Patent Grant
8849993
1. Technical Field
The invention relates generally to network security. More particularly, the invention relates to a method and apparatus for efficiently monitoring and subsequent handling of network data.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Networked information systems are an essential part of many organizations. Critical systems, services, and information resources all require protection that depends on effective orchestration of a variety of factors: network architecture, security products, site security, administrative procedures, end user responsibility, and more. A network security policy is an explicit plan of how to accomplish this multi-faceted protection, what objectives the plans should meet, and what assets are, being protected.
To manage a network, an end user needs to know and understand what is happening on the network. Most security holes come from unexpected, misconfigured, or unauthorized services, for example, from a high-port telnet, a new service added in, a rogue server, and/or a misconfigured workstation. The end user does not know what is the unauthorized network traffic.
Security administrators need tools to help them formulate site security policy and to translate the policy into monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. They need to be sure that the computer enforced policy—often cobbled together from a plethora of disjoint access control mechanisms—matches their enterprise policy, all too often specified in a loose natural language or a set of unwritten principles. This leads to confusion as to why access is being granted or denied to particular resources and may lead to unintentional breaches of security.
In addition to monitoring network system traffic, it is important for network analysts to assess their network's configuration. A discussion on current techniques for network assessment follows below.
A conventional network assessment visit determines the customer network using the following information:
As a matter of practicality, the information is typically derived from the first three of these items. Customer log files and network traffic is of a volume so great that it is impractical to examine it in a short assessment visit.
The weaknesses such conventional methods are as follows:
Vulnerability Scans
Network vulnerability scanners only detect certain types of known vulnerabilities. Such vulnerabilities are generally not detected directly, but are inferred based on host responses to a series of network packets sent to hosts by the scanner. This process does not directly ensure that data traffic on the subject network matches expectations, either explicit or implicit.
Network vulnerability scanners cannot see a host if it does not respond to packets. A host that is only a source of network packets, such as, for example, a rogue router, is not visible to a scanner. Hosts which are turned off or otherwise temporarily disconnected, such as, for example, workstations and laptops, are often missed by vulnerability scanners. This problem is compounded by the fact that scans are often scheduled for non-work hours in order to alleviate customer fears that the scans will somehow impact production systems and organizational mission.
Network scanners typically return a large volume of vulnerability information, based on all possible configured elements in a network. The scanner tools cannot currently interpret those vulnerabilities in light of business requirements which the subject systems are intended to support, or even for the specific network architecture of which those systems are a part. The scan results must be reviewed manually by a security analyst, who applies a knowledge of the business requirements and network architecture to an interpretation of those results. Such manual process is error-prone because the volume is so great that problems may be overlooked.
Another problem is that the scan derives only vulnerabilities, not network usage patterns. Therefore, the scan cannot detect security problems that are attributable to human behavior, but only those scans that result from misconfigured systems and/or systems which have documented design problems.
Network scanners cannot diagnose incorrect client usage of software. For example, network scanners cannot detect whether web servers are being used with invalid ciphersuites, whether 40-bit browsers are in use, and whether a given telnet port is accessed only by a management station.
Network scanners must be targeted to particular subnets. If a customer has forgotten to mention a subnet, the scanner does not notice it.
Customer Interviews
Customers may not provide the network analyst complete or accurate information, either because the customer forgot details, because the information is not known to the customer, or because the customer does not understand the importance of giving the information to the analyst.
Customer interviews at best can provide descriptions of overt usage of subject systems, and generally not covert usage. Often, formal policies of the organization are not even documented, much less promulgated, audited and enforced.
Hidden agendas, office politics, and other factors also can affect the success of the interview process.
Host Inspection
Inspecting host configuration files is a time consuming, manual process that is subject to human error. In the assessment of any large network, it is impractical to include an inspection of the configurations for more than a few critical systems.
Once again, inspection of host configurations does not reveal completely intended usage of the subject systems. The configurations must be analyzed within the context of the business requirements and overall security environment of the organization. This manual process is very human dependent and prone to error.
Log File Inspection
Log file inspection can provide great insight into the workings of network components. Machine-based aggregation and filtering systems can speed this process. However, logs provide only a components' own view of its status. If a component is misconfigured, the log data from the component cannot be trusted. Log data may also be subject to modification by an attacker who has penetrated the machine and is seeking to mask his presence.
In addition, because log aggregation systems work in cooperation with the components that generate the information, they require configuration changes to every component that they examine. Also, they are unable to detect when a component is added to the system.
Back Pressuring
A conventional pipelined system uses flow-control between the stages of the pipeline. Consider stage N, putting data into a queue for stage N+1. When stage N generates data faster than N+1, the queue will fill. This prevents stage N from inserting new data into the pipeline. Stage N waits until stage N+1 is ready to accept more data. The process of each stage causing its predecessor to slow down is called “back-pressuring”.
In a passive network monitoring device, back-pressuring is not possible, because the data that feeds the pipeline is not controlled by the network monitor. Were a monitoring system to use back-pressuring, it would have no recourse but to drop input data from the network interface when too much data is received.
Such techniques of performing network assessments generally are limited in their ability to determine actual security threats to information systems. Generally, they represent the state of the art and are indicative of best practices within the security community today.
It would be advantageous to provide a method and apparatus for harnessing the traffic across networks in such a way as to also expand the environment from which to gather traffic, and to further provide a method and apparatus for accessing and hence viewing such greater volumes of data in a meaningful way.
It would further be advantageous to provide a method and apparatus for controlling great volumes of data in a smooth and reliable fashion.
A method and apparatus for a network monitor internals mechanism, which serves to translate packet data into multiple concurrent streams of encoded network event data, to contribute to enterprise management, reporting, and global mechanisms for aggregating monitors at a centralized aggregation point, and to facilitate rate limiting techniques because such monitors are not in control (i.e. cannot back pressure flow) is provided.
Rate limiting is the process of selectively dropping data at various stages of a pipelined system, so as to prevent back pressuring. Rate limiting is applied at each stage so that data is dropped in a heuristic manner that is appropriate to this stage of the pipeline. The heuristic is chosen so that the data discarded causes the least impact on the monitoring result. For example: packets may be dropped based on connection boundaries, rather than randomly; event details may be dropped, but counts of the events maintained; event information may be abstracted by counting and combining like events over a time interval.
a is a schematic diagram of components of the system according to the invention;
b is a schematic diagram of components of the system according to the invention;
a is an example of a policy wizard dialog box according to the invention;
b is an example of a policy wizard dialog box according to the invention;
a is an example of a policy wizard dialog box according to the invention;
b is an example of a policy wizard dialog box according to the invention;
c is an example of a policy wizard dialog box according to the invention;
A method and apparatus for a network monitor internals mechanism that serves to translate packet data into multiple concurrent streams of encoded network event data is provided. The data translation is accomplished by interpreting both sides of each protocol transaction.
The invention is a component of a network security policy monitoring system and method that comprises supportive features, algorithms, and tools. The monitoring system is ideally suited for network and security assessments or long-term monitoring where real network traffic is analyzed to identify abnormal traffic patterns, system vulnerabilities, and incorrect configuration of computer systems on the network. The monitoring system listens on a network, logs events, and takes action, all in accordance with a rule based system-wide policy. The monitoring system provides a technique that is able to incorporate external sources of event information, such as are generated in log files of other network components. The inventive technique of the monitoring system gets protocol information, which can make it more meaningful to a network administrator. It sends data upstream to an event log and interprets the data. It listens to secure protocols and can identify encryption quality of service parameters. It extracts basic security parameters, such as, for example, network events, and passes them to a policy manager component.
An important part of understanding the invention is understanding network security terminology for policy monitoring. See Table A below.
The preferred embodiment of the invention translates traffic on the network into protocol events that are themselves combined into network events. As protocol events are detected, they are compared against a policy. The policy specifies a disposition of the network event, as defined by the observed series of protocol events. Information about the protocol events, the network event and its disposition is stored in a database. This database of network traffic information can be mined for policy violations.
This preferred embodiment of the invention is described with reference to
The policy monitoring component 100 comprises a policy manager component 106 that itself comprises a parser 101 for parsing the policy file 105, a policy engine for 102 for assigning policy dispositions to network events, and a logger 103 for determining how to log the information processed by the policy engine 102, according to an input logging policy 130. It also comprises a database 104 for storing synthesized information of the packet dump's 115 conformance to the specified policy 105 performed by the policy engine 102, where it can be mined with a query tool 135. It also comprises a report script component 160 for querying the database 104 and creating reports 161, and an alarm script component 155, for generating alarms based on the severity of the disposition assigned to network events.
An equally preferred embodiment of the invention also comprises a parser tool 150 that takes the policy specification file 105 as input and automatically generates an English description of the policy 151 for the end user. The parser tool 150 is optional.
An equally preferred embodiment of the invention also provides a secure Web server feature 162 for the end user to review reports from the end user's host computer 163. The secure Web server feature 162 comprises the Web server 164 and a report database 165 that hosts the reports 161 generated using the report script 160. The Web server feature 162 is optional.
An equally preferred embodiment of the invention provides secure management connections (141, 142) and a secure management host 140 for managing the policy monitoring component 100 and the combination of the network monitoring components 128, respectively.
b shows a simpler embodiment of the invention, wherein the parser tool 150 and the secure Web server feature 162 are omitted.
The default action of the policy engine 102 is that it denies all traffic. The policy 105 opens holes in this denial to allow permitted traffic to flow. Although the policy engine 102 assigns a single disposition to an entire network event, the protocol events are significant. As network data 115 arrives, the policy engine 102 interprets protocols and generates updates of protocol event information. The policy 105 is consulted as each new piece of information arrives, so that the earliest determination of disposition is reached. For example, if the policy 105 states that a given IP address may not communicate with another IP address, the policy 105 can generate a disposition immediately upon receiving the first packet 115 of the network event.
