Nov. 2, 2012 Decision on Appeal from U.S. Appl. No. 09/969,686. |
USPTO May 15, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/969,686. |
USPTO Sep. 19, 2013 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/969,686. |
USPTO Dec. 31, 2013 Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/969,686. |
USPTO Mar. 6, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 09/969,686. |
USPTO Feb. 28, 2017 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/572,167, 14 pages. |
USPTO Sep. 8, 2017 Final Rejection from U.S. Appl. No. 14/572,167, 17 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150101015 A1 | Apr 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11855963 | Sep 2007 | US |
Child | 14572328 | US | |
Parent | 09969686 | Oct 2001 | US |
Child | 11855963 | US |