To aid policies in early determination of disposition, the policy language divides dispositions into immediate and final. An immediate disposition fires immediately, i.e. its value becomes associated with the network event right away. A final disposition sets a bookmark to itself as the latest and best disposition. When all protocol events are processed without an immediate disposition, the last bookmark set is the disposition that is applied to that network event. Immediate dispositions are designed to generate early results and to allow policy writers to issue a definitive disposition for the network event based on the information received up to that point. Final dispositions allow for the possibility that a better disposition might be determined later on. In other words, they allow the policy engine 102 to make a more informed decision based on additional protocol events that might be received as the network event progresses.
Overview of the Components
An overview of main components of the preferred embodiment of the invention is discussed below with reference to
Policy Generator
The preferred embodiment of the policy generator component 110, also referred to as policy wizard, is a program that makes an end user readily able to generate a first-pass policy for a new site. Policy information is input into a set of dialog boxes and a policy is generated. The wizard enables the end user to generate policy based on what can be considered gross characteristics of a network at the IP level, such as, for example, policy domains, communities of hosts, servers, subnets and firewalls, as well as at the UDP/TCP service level. For example, such network characteristics can comprise communities of hosts that can access certain services on server hosts.
Once a policy has been generated with the wizard, it is output in the policy specification language 105 so that it may be directly processed by the policy monitor component 100. The policy wizard 110 is also able to save files at the wizard level, i.e. such that the policy may be refined in the wizard and re-generated.
Policy Monitor
The policy monitoring component 100 comprises a suitable user interface, such as an MFC-based front end or a command line interface, and the policy manager 106. The policy manager 106 performs the actual examination of a sequence of event updates stored in a file or transmitted in a continuous stream 115 in the context of a policy specification 105 and signals the adherence to the policy via records written to the database 104.
Network Monitor
The network monitor component 127 provides the following capabilities:
In another embodiment of the invention, the network monitor 127 can read packet data directly from observed network 125, generating a continuous stream of event updates for the policy monitor 100. This stream operates in real-time so that the policy monitor 100 processes events shortly after they happen on observed network 125.
It should be noted that the network monitor 127 can be used as a standalone tool, but typically is invoked from within the policy monitor component 100 and the query tool 135 in normal operation of the invention.
It should also be noted that the network monitor and the policy monitor may run on the same machine.
For a more detailed discussion on the internals of the network monitor, refer to the section, below entitled “Network Monitor Internals Descriptions.”
Query Tool
The query tool 135 allows the end user to view the data that has been stored in the database 104 by the policy manager 106.
Policy Compiler
The policy compiler performs syntactic and semantic checking of a policy specification. Upon successful compilation the compiler as controlled by runtime arguments, may:
It should be appreciated that it is not necessary to run the compiler because the policy monitor component automatically compiles and installs policy from the policy specification file.
Platform
The policy generator 110 runs on a Windows NT or Unix machine, while the policy monitor 100 and the network monitor 127 run on Linux machine(s). It should be appreciated that these components can run equally well on other suitable operating systems. In addition to policy and network monitoring software, the following software components are also installed on the appropriate machines:
It should be appreciated that these components can run equally well on other compilers, databases, and packet monitoring systems.
Policy Files
There are two file types that are used within the invention's environment, and are described below in Table B.
The preferred embodiment of the invention incorporates a high level workflow method for developing policy, as follows:
The high level workflow described above can be illustrated further by understanding an example, as follows. System components of the invention are referenced using
Referring to
Next, compliance of current network traffic to this initial policy is monitored (202). Such monitoring is achieved by collecting packet information off the network and running such data 115 against the initial policy 105 using the policy monitor 100.
Then the query tool 135 is used to data-mine output network event data from the database 104, using the mined data to check for traffic that is not consistent with the policy 105, and reporting the results (203).
Once anomalies have been found, the next step is to work out where the problem lies. The problem could be network equipment is misconfigured and needs to be corrected (203); otherwise acceptable behavior is not covered currently by the policy specification file the file needs to be corrected (204); or, otherwise acceptable behavior is not covered currently by the corporate policy and the corporate policy needs to be corrected (205). In the case of this example, it is assumed that the policy specification 105 is incomplete and an end user needs to add a new rule to permit the observed traffic pattern.
Generate a Policy Specification File from a Wizard Policy
The end user starts the policy generator tool, or wizard 110, by double clicking on a policy wizard shortcut on the end user's desktop. In the preferred embodiment, a window such as depicted in
In this example, the end user has opened a file, c:\spm\quickstart\null.spw, through the File->Open menu item 301. This file contains a very simple policy that defines a single policy domain defined by a 10.0.0.0/8 subnet mask. Rules within this policy deny essentially all traffic.
The end user chooses to compile the policy, whereby the dialog box in
b shows the dialog box in
File Running Policy Monitor Over Canned Data
The end user starts the policy monitor 100 by double clicking on a policy monitor shortcut on the desktop. In the preferred embodiment, a window such as depicted in
The end user ensures that the “Input Dump File” entry field 501 points to a data dump file, here qs.dmp, and that the “Policy” entry field 502 points to the null.spm (monitor) file that the end user generated above. The “Monitoring Point” entry field 503 is derived from a policy domain name “Intranet” that is present in the null.spw (wizard) file.
The end user ensures database connectivity information is set correctly. The ODBC entry field 504 with entry “sybase” points to a Sybase database running on a local machine. The username “policy” 505 with some password, shown as “******” 506 have been preinstalled.
The end user presses the Run button 507 and the .dmp file is processed through the policy specification file 105 placing the output data into the database 104.
Look at the Results Using Query Tool
The end user starts the query tool 135 by double clicking on a query tool shortcut on the desktop. In the preferred embodiment, a window such as depicted in
The end user presses a “Network Events” button 601 and the dialog box depicted in
Here, the end user enters the same username and password as was used in policy monitor 100 and connects to a database 104 named Policy on localhost.
When connected, the screen shown in
Add a New Rule Using the Wizard
The end user returns to the policy wizard main window and presses the “Edit Rules” button which opens a dialog box as shown in
Next the end user generates a new policy specification file and runs policy monitor. The end user returns to the query tool and presses the “Network Events” button again to get a new rule view dialog box. The topmost “Execution Run” is now the output from the processing just completed. The end user presses the “Query” button and can now see that DNS traffic from 10.5.63.143 to 10.5.63.6 is now conformant to the policy as shown in
Detailed Description of Components
The preferred embodiment of the invention incorporates the following components, detailed description of which follows below.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a policy generator tool, or simply policy generator, equally referred to as policy wizard, that provides a level of abstraction on top of the policy language, and which simplifies the process of creating an initial policy based on gross characteristics of a network at the IP level, such as policy domains, communities of hosts, servers, subnets, firewalls.
The policy generator provides a novel mechanism for translating desired network security policy, such as corporate network security policy, into a policy specification file that can be interpreted and implemented by a policy monitor mechanism.
Building a policy with the policy wizard involves: deciding on logical divisions within the network, i.e. policy domains, grouping network nodes into logical communities, and expressing rules about which communities of hosts can provide what services to which communities of hosts.
High Level View of Policy Generation
The first step in building a basic policy is to define a high-level topology for the network. Not much detail is necessary. In the preferred embodiment of the invention, the network needs to be divided into bounded units called policy domains. In practice, the choice of a policy domain boundary is fairly obvious. Usually natural logical and physical boundaries in a network help define policy domain boundaries. For example, firewalls and routers with packet filters commonly denote the important boundaries. When defining a simple policy, it is reasonable to ignore switches, bridges, hubs, and routers that connect interior subnets.
It is suggested that policy domains be as small as required by traffic monitoring limitations and as large as specification of rules allow. Rules are written about traffic visible in a policy domain. Traffic in a policy domain is logically considered to be visible any where within the policy domain even though networking elements, such as, for example, switches prevent such visibility in most networks. By writing rules about traffic as though it is visible anywhere within the policy domain, the same set of rules can be applied to network traffic anywhere within the policy domain.
It has been found that if a policy domain is too small, rules need to be duplicated for each extraneous policy domain. If a policy domain is too large, then the choice of a network traffic monitoring point can become overly constrained, or the ability to detect IP spoofing and rogue routers is lost.
Identify the Policy Domains
It should be appreciated that the end user could choose to declare the Internet and Corporate network to be policy domains, but, by doing so, would only create unnecessary work because the end user does not intend to monitor traffic there. Any rules generated would thus never be used.
Add Perimeter Elements
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, the point of connection of a policy domain to the outside world is known as a perimeter element. For each perimeter element the set of nodes visible through it needs to be known and, for generating rules to detect IP spoofing and rogue routers, the MAC address of the perimeter element itself needs to be known.
As an example, if an end user could sit inside a policy domain and look out through boundaries, it is probable that the end user would see a filtered version of what is on the other side. Network address translation (NAT) can change the IP addresses seen though the boundary. For example, a proxying firewall may not let the end user see anything directly beyond a single IP address at the boundary. Filters may limit the view to only a few hosts when thousands are actually present.
Define Communities
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, communities consist of sets of IP addresses. They can be expressed as, for example, individual IP addresses, ranges of addresses, or subnet masks. Additionally, communities can be composed of other communities. It is often the case that a community of nodes involves all nodes in some existing set except for a node or two. Communities are defined in terms of included elements and excluded elements.
Define Rules for Each Policy Domain
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, rules defined for a policy domain describe allowed transactions. For example, if no rules are written, the policy specifies that everything at the IP level or above is denied, although this specification is not strictly true because typically auto-generated rules that apply to IP broadcast traffic and ICMP traffic within the policy domain exist. Rules create holes in this base layer that declares all traffic illegal.
Rules are defined in terms of initiator communities, target communities, and the services allowed. Services consist of a set of port numbers and indicators of whether TCP or UDP protocols are used.
Using the Policy Generator
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a front end for the policy generator. It provides a user interface for entering and editing a simple policy. The front end reads and writes the current state of a policy from or to an intermediate file. The currently preferred extension for the intermediate file is .spw. When a policy has been specified to the satisfaction of the end user, it is written to an intermediate policy file for processing by the policy generator backend that generates a formal policy specification file compatible with the policy monitoring system.
The front end allows the end user to edit policy domains, communities, services, and rules, to read and write the current policy from or to an intermediate file, and to process the intermediate policy file into the formal policy specification file.
The preferred embodiment of the invention allows several instances of each editing process to be open simultaneously. The interaction is intended to feel very live. Data changed in one editing process should be reflected in the contents shown in other editing processes. For example, if a community is added in one community editing process, then it is immediately available for use in all editing processes. When building a policy, entities are first created, then filled in. From the time of creation they can be used throughout the policy. Consequently, a community or policy domain does not need to be fully specified in order to be used. However, to prevent errors in backend processing, all entities should be complete before the intermediate policy file is submitted to the backend for policy specification file generation.
In the preferred embodiment, only one policy is under development at any time. The front end starts up containing a default policy that is empty except for some predefined default services. This policy can be used as a starting point or an existing policy can be read from a saved intermediate policy file.
It has been found that it is best to use simple names in developing a policy and to use a name that makes sense from a predetermined point of reference, not a fully qualified name that makes sense from any point of reference. For example, it is better to give a rule a short, descriptive name such as, “Allow_Outgoing_Mail” than to give the rule a long name such as, “Allow_Mail_From_Intranet_To_Outside_Intranet”.
For an in-depth understanding of the formal policy specification generated by the policy generator, or policy wizard, please refer to the section, Understanding the Wizard Generated Policy, below.
The preferred embodiment of the packet gathering component 128 is a program referred to as the harvester. It reads packets off the observed network 125 and writes them to either a packet capture file 126 or to a TCP socket that is connected to the policy monitor 100.
As an example, the harvester reads packets off the network when invoked as follows:
In this example, 1000 packets are read from a network interface labeled ‘eth0’ and stored in file ‘qs.dmp.’
The harvester can also be configured to read packet data and convert it to event data suitable for policy monitor 100. As an example, the harvester may be invoked as follows:
In this example, 1000 packets are read off the network interface labeled ‘eth0’, converted to event data suitable for policy monitor 100, and stored in the file ‘qs.dme’.
The harvester can also be configured to read packet data, convert it to event data suitable for policy monitor 100, and stream such data directly to the policy monitor in real time. As an example, the harvester may be invoked as follows:
In this example, 1000 packets are read off the network interface labeled ‘eth0’, converted to event data suitable for policy monitor 100, and transmitted in a TCP network stream to port 333 on the machine with IP address 10.5.63.6. This machine and TCP port may be configured so that the policy monitor 100 reads the data and processes it.
It should be appreciated that the events are transmitted as they are processed, so that the policy monitor 100 is able to see events shortly after they occur on the observed network 125.
In this mode of operation, the policy monitor 100 is also able to pass information about policy dispositions back to the harvester. The harvester can use this information to make processing of packets more efficient. For example, if the policy monitor 100 has determined that a given network event is acceptable according to the policy, the monitor can sometimes expedite its protocol processing by skipping packets until the network event terminates.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a policy monitor component that provides a user interface, either graphical or command line, that allows the configuration of various options of the monitor, policy engine and logger.
Monitor Configuration
Monitor configuration allows the end user to configure the location of the input packet dump, policy to be used, and the specification of the monitoring point.
The Input dump file specifies the input file, in tcpdump format that is to be used.
The Policy input specifies the .spm file that contains the policy specification to be used.
The Monitoring Point is a specification of where the Input dump file was collected. This name is derived from policy domain names that are specified in the policy wizard. For example, if a packet dump was collected in a policy domain named “Intranet” then the Monitoring Point name INTRANET_MONITOR should be used.
Monitor Logging Options
The monitor logging options allow the end user control of the location and the amount of data that gets written to the backend database.
The Execution Run Comment field allows the entry of freeform text that is added to the logs in the database to help identify this particular run of policy monitor.
ODBC Name provides the name of the ODBC source to which output data is written. The DB Username and DB password are the end user's database login information. The Save Password allows the program to save the password in the clear so that it does not need to be entered the next time the program is run.
Output Options
Output options allow the end user to specify whether the trace output from the monitor should be displayed in a console window (Output to console) or sent to a file (Output to file:).
Advanced Options
Advanced options allow more options to be set. In day to day operation, it is rare that such options need to be changed.
Advanced Monitor Configuration
An Assert DLL parameter allows specification of the name of the DLL to be used to verify condition and credential assertions. Note that if this DLL does not match the version of the policy specified then this DLL is regenerated, overwriting the provided DLL.
A Trace Options parameter allows the end user to provide configuration of runtime trace options. This option affects the amount of output generated by the monitor. For a more efficient operation, this field should be left blank.
A Certificate Dir argument points to a directory that contains trusted CA root certificates in DER encoded form.
Advanced Packet Logging Options
The packet logging options section allows the configuration of the trace options to be provided by the low level packet monitor. The various logging options may be specified at a global level (by setting them for layer “-All-”) or individually on a per-layer basis. Again it is to be noted that specifying logging options adversely affect the performance of the monitor.
The Site Handle parameter specifies a name that is associated with the particular company or site that is being monitored. It is used to segment a table that is used for IP-address name resolution within the output database.
Advanced Monitor Logging Options
The Disable Logging checkbox disables the writing of all logging data to the database. If logging is enabled then the remaining checkboxes provide for the enabling or disabling of the logging of network events with the given final disposition code. For example, if Disable Logging is not selected and only Policy Error selected then the only network events that are logged to the database are those that resulted in a final disposition code of POLICY_ERROR.
During normal operation information about all protocol events within a network event is logged, even those that occurred after a final disposition was reached. An Enable All Layer Logging parameter can control this feature. When set on, all protocol events are logged to the database. When not set only those protocol events that are processed before a disposition is reached are logged.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a query tool to examine the data that was placed in the database. The preferred query tool allows the following functions to be performed:
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides other tools discussed below.
Compiler
In its simplest form the compiler needs just a single argument that is the input policy specification file. This form is often all that is needed while doing initial development of a policy. It should be appreciated that the compiler is rarely used in standalone form since its function, with the exception of the -r flag, is subsumed into the policy monitor component.
Example Usage
During initial development a command such as the following could be used while getting rid of syntactic and semantic errors from the policy under development:
Once compiler errors are gone, the end user is ready to generate pieces that are used to run the policy monitor. For example, the end user can use the command line:
The following arguments in Table C may be provided to the example pmsCompiler.exe.
Network Monitor
The preferred embodiment provides a streams-based network monitor that can be run in a standalone mode independent of the policy monitor. In this way it can be used to provide a detailed, streams-based view of the network traffic, or a subset thereof. For example, run in standalone mode is desirable when a particular protocol is not supported natively by the policy monitor and an end user desires to see raw data to gain an understanding of what is going on.
It should be appreciated that a convenient way of accessing such functionality is through the query tool.
Example Usage
The following invocation of the network monitor:
Table D provides a list of network monitor options according to the invention.
Understanding the Wizard Generated Policy
Using the Policy Generation Wizard, a user specifies a network security policy in terms of the network services provided by certain hosts to other hosts in the network. When such policy is processed, the wizard generates a formal and more detailed description of the network security policy using the policy language. The policy language specification may then be used to analyze network traffic using the policy monitor tool. The results of this analysis can be studied using the query tool. An exemplary policy language is taught in A Declarative Language for Specifying a Security Policy, patent application Ser. No. 09/479,781 (Jan. 7, 2000).
Understanding the output of the preferred query tool requires understanding how the preferred wizard translates the high-level view of security policy it presents to its users into a set of policy language objects such as rules, credentials and dispositions.
Understanding the policy generation process involves the following:
Every policy generated by the wizard includes a set of predefined default rules for handling protocol events that do not conform to the user-defined policy i.e. rules that deny access, as well as rules for handling common network events not covered by the user policy. These rules and their dispositions are shown in Table E and Table F, and further discussed below.
Table F shows the default rules for all the protocols supported by the policy monitor. The policy engine selects these rules when no other rule can be found that is satisfied by the protocol event.
Table G below shows rules that cover protocol events not addressed by the wizard's user interface. These are well understood events that can be separated from those handled by the default rules. Ip_Deny_Pure_Ip is assigned to IP associations whose payload is not one of the three well-known IP-based protocols (ICMP, UDP and TCP). Tcp_Missed_Connections is assigned to network events where the establishment of the TCP connection was not witnessed by the policy monitor. Ftp_Ignore_Data_Connections is assigned to all FTP data connections which, from a security policy monitoring perspective, can be safely ignored. It is noted that the preferred policy wizard generates other rules to deal with common protocol events as discussed below.
Table G shows the predefined dispositions used by all the rules in the generated policy. Associated with each disposition are its disposition code and severity, which may be used in the query tool to filter network events.
It should be noted that ok and policy-error are actually built-in dispositions in the policy language. If policy-error is encountered it indicates an error in the processing of either the policy or the network traffic data by the policy monitor. The meaning of the other dispositions is explained later in this document in the context of the rules in which they are used.
Finally, the wizard includes a set of predefined credentials that are combined with dynamically generated credentials and used in implicitly generated rules:
It is noted that the double underscore prefix in these credential names is used to ensure that there aren't any name conflicts with credentials generated to represent user-defined communities and services.
Explicit Rules and Credentials
Every community defined by the user results in a credential of the same name. Because the scope of a community name is that of the entire policy specification, the resulting credential names need not be massaged to ensure uniqueness.
Service names are also global in scope. Because services and communities share the same name space, every service defined in the policy results in a credential whose name is constructed by prefixing the user-supplied service name with the underscore character. Thus, for example, the Smb service is represented by a credential named_Smb.
Rule names, on the other hand, are only unique within the scope of a policy domain. Furthermore, if a user-defined rule addresses a service that is both a UDP and a TCP service, the wizard generates two rules, one for the UDP protocol and another for the TCP protocol. Thus, a rule name is constructed by prefixing the user-supplied name with the protocol name (Udp_ or Tcp_) and the policy domain name.
For example, if the user defines a rule titled Smb_Services within a policy domain named Intranet, the wizard generates two rules, Udp_Intranet_Smb_Services and Tcp_Intranet_Smb_Services, for the UDP and TCP protocols respectively.
User-defined rules may also result in the generation of additional credentials. When defining a rule, the user provides the following information:
If more than one initiator community are specified, the wizard generates a credential that combines these communities into a union. The credential name is constructed by appending the word _Initiator to the user-supplied rule name, prefixed by the policy domain name. Using the example above, the wizard would create a credential named Intranet_Smb_Services_Initiator.
Likewise, if more than one target communities are specified, the wizard creates a credential representing their union and names it by appending the word _ Target to the policy domain and rule names, e.g. Intranet_Smb_Services_Target).
However, if one or more services are specified they are combined with the target credentials according to the service type. For example, the Smb service (for the SMB protocol suite) and its like-named credential include ports that are used for both TCP and UDP. Thus, for the Smb_Services rule used above, the wizard would generate the following additional credentials: Udp_Intranet_Smb_Services_Target and Tcp_Intranet_Smb_Services_Target. These credentials combine Intranet _Smb_Services_Target (or a single target community) with the _Smb credential and constitute the actual target credentials used in Udp_Intranet Smb_Services and Tcp_Intranet _Smb_Services respectively. It should be noted that, in many cases, the set of UDP and TCP services referenced in a rule have little, if any overlap.
If the end user does not specify any services the wizard uses the Intranet_Smb_Services_Target credential (or a single target community credential) to identify the target principal.
Implicit Rules and Credentials
For each policy domain within the policy specification, the wizard automatically generates a set of rules and credentials that define the valid IP-level traffic seen at the monitoring point within the domain. In addition, an ICMP rule is generated that handles all intradomain ICMP traffic, as well as a credential for the monitoring point in that domain.
The monitoring point credential is based on an agent descriptor string manufactured by the wizard. The agent descriptor is constructed by converting the policy domain name to uppercase and appending to it the word _MONITOR. Thus, for example, a policy domain named Intranet is assigned the agent descriptor:
Note that this is the agent descriptor to be used in the policy monitor when analyzing data collected at this monitoring point.
The monitoring point credential itself is named by appending the word _Monitors to the policy domain's name. In the example above, the credential is named Intranet_Monitors.
The wizard segregates all intradomain ICMP traffic (common on an enterprise network) by use of a rule that assigns it the disposition Monitor_Icmp. The rule is named by combining the protocol name with the domain name using the word _Within. For example, in the Intranet policy domain the rule is named Icmp_Within_Intranet.
IP traffic is described by a set of rules that systematically enumerate all valid IP-level traffic within the policy domain, between hosts in the policy domain and external hosts, and between external hosts through the policy domain (when more than one perimeter element is present). Most of these rules provisionally allow IP traffic, letting the subsequent protocol layers (ICMP, UDP, TCP, etc.) determine if the traffic is indeed allowed either by a user-defined (explicit) rule or by a predefined rule.
The first IP rule provisionally allows all intradomain IP traffic. It is named by combining the protocol name with the domain name using the word _Within (e.g., Ip_Within_Intranet). In the absence of a higher-level protocol within an intradomain. IP association, the rule assigns the network event a disposition of Deny_Pure_Ip, i.e. its final outcome.
The intradomain IP rule uses the policy domain's defining community as its target principal. However, it generates another credential to be used as the initiator. This credential combines the defining community with the predefined credential for zero-valued IP addresses (_Zero_Ip_Address). The generated credential is named by appending the word _Initiator to the generated rule name, e.g. Ip_Within_Intranet_Initiator.
Another intradomain IP rule is used to segregate typical broadcast and multicast traffic within an enterprise network. It is named by combining the protocol name with the domain name using the words _Broadcasts_Within, e.g. Ip_Broadcasts_Within_Intranet. Its initiator principal is the same as that used for the general intradomain traffic, e.g. Ip_Within_Intranet_Initiator. Its target is a new credential constructed by combining the predefined credentials _Multicast_Addresses and_Local_Broadcast_Address with the directed broadcast addresses for all the subnets within the policy domain's defining community. The new credential is named by appending the word _Target to the rule name e.g. Ip_Broadcasts_Within_Intranet_Target.
The intradomain broadcast and multicast traffic is assigned the disposition Monitor_Broadcasts.
Traffic between hosts in the policy domain and external hosts is described by a set of rules whose complexity depends on how much information the user supplied about the topology of the network. Specifically, it depends on how many perimeter elements were specified and on whether or not the interface addresses, i.e. MAC addresses, of the perimeter elements are included in the policy specification.
If there are external communities associated with at least one perimeter element for which the interface address is not known, the wizard generates a credential combining all such communities in a single union unless there is only one such community, in which case its credential already exists. This credential is named by combining the policy domain name with the string _External_Communities, e.g. Intranet_External_Communities.
The wizard then generates two rules defining the traffic between hosts internal to the policy domain and these external communities. The wizard names these rules by combining the protocol name with the domain name and the string _To_External_Communities or _External_Communities_To, depending on the direction of the IP traffic, e.g. Ip_Intranet_To_External_Communities for outbound traffic and Ip_External_Communities_To_Intranet for inbound traffic.
The credentials used alternately as the initiator and target principals for these rules are the policy domain's defining community and the aforementioned credential for the external communities. The rules provisionally allow the IP traffic to flow, subject to other rules for higher level protocols. In the absence of a higher-level protocol within the network event, the rule assigns it a disposition of Deny_Pure_Ip, i.e. its final outcome.
External communities visible through one or more perimeter elements whose interface addresses are known, are handled by a separate set of rules, two per perimeter element. For each perimeter element, the wizard starts by creating a credential that combines one or more credentials for one or more external communities visible through it with the perimeter element's interface address. Such credential is named by combining the domain name with the perimeter element name and the string _Communities. For example, external communities visible through a perimeter element named Firewall are described by a credential named Intranet_Firewall_Communities.
The wizard then generates two rules defining the traffic between hosts internal to the policy domain and the external communities visible through this perimeter element. The wizard names these rules by combining the protocol name, the domain name, the perimeter element name and the word _To, e.g. Ip_Intranet_To_Intranet_Firewall for outbound traffic and Ip_Intranet_Firewall_To_Intranet for inbound traffic.
The credentials used alternately as the initiator and target principals for these rules are the policy domain's defining community and the aforementioned credential for the external communities. The rules provisionally allow the IP traffic to flow, subject to other rules for higher level protocols. In the absence of a higher-level protocol within the network event, the rule assigns it a disposition of Deny_Pure_Ip, i.e. its final outcome.
Finally, if there is more than one perimeter element associated with the policy domain, the wizard generates rule-pairs that describe the traffic between external communities visible through specific perimeter elements as well as external communities visible through any perimeter element, i.e. those without associated interface addresses. The rules are named by combining the names of each pair of perimeter elements with the protocol name, the policy domain name and with the word _To, in the case of addressable perimeter elements, or with the string _External_Communities, for all other external communities. An additional rule is generated to cover traffic between external communities not associated with an addressable perimeter element and is named by combining the protocol name with the domain name and the string _Between_External_Communities.
Thus, if the Intranet domain used as an example in this section were to have a second (addressable) perimeter element named Router and a third non-addressable perimeter element (whose name is unimportant), the wizard would generate the following rules to cover all traffic amongst their respective external communities:
Table H and Table I summarize all the implicit rules and credentials generated for the example policy domain Intranet. The policy domain includes two perimeter elements with a specified interface address (Firewall and Router) and a third non-addressable perimeter element.
Logging and Reporting Modules
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides logging and reporting modules, as described herein with reference to
The preferred embodiment of the invention also provides an alarm script 155. As the policy engine module 102 reaches dispositions on network events of a certain disposition severity, for example, CRITICAL or HIGH, the alarm script is invoked to provide expedited alerting of the disposition.
The following algorithm is used to enter the data into the database 104.
On a periodic basis report statistics 161 are sent across a secure channel to a secure, customer accessible server 162. The preferred embodiment of the invention uses the following algorithm.
It should be appreciated that an equally preferred embodiment performs name resolution on packet data after the packet data has been collected, rather than concurrent with collecting the packet data. An advantage to such name resolution technique is that name resolution after collection is removed from real-time processing, thereby rendering name resolution more efficient.
On the receiving secure server 162 the following algorithm is invoked on the received email message.
Upon accessing the reporting website 164 the client is able to peruse the reports that have been generated, access the protocol event data stored in the database 165 via a cgi script.
The preferred embodiment of the invention uses a formal specification of network security policy that is to be enforced on a network. This specification provides a precise, compact description of network security policy. However, it is difficult for a layperson to understand. In order to allow comprehension of the policy by non-technical staff within a user's organization the parser module (
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides the following algorithm for generating the English language representation. The algorithm comprises the following:
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides the following rule algorithm to generate an English language representation of a single policy language rule. The algorithm is described with reference to
For an example of the rule algorithm discussed above, Table K below shows code to the example implementation.
For an example of an output file generated by the main algorithm discussed above, Table L shows the example of the output in table format. For an example of a policy specification file that can be used as input into the main algorithm discussed above, refer to Table P below.
The preferred embodiment of the invention comprises a technique for a policy engine internally to organize policy rules in order to effect an efficient evaluation of protocol events at runtime. Evaluation of a protocol event entails selecting one or more applicable policy rules using an evaluation algorithm. The preferred evaluation algorithm is described in A Declarative Language for Specifying a Security Policy, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/479,781 (Jan. 7, 2000). An excerpt describing the preferred evaluation algorithm is provided below in Table P.
Using this technique, policy rules are organized in a manner that minimizes the number of rules that need to be considered when determining the set of rules applicable to a given protocol event. The algorithm is described with reference to
It should be noted that the same rule can be referenced by different lists of ordered rules and, in each list, can have different rank numbers because the ranking of a rule is relative to the ranking of the other rules in the same list.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides an assessment tool that allows the discussed technique for continuously, assessing the security of a system to be applicable to both long-term and short-term network assessment. The tool provides an additional dimension to network assessment. That is, it provides the ability to capture and classify large volumes of network traffic efficiently, based on a formal policy which describes permitted traffic. The tool adds network usage to the known list of features discussed in an assessment framework.
It has been found through field experience that the invention can be useful in the following contexts:
It should be appreciated that using the invention as a supplemental process in performing network assessments results in at least the following benefits:
It should be appreciated that because the invention operates passively, the customer network can be monitored while in normal operation or production.
Operational Description
An example of implementing the assessment tool is described in the following discussion. A consultant arrives at a customer office with one or more workstations with the monitoring invention discussed herein loaded. The workstation, or station for short, may be a laptop computer, or other suitably portable platform. The monitoring station is attached to the customer network at a critical network bottleneck, e.g. just inside an Internet firewall, and monitors all traffic at that point in the network. From a security point of view, the monitoring station is entirely passive and invisible to the network. The monitoring station only receives packets and does not respond to any protocol actions. Due to the monitoring station's passive nature, no operational impact is imposed on the subject network. Hence, assessments may be performed during peak production times, as well as when a network is in a quiescent state.
In this example, the monitoring station is left attached to the network for a long period of time, depending on conditions, such as, for example, the practical demands of the visit, storage space on the station, and the amount of traffic on the customer's network. If appropriate, the station can be left at the customer site to gather data over a short-term period, such as, for example, days and weeks.
In this example of an assessment situation, the policy specification is used to remove from consideration as much mundane network traffic as possible, allowing the analyst to concentrate on more interesting traffic. Due to the opinion of the analyst being part of the assessment process, there is no fixed goal for the level of detail needed in the policy specification. In the simplest case, the analyst generates no policy at all, and examines the network events one by one (perhaps using the query tool to filter them). In practice, it can be suggested that the analyst undergoes a short policy development phase, as the short policy development phase can serve the analyst well to reduce thousands of network events into a page or two, which may then be examined by inspection.
The invention allows data to be stored in full packet form for most detailed analysis, or in compressed form storing only security-sensitive events. The latter form also removes customer-confidential information, such as, for example, embedded passwords, so that it is more appropriate for removal from the customer site. A typical usage scenario is capturing full-packet data in a short burst, such as, for example, five minutes. After a brief analysis, a longer data collection is run using the compressed form.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides the following algorithm for an operator, such as an analyst, to perform the data analysis on a data packet or on a compressed file of data. The algorithm is described referring to
It should be appreciated that the same packet or compressed file is run by the policy engine multiple times.
It should be appreciated that in an assessment situation a policy can be edited by using the policy generator discussed herein. The invention provides for using the policy generator for rapid policy development based on transport-level parameters. Enhanced policy development, using more complex tools, typically is not necessary in an assessment situation.
It should also be appreciated implementing the algorithm discussed above does not take very long. Part or all of the process may take place at the customer site, in a hotel room, on an airplane, or back at the analyst's office, for example. When the process is completed, the analyst has a list of monitored network events. This list is used as a basis for additional discussion with the customer to determine the meaning of such events. Experience has shown that such conversation is useful to the assessment interviewing process.
It should also be appreciated that the variations of the algorithm above can be implemented and are within the scope of the invention. Examples of variations follow.
An equally preferred embodiment comprises the analysts first determining the customer requirements and the customer network credentials. Using this information, the analyst programs an initial policy. The analyst can derive and use additional information from the scanning process as described in the algorithm above.
The customer or analysts designs an initial best policy as a set of credentials and rules, set all dispositions to DENY, and monitors the network to determine what the dispositions should be.
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, the policy language describes a policy decision involving two principals, an initiator and a target principal. These principals are identified by a set of one or more credentials. For each policy decision the policy engine ascertains which credential in the policy best describes the information about the principals involved in an interaction. Similarly, the policy language herein describes conditions that in turn describe tests performed on the state of an associated protocol event.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a credential/condition assertion verification optimization algorithm to ensure that the choice of credentials and conditions are made as efficiently as possible.
To accomplish credential/condition assertion verification optimization, the policy engine:
The preferred embodiment provides a more rigorous algorithm, an example of which is described in Table M below.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a network monitor internals mechanism discussed below that serves to translate packet data into multiple concurrent streams of network event data. It accomplishes this by interpreting both sides of each protocol transaction.
Protocol Engine
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a protocol engine in the network monitor that can be described with reference to
The protocol engine 6100 provides one module 6107 for each protocol implemented 6108. The modules implement a generic series of operations, a preferred example of such series is provided below in Table N. A common connection structure 6109 allows connection data to be arranged in a stack allocation for each access across layer boundaries. In Java or C++ terminology, for example, each protocol is a superclass of connection. The layering permits protocols to assume one or more roles as the layer responsible for each corresponding boundary, such as, for example: Network, Transport, Session, Application, or Transactions.
It should be appreciated that in the stopCollecting generic operation, and in a transport protocol, header information in packets may need to be examined to determine connection state, allowing freeing of resources when the connection terminates. Transport protocols discard all subsequent data from the connection, and do not forward packets on to higher level protocols. Such mechanism allows the monitor to efficiently process bulk transfers, encrypted connections, or connections that are no longer of interest to the policy engine.
It should be appreciated that the process discussed above for the stopCollecting generic operation can be appropriate for a hardware filter to stop packets from arriving.
The concept of the current time in the monitor flows from the packet level upwards. That is, time is associated with the packet and is maintained throughout the packet. When the network monitor is running in real time off live packet data, current time reduces to the time a packet was received, which may be earlier than the time when the packet is processed. When the network monitor is running off stored packet data, current time in the monitor has no relation to actual current time. The packet is processed relative to the time it was received and whereby time intervals remain the same. Also, results can be lined up in the database reflecting the point of reference of the time the packet was received.
The network monitor provides support for setting alarms on connections. An alarm is set by registering a connection to receive a signal when the network monitor transitions to a predetermined value of current time. The signal consists of a call to a generic alarm operation in every protocol layer registered with such connection. Alarm handlers are called in order from lowest protocol layer to highest protocol layer.
Because network monitor functionality is based on network events that can map to network connections, the network monitor provides a connectionless association feature. By using the feature, the network monitor registers the fact that it noticed two IP hosts communicating. Typically, an association is long lived, whether or not the network monitor knows its intention. Examples of associations are a series of ICMP PING/PING REPLY packets and a stream of IPSEC packets. The network monitor treats associations as connections. Indeed, often associations are connections at a higher level of protocol.
Output Section
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides an output section in the protocol engine.
The output section 6200 works by allowing the network monitor to establish a transaction which forms an association between a monitor connection and a network event in the policy engine.
The output section's interface comprises a set of calls to establish communication with the policy engine, and to start and finish transactions, and a set of protocol-specific calls. The calls progress as follows:
It should be appreciated that in addition to the calls above, multiple transactions can be active at a time, as long as each transaction follows the ordering described above.
The output section internally translates such calls into a generic set of calls, an example of which is listed below. At initialization of the network monitor, the output section is configured with a chain of output generic modules, each of which is used as filter on the output data. An example of the implemented modules follows:
In an equally preferred embodiment of the invention, the network monitor also includes an input section that decodes an encoded version of events. For an example application, in a real-time monitoring system embodiment the monitor 127 processes network traffic 125 in real time and uses ENC to generate encoded output. The encoded output is transmitted in real-time over a TCP connection where it is decoded and connected using SM to the Policy Engine 102.
In another embodiment of the invention, the output section is used for testing purposes. The output section is configured using command line arguments. An example of an algorithm for such testing follows:
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a technique for network event encoding to be used by the network monitor. The encoding technique is designed for both archival and transmission purposes. The basic format of the encoding is:
An example of the preferred form of the header follows:
The agent descriptor section is used to store a possibly null list of agent descriptors that are configured into the network monitor at encoding time. The agent descriptors are strings that plug into a particular policy language policy. They indicate the location of the subject monitor in the subject network wiring structure, enabling rules that apply to such location in the network and disable rules that do not apply.
A preferred agent descriptor section comprises an array, where each element of the array is an ASCII string, preceded by a single byte giving its length. The size of the array is given in the header cited above.
The preferred type map section is used to improve maintainability of the full policy monitoring system. Provided by the type map section is a mapping between update types used in an encoded record and the update types' string names. The decoding module uses this information to detect new update types that are not supported by mapping known updates to the correct values. That is, because new update types typically are not interpretable by old software, they are therefore successfully skipped.
A preferred type map section comprises an array, where each element of the array contains a four-byte type value, a single byte of string length, and the ASCII name of the type. The size of the array is given in the header cited above.
The preferred encoded transactions comprise an array of individual update encodings. The size of the array is either derivable from the header file size information, or is unbounded, such as, for real-time monitoring.
A preferred header for an individual update has the following format:
Following the header a body contains additional update-type-specific data, or possibly none.
To understand all events that transpire on a connection, it is necessary to combine events of different protocol layers. For example, an update, named SM_IP_ASSOCIATION, provides IP src and dst addresses and establishes a peer relationship. Subsequent events assume that this information is known and builds on it. For example, an update named ICMP_ECHO has no body at all.
An example of a set of update types and corresponding encoding body for each update, according to the invention is given below in Table O. The meaning of the term “string” is: if length(string) is <255, then byte[length], byte[string][length], else byte[0xff], byte[a], byte[b], byte[c], byte[d], byte[string][length] where a, b, c, d are the four (big-endian) bytes of length.
An exemplary user interface for providing and reporting the processed and analyzed network data from the database (
It should be appreciated that examples of a typical end user using such interface are, but are not limited to a customer whose network is being monitored, an operations analyst reviewing the customer's network environment and network data, and/or a policy analyst reviewing the network data and its conformance to network policy.
The preferred embodiment of the invention uses a web page paradigm as an example of a type of user interface, and is described with reference to figures of screen prints of web pages herein. While the claimed invention herein has disclosed a web page implementation of a user interface, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that such user interface readily encompasses any form, that can be substituted therefore to effect a similar result as is achieved by the web page, including but not limited to any graphical user interface or non-graphical user interface.
The preferred embodiment of the invention is described with reference to
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, the dashboard 20000 updates once every five minutes. It should be appreciated that different update rates can be used to keep the data on the dashboard 20000 current, and that parts of the underlying customer data may be updated at a different, such as a slower rate.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a tear off feature on the system dashboard 20000. In this example, the end user clicks on a tear off tab 20010 to open a tear off console window.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides an outstanding alerts area 20020 of the dashboard and consists of a FIFO queue of CRITICAL alerts that have been generated by the policy monitoring system (
The underlying data is updated on a real-time basis. Entries in the list link to alert details, as depicted in
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a health monitor 20040 to show a visual representation of the severity categories into which the current observed traffic has been assigned over a predetermined amount of time. In this example, the underlying data is updated every five minutes and summarizes traffic over the last one hour and last twenty four hour periods. CRITICAL and HIGH severity alerts have a red bar 20050, MEDIUM, WARNING and MONITOR uses a yellow bar 20060, and all others are green 20070.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides access to current summary reports. An example is shown in
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides an events summary view as shown in
In the example shown in
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a link to network events detail information. In this example, a separate link 2206 builds a network events details page as shown in
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, the summary page (
It should be appreciated that in another equally preferred embodiment, user defined and configurable query and reports settings can be stored, for example, in, a user's preferences or profile.
The preferred embodiment of the invention comprises trend reports on the dashboard, wherein such reports comprise charts that link to a network events summary page containing details of the summarized traffic. More specifically, the charts, unless otherwise explicitly specified, are bar charts, each of which link to the network events summary page.
Referring to
It should be appreciated that another equally preferred embodiment of the invention comprises an input means for the end user to customize which trends appear in the trend, e.g. QuickWeek section, and to customize the time period being viewed.
The preferred embodiment of the invention comprises trend charts that are embedded into details pages. Each of the trend charts allows the end user to dynamically configure a time range by a means such as a pull down menu.
Examples of such embedded trend charts are
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides event detail reports, such as for but not limited to network event details, protocol event details, and alert details, described below.
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a network event details page containing listed fields in columns that vary according to the violation type, such as, for example, All, Conformance (
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a protocol event details page as depicted in
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides an alert event details page as depicted in
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a policy update page containing, but not limited to a table displaying each time a new policy is installed on the security policy management system discussed herein. This table contains, but is not limited to:
It should be appreciated that in the preferred embodiment of the invention alerts are generated whenever a disposition with a CRITICAL severity is assigned to a network event, each alert generating an email containing, but not limited to the following information:
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a customer page that allows the user to configure a list of email addresses within a customer's organization that shall receive alert email.
Another equally preferred embodiment provides means for accessing ad-hoc queries for the end user, such as, but not limited to, filtering results by any one or all of the following:
An example of a means for accessing ad-hoc queries is an advanced search feature, such as for example, an advanced search dialog box 3100, as depicted in
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, an end user can open the advanced search dialog box 3100 from an Advanced Search link 3201 on the dashboard, as depicted in
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides informational aids. For example, the following information about a user's policy is available via a variety of features, such as but not limited to links, tool tips, and the like:
The preferred embodiment provides links to descriptions of rules, dispositions, IP-addresses, and the like, displayed, for example in a pop up window whenever the user's cursor is over the respective field, as depicted in
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides links on each page that include, but are not limited to:
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, each details page contains a button linking to a printer friendly version of the page.
In the preferred embodiment of the invention, regardless of the time zone the user's or the policy monitoring systems runs on, such as, for example Universal Time Coordinates (UTC). Any time being displayed to the user, such as, for example, on a website or in contents of emails, is converted to the user's time zone and as such is explicitly displayed.
A method and apparatus for a network monitor internals mechanism, which serves to translate packet data into multiple concurrent streams of encoded network event data, to contribute to enterprise management, reporting, and global mechanisms for aggregating monitors at a centralized aggregation point, and to facilitate rate limiting techniques because such monitors are not in control (i.e. cannot back pressure flow) is provided.
More specifically, an architecture of enterprise management, enterprise global management, and enterprise reporting is provided; a corresponding underlying technology for distributed querying, i.e. a command manager protocol is provided; an exemplary enterprise monitor operations view is provided; and rate limiting techniques for the incoming packets are provided.
This section provides a user level view of the information managed by the invention. It includes definitions of entities visible to the user, rules for determining a unique instance of each entity, relationships between entities, and the constraints that the application of the invention enforces to maintain data integrity.
Conventions
The data entities are presented using the following conventions:
It should be appreciated that unique identifiers in the logical model herein are defined based on objects represented in the system, rather than system generated identifiers used in implementation.
Policy Entities
Policy
A Policy is a technical specification of network security policy for a specific network. A policy is made up of policy objects used by a Policy Engine to characterize network traffic. A policy is versioned each time a change is made anywhere in the policy.
Policy Version
A specific collection of policy entities making up the policy at a point in time. Individual policy objects have timestamps to indicate when they were last changed, allowing easy identification of what actually changed in a given revision.
The policy version defines what policy is in effect for all conformance data.
Network Object
{Top Level Network, Subnet, Network Interface, Host}
The network object is a supertype entity that represents anything that generates or receives network traffic. Network objects have the ability to participate in Relationships, which means they can offer services to and require them from other network objects. See Relationship.
In one embodiment of the invention, a Fully Model Traffic flag directs a Policy Developer system (Policy Developer) to create detailed rules to validate all traffic to and from network objects rolling up to a reporting element. If this flag is not set, traffic not covered by specific relationships are not reported, i.e. are swept under the carpet. Tuning detailed rule generation improves output when evaluating a policy. It also allows policy to be developed for part of a network only.
Constraints:
A Top Level Network is a type of network object and is one of a defined set of commonly recognized high level network elements. Top Level Network objects provide containment for subnets, and form the first two levels of a network object containment hierarchy, with All Networks at the root of the hierarchy.
A Top Level Network object may be connected to one or more Perimeter Elements through a Network Interface.
Subnet
A subnet is a type of network object contained by a designated Top Level Network object (network type). A subnet represents a collection of network devices using an address space defined by the subnet mask(s).
If a subnet has a collection point, it is considered a “monitored” subnet.
A Subnet may be connected to one or more Perimeter Elements through a Network Interface.
Constraints:
A Network Interface is a type of network object that defines a connection between a Subnet or Top Level Network and a Perimeter Element. The MAC address of the network interface is used to generate IP routing rules if provided. The network address translation specification is also used to validate IP routing when provided.
Constraints:
A host represents a device or logical group of devices. Hosts are commonly used to represent groups of devices that share relationships or other characteristics. A host may contain an IP addresses space (an IP list or range) and/or other hosts (host group).
Constraints:
A perimeter element is a device that acts as a router or firewall, and supports network connections between subnets and Top Level Network objects. The perimeter element contains a network interface for each connection it supports.
Service
A service is a category of network traffic that is associated with a specific application.
A service has a “base protocol”, which specifies both the transport protocol and application layer protocols supported by the invention. See Protocol. The traffic descriptor(s) identify which ports are used by this service. If the “base protocol” is TCP and/or UDP, the service is more generally defined as all traffic using the specified transport protocol(s) and set of ports.
Protocol Component
Each IP network protocol is defined to have a set of “components”, which are potential characteristics of a protocol session. For example, the SSL protocol has a component to identify a connection where poor-quality encryption is used. The TCP protocol has a component to identify a connection where data is transferred, and another one to identify a connection where no data is transferred.
Outcome
An outcome defines how security policy applies to the use of a given protocol. For example, an OK outcome means that use of the protocol is expected. Note that outcome names are not unique, e.g. each protocol has an OK outcome. An outcome contains a list of protocol components with a criticality assigned to each one. For protocol uses that are not expected, or are known to be bad, an outcome can be created that defines for each protocol component how critical a policy violation it represents.
Criticality is an important attribute throughout the system, as it identifies to the user when significant violations occur. Criticality is assigned to each network event by the policy engine, and is used to generate policy alerts.
Relationship
Relationships describe expected or anticipated network traffic, and are the basis for the rules used by the policy engine. A relationship is defined as a service “offered” by a destination object (or server application), and “required” by a source object (or client application). An associated outcome defines how policy applies to the relationship. Relationships can describe both expected good traffic and traffic that is forbidden by policy.
Inherited relationships are created when relationships are defined for a network object that contains other network objects. For example, if a host is contained within a subnet and a relationship is defined for the subnet, the contained host inherits the relationship. This means that the same policy applies to traffic to or from the host as to the subnet. Inherited relationships can be overridden.
Conformance Entities
Conformance entities are used or created by the policy engine when evaluating network traffic against a policy.
Collection Point
A collection point represents a physical place in the network (typically a SPAN port o n a switch) where traffic capture is occurring and the policy engine is applying policy.
The location of the collection point determines what traffic should be visible to the Monitor.
A Collection point is associated with one or more subnet objects.
Rule Name
A rule is an input to the policy engine created when a policy is compiled in the Policy Developer. Rules are derived from relationships and other policy objects through system logic. The policy engine associates a rule to each protocol and network event.
Disposition
A disposition is an input to the policy engine created when a policy is compiled. A disposition characterizes a possible outcome of applying a rule to a protocol event.
Dispositions are derived from relationships and other policy objects through system logic.
Credential
A credential is an input to the policy engine created when a policy is compiled. A credential identifies a network entity or type of network traffic. It includes a boolean expression which, if true, defines a match. Credentials can also be created for application level entities such as user name, PKI certificate, URL, etc. Credentials are used in rules.
Condition
A condition is an input to the policy engine created when a policy is compiled. A condition contains a boolean expression used in evaluating a rule. Credentials are used in rules.
Network Event
A network event is an output of the policy engine created when network traffic is evaluated against a policy. A network event is a summary of the set of protocol events that make up a complete application level session on the network. For example, viewing a Web page creates a network event that summarizes the underlying IP association, TCP connection and HTTP Get protocol events.
A network event is identified by the packet which initiates an application session between devices. The optional capture file reference supports offline traffic analysis using discrete capture files. The policy engine assigns the following information to the network event, based on the protocol events and the most relevant policy rule that fires during policy evaluation:
A policy alert is created whenever a network event is assigned a severity of “critical”.
The policy alert is sent via email or SNMP trap to specified addresses, and is tracked through an Operations View. The alert cleared flag and time indicate when an operational user clears the alert from the Operations View.
Protocol Event
A protocol event is an output of the policy engine that is created when network traffic is evaluated against a policy. A protocol event describes a single protocol exchange, and references the policy rule/disposition pair describing the result of policy evaluation for that event.
Protocol Event Attribute
A protocol event attribute is output from the policy engine recording the value of each defined field in a protocol event. The set of protocol attributes for each protocol is statically defined.
Reporting Entities
Reporting Element
A reporting element is a network object used to summarize network activity. Any network object may be designated a Reporting Element. Being reporting elements makes “interesting” network objects visible in summary views regardless of where they appear in the network object hierarchy.
When containment relationships create a hierarchy of reporting elements, network events are preferably reported at the lowest level. Reporting elements higher in the hierarchy summarize network events that do not roll up to any lower-level reporting element. Every IP address rolls up to some Reporting Element, with the Top Level Network objects functioning as Reporting Elements by default for any IP addresses that don't roll up to a user defined reporting element.
An owner may be assigned to the reporting element.
Network Object Hierarchy
Definition:
The network object containment relationships create a network object hierarchy. At the root is “All Networks”, the next level is the Internet, Intranet and Extranet objects. All defined subnets are contained within either Intranet of Extranet, and hosts are contained (implicitly) by the subnets.
Groups of hosts can be defined as well as groups of groups, forming a host group hierarchy separate from the subnet hierarchy.
Counts of network events can be rolled up at all the nodes in these hierarchies.
It should be appreciated that in one embodiment of the invention, host groups are constrained to roll up to a specific subnet.
Reporting Network Objects
For reporting purposes, network objects are identified by name. This has two implications:
Counts of violations (network events with criticality other than OK) from a monitor summarized over a time interval. The monitor is part of the identifier to support the case where multiple monitors are deployed at a collection point. The time interval varies depending on the level of summarization. At the monitor, summarization is performed on a batch interval, e.g. 5 minute. Each summary row counts the number of occurrences of violations with the same:
The Summary Service is the same as the Network Event Service except that the “Unknown Service” value is used to consolidate all protocol/port based network event services into a single count.
Conformance Summary
Counts of conforming network events (events with criticality of OK) from a monitor summarized over a time interval.
The Conformance Summary is the same as the Network Event Summary except that the summarization is by network object instead of IP address. As implemented, the two types of summaries are denormalized into the same summary table, but the level of detail available for conforming events is less than for violations.
Policy Domain
A policy domain represents the collection of all Monitors running the same policy. The monitors are referenced indirectly through the Management Domain. See Management Domain.
Management of a policy domain is the responsibility of the policy analyst who is the author of the policy.
A policy domain can span management domains.
Introduction
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides the following architecture of the invention. The description of the preferred architecture comprises studio components (Studio), monitor components (Monitor), and Enterprise Manager and Reporting components (Enterprise Global and/or Enterprise Reporting) and their respective communication protocols.
It should be appreciated that the following discussed architecture in this entire section is by way of example only, and that other architectural configurations are possible and necessarily fall within the scope of the present invention.
Terms and Definitions
Following are definition of terminology introduced in this section.
An enterprise manager (EM) is a consolidation point for several monitors that provides an operational view and centralized management.
A tier 1 enterprise manager is an EM that interfaces directly to monitors.
A tier 2 enterprise manager is an EM that interfaces with monitors and other downstream EM's. Embodiments of tier 2 managers would be Enterprise Global and Enterprise Reporting.
High Level Architecture
Deployment Scenarios
Single Monitor Deployment
Single Monitor Deployment can be described with reference to
The preferred Monitor 180 is made up of two machines, a harvester performing packet capture and protocol processing 128, and a Security Manager (SM) 100 evaluating the captured traffic against policy. The SM additionally provides an externally accessible web interface for operations view (“a dashboard”) and systems management, and a remote querying and management technology (“the command manager”).
Each harvester collects data from a single “policy collection point”. Data may be physically collected on multiple interface cards for de-multiplexing into a single logical SPFM device from which the harvester is reading (see SPFM below).
Full Deployment
Full Deployment can be described with reference to
A full deployment of the preferred architecture comprises:
An Enterprise Manager 200 providing consolidated operational view, reporting, and systems management over a collection of monitors. This collection of monitors is divided into disjoint Policy Domains within which each monitor processes the same policy.
As with single monitor deployment, each monitor is made up of two machines, a harvester performing packet capture and protocol processing, and an SM evaluating the captured traffic against policy. Each harvester collects data from a single “policy collection point”. Data may be physically collected on multiple interface cards for de-multiplexing into a single device from which the harvester is reading.
Architectural Diagram
Components
Monitor
The Monitor provides the following functionality:
The preferred Monitor is physically two servers, one (the “harvester”) 128 collecting packet data, performing protocol analysis and sending a summary of the traffic to a second (the “SM”) 100 evaluating these summaries against a user supplied policy and storing the output of this evaluation. Refer to
Enterprise Manager
The preferred Enterprise Manager 200 provides the following functionality (refer to
The preferred Enterprise Reporting module 410 provides the following functionality (refer to
It should be appreciated that
Enterprise Global
The preferred Enterprise Global module 900 provides the following functionality (refer to
The preferred Studio 400 provides the following functionality (refer to
The following functionality is provided by the preferred web server environment 600 (refer to
It should be appreciated that one possible embodiment of the Command Manager 612 protocol of
Communication Protocols
This section discusses the preferred communications protocols between various components according to one preferred embodiment of the invention.
Manager and Monitor
Table Q below summarizes the communication between the Manager and each of its Monitors.
Manager and Studio
Table R summarizes the communication between the Manager and Studio.
It should be appreciated that the protocol XML/HTTPS is that of the Command Manager component.
Manager and Reporting
Table S summarizes the communication between the Manager and Reporting.
Manager and External Servers
Table T summarizes the communication between the Manager and servers that are external to the preferred deployment of the invention.
Manager and External Clients
Table U summarizes the communication between the Manager and clients that are external to the deployment.
Monitor and Studio
Table V summarizes the communication between the Monitor and Studio.
Again, it should be appreciated that the protocol XML/HTTPS is from the Command Manager protocol.
Monitor and External Servers
Table W summarizes the communication between the Monitor and servers that are external to the deployment.
Monitor and External Clients
Table X summarizes the communication between the Monitor and clients that are external to the deployment.
Protocols Summary
Refer to
Enterprise Global
One preferred embodiment of the invention provides Enterprise Global, which comprises a configuration of a plurality of Enterprise Managers.
High Level Architecture
For an understanding of Enterprise Global, refer to
The full hierarchical architecture comprises a second tier manager 200b farming out requests to first tier managers 200a. The second tier managers uses the same protocols to interact with the first tier managers as the first tier use to talk to the monitors.
Further tiers are identical to the second tier.
Reporting Server without a Manager
One embodiment of the invention provides having a Reporting server without a Manager, the Reporting server collecting data from a number of Monitors.
Tier-2 Manager
The second tier manager is a “global” manager as opposed to a “regional” manager. Such second tier manager maintains no conformance data but rather farms out the queries it needs to perform to its Tier-1 Managers. The second tier manager provides for a greater aggregation of conformance data, and a more centralized locus of management. As another embodiment, the second tier manager provides for aggregation of conformance data via web interface, but does not provide centralized management or studio query functions.
One embodiment would be an implementation acting purely as a HTTP proxy, i.e. a UI displays the list of accessible Tier-1 managers, and then proxies the Tier-1 interface to the user.
A second embodiment would be an implementation that puts application logic on the Tier-2 manager that then generates queries to the Tier-1 Managers and then renders the results. Such permits a Tier-2 Manager to perform a query that spans multiple Tier-1 Managers.
Protocols
The following protocol interactions are added to the system to support the extended architecture.
Tier-2 Manager and Tier-1 Manager
The following table summarizes the communication between the Manager and the Studio.
Tier-2 Manager and External Servers
The following table summarizes the communication between the Tier-2 Manager and servers that are external to the deployment.
Tier-2 Manager and External Clients
The following table summarizes the communication between the Tier-1 Manager and clients that are external to the deployment.
Tier-2 Manager and Studio
The following table summarizes the communication between the Tier-2 Manager and the Studio.
Summary
User Configuration Data
The User Authentication and Authorization database within a system deployment contains user authentication data and what roles that user has within each Policy Domain.
Independent Manager User Databases
Refer to
Shared Manager User Databases
One alternative deployment is using a shared user authentication and authorization database, or an external authentication server such as an LDAP directory or a Radius server. Refer to
This section discussed one preferred embodiment of the Command Manager protocol. Such embodiment is meant by example only and does not limit the scope of the invention.
Herein is a description the functional interface and design of the provided systems management, also referred to herein as the Command Manager. In particular this mechanism is used to manage:
The system management of the Monitor and Manager is accomplished via a Web based interface. All active management of the system takes place through this interface.
Status change notifications and ongoing monitoring are provided.
Component Architecture
An application, referred to herein as the Apache/tomcat, is used as the webserver platform. The management application is implemented as a collection of Java language JSP (Java Server Pages) and servlets that perform system functions.
In one embodiment, the Manager invokes operations on the Monitor by accessing URLs. The Manager has the capability to do such on multiple monitors simultaneously, e.g. for restarting the entire system.
Refer to
Functional Specification
Monitor Console
The Monitor console 1202 is a web browser that connects to a set of servlets that run on the Monitor 180, where they invoke console manager commands on behalf of a client. The client can request that the result be returned either as a rendered HTML page or as a XML document.
Environment
The Monitor console 1202 uses a web browser to run commands on the Monitor 180.
Interactions
Refer to
Management Console to Monitor, EM Command Manager to Monitor
The monitor management interface, implemented by the Command Manager, consists of a list of commands I URLs. A preferred embodiment of this command list is in the Table AC, following. Additional or different commands may be added to extend the protocol framework. It should be appreciated that the set of commands provided by the command manager is limited by its configuration. This limitation provides for an interface that is easily audited for security issues, and is resistant to many common security attacks.
It should further be appreciated that in addition to the custom arguments named above a “no-render” argument is also optionally supplied. If supplied then an XML result is returned to the caller rather than an HTML page.
Console Manager Result DTD
One embodiment of a Document Type Definition (DTD) is provided that describes the data returned by the Command Manager 612. It should be appreciated that this DTD is encapsulated and transported within the Command Manager DTD.
The following table shows sample DTD.
Details of Command Manager Preferred Embodiment
The command manager 612 provides a naming mechanism for command targets, referred to as LogicalHostnames. Exemplary targets are: a Monitor, an Enterprise Manager, an Enterprise Reporting system, and Enterprise Global. The naming structure makes use of randomly allocated large numbers, referred to as UUID's. The size of the UUID's and their random selection makes it possible to choose them without a coordinated selection scheme. Each UUID also maps to a more convenient textual name, used in the user interface.
A LogicalHostname consists of three subsidiary entity names, referred to as the Domain, Tier, and MachineID. The Domain indicates the policy domain into which the Command Manager requestor is authenticated. The Tier indicates the level of hierarchy within the domain, 0 being a Monitor, 1 being an Enterprise Manager (tier 1), 2 being an Enterprise Manager (tier 2), and so on. The MachineID identifies a single machine within the Command Manager interconnectivity.
Each of Domain, Tier, and MachineID may be specified to be a wildcard, indicating that all or any such target will match this field. In this way, a LogicalHostname may refer to more than one actual command manager target.
With reference to the preferred embodiment of a command set in Table AC and
An exemplary notation for a LogicalHostname is as follows:
Some examples of this notation follow:
Authorization begins when a requesting entity, referred to as the requestor, gives the command manager a command to invoke, a LogicalHostname, specifying one or more machines on which to invoke the command, and a set of roles to authorize the command. An exemplary command set appears in Table AC. Such set of roles may indicate that any role is acceptable.
The command manager has access to User Configuration Data as specified below. The requestor authenticates to the command manager, which looks up the acceptable roles for the user in the User Configuration Data. In two equally preferred embodiments, such authentication is based on either user name and password or SSL client certificate authentication. With respect to the exemplary command set in Table AC, a set of roles is associated with each command. The command manager matches the authenticated requestor's command to the roles associated with the command, and requires the requestor to have such role before such command is performed.
If such command is authorized in said manner, the command manager configuration builds, on behalf of the requestor, a chain of trusted connections through one or more connected machines, which may serve as requestors or targets. A preferred embodiment example of said trusted connections is an SSL protocol connection with Client and Server certificate authentication.
The requested command, set of roles, and LogicalHostname is then transmitted to one or more connected machines using such trusted connections, along with the LogicalHostname. The command manager sends said items to only those machines that might need to perform it, based on the said LogicalHostname.
When a machine on the chain receives such command, such set of roles and such LogicalHostname, it intersects the set of roles with a configured list of roles it is willing to adopt on behalf of the previous machine in the chain. For example, a monitor may be willing to perform only a subset of available commands for its Enterprise Manager. The LogicalHostname is translated into a set of LogicalHostNames, with the Domain wildcards expanded to each domain which might be able to execute the command, based on the intersected set of roles. The command, intersected set of roles, and set of LogicalHostnames is then transmitted to further machines, if required.
In addition to the such transmission to further machines, if said machine on the chain matches an element of the set of LogicalHostnames, then the set of roles is further intersected with a configured list of roles that said is willing to adopt for that command. If the result of this intersection is not an empty set, then the command is executed.
This section discusses an exemplary embodiment of both the user interface and functional interface design of the Operations (Ops) view for the Enterprise Manager and Monitor systems. The Operations View provides access to the data being generated by the SM and is then viewed via a website. The data generated by the SM is currently stored into a database. The Operations View is responsible for querying the database using a separate API that has been optimized and been written specifically for this purpose. The difference between the Manager's and the Monitor's Ops View is that the Manager can show one or more Policy Domains whereas the Monitor only shows one Policy Domain.
It should be appreciated that such exemplary implementation is by example only. It should be apparent to one skilled in the art that various other implementations and configurations are possible and are each within scope of the invention.
User Interface
Several components share the same look and feel, including the Manager and Monitor Operation Views, and the Monitor Console. Access to the same such components is through a common infrastructure. All components are accessed from a web browser, using HTTPS to access a Java language servlet that implements monitor operation view functions.
Home
Home Page (monitor page, dashboard, etc.)
Referring to
This page also shows an alert box. In this summary, the user is able to see the new alerts coming in and he or she is then able to go to the details of each of these from there. The alert box works similarly to the way email works. Whenever there are new alerts, the New Alerts text becomes bold and it shows how many new alerts there are. These will remain bold until a user goes to the details view by clicking on them, reviewing them, and checking them as “read”.
The user then gets to this page after logging in. The login servlet checks whether the username/password are valid and then it checks the roles for that particular user. The role dictates what policy domains the user is allowed to see. The policy domains that the user is allowed to see show on the left side of the page, and the graphs containing the last twenty four hour data show on the right hand side of the page together with the first fifteen lines of the first level summary table. The data shown the first time is of the first policy domain on the list. The user is able to click on an item in the summary table to go to the second level summary table or select a date range, the number of rows desired to view and clicks on the view summary button to go to the first level summary table.
The user may filter the data by Policy Domains. All a user has to do is select the Policy Domain desired from the left hand side of the page, and click on the update view button. This causes the page to reload and shows the data for the Policy Domain(s) selected. The last selection the user makes is remembered across logins, depending if the user has cookies enabled in the browser.
First Level Summary
The first page in the event summary provides a table with a Policy Domain's Reporting Element and the count for each of its seventies. This table is sorted on the status column with most critical being on top; the status column indicates the most severe violation for that Reporting Element during the selected time period. Clicking on a row of the table displays second level summary for that Reporting Element.
There are two ways to get to this page. One is from the home page, by clicking on the view summary button, and the other is by clicking on the home page graphs. Required information is date range, number of rows to show, and user information.
The following table shows an example of the data rollup at the first level.
Second Level Summary
The second level summary expands the information for the Reporting Element selected in the previous page. Each line has at least one reporting element. The reporting element appears in bold text, for emphasis. Clicking on a row of the table displays Event Summary 3 for that Reporting Element. This table is sorted by criticality.
The only way to get to this page is by clicking on one of the rows on the first level summary table. This can be done from the first level summary page or from the summary table on the home page. Required information is date range, number of rows to display, and Reporting Element.
The following table shows data rollup at the second level.
It should be appreciated that Source (Src), Destination (Dest), Service, Outcome, Outcome Component, Owner and Criticality columns show how the traffic violations fit into the way that the Policy models the network.
Third Level Summary
The third level summary shows event detail summary for the row clicked on the second level summary. The ExecutionRun keys in which this data can be found is available either in the table or as a tooltip.
DNS names are available for the IP-Addresses, either as tooltips or vise versa.
The only way to get to this page is by clicking on a row on the second level summary table on the second level summary page. Required information are date range, number of rows to display, outcome and outcome component, plus either source or destination reporting element
The following table shows third level summary data.
Parameters
Most of the summary and detail queries preferably give the user the option of setting the following parameters:
It should be appreciated that in the first level summary, add another view that is by Outcome and another one by Criticality. And, in the third level summary, allow clicking through the rows to perform a remote query (of some definition) on the SM.
Rate limiting is the process of selectively dropping data at various stages of a pipelined system, so as to prevent back pressuring. Rate limiting is applied at each stage so that data is dropped in a heuristic manner that is appropriate to this stage of the pipeline. The heuristic is chosen so that the data discarded causes the least impact on the monitoring result. For example: packets may be dropped based on connection boundaries, rather than randomly; event details may be dropped, but counts of the events maintained; event information may be abstracted by counting and combining like events over a time interval.
One preferred embodiment of rate limiting according to the invention is discussed with reference to
Each of these rate limiting features is discussed in detail herein below.
It should be appreciated that each rate limiting design and implementation is based on the type of process (such as the SPFM, the Monitor, and the Logger, for example) and each process' idea of connection. Each process discards unwanted packets and events in its own way.
It should further be appreciated that the rollup feature discussed herein above can be viewed as another means for rate limiting as data goes into the Enterprise Reporting system. In one embodiment of the Enterprise Reporting System, received event data is processed over a time interval so that like events are counted and combined as a rollup, such rollup data maintained in lieu of the complete event data. In addition, as such rollup data ages, it may be further rolled up over successively longer time intervals, to achieve more efficient storage for older data. Further, the rolled up event data may be combined based on the network object containment hierarchy including a combination of the following:
In another embodiment of the Enterprise Reporting System, such longer time interval are dynamically adjusted over time to allow data to fit into available storage space as follows, based on rollup data:
Parameters
This section provides an in depth discussion and functional description of one preferred embodiment of rate limiting. It should be appreciated that the discussion below is meant by example only and that variations of specific configurations and descriptions are readily apparent to one skilled in the art as being within scope of the invention.
Benefits of the Mechanism
Following is a list of benefits from the rate limiting mechanism of one preferred embodiment of the invention:
The logger rate limiting is configured via the following example .ini file configuration variables, i.e. parameters:
It should be appreciated that the term “execution run,” above, refers to an interval defined by a number of packets, a period of time, or a number of network events, or some combination of the three.
Description
Such logger algorithm performs a filter on data arriving into the logger module 103 of the SPM 106 process. The algorithm escalates the aggressiveness of the filtering based on the number of violations the Policy Engine 102 (PE) prefers to log and the configuration of the filter as defined in the .ini file. This filtering takes place on a per ExecutionRun (ER) basis, with the filtering lagging by N execution runs, i.e. the N execution runs after a change in traffic pattern will contain unfiltered data.
The function will be described by example.
Consider the following configuration as defined in the .ini file, svs.ini.
The above implies that the following filtering takes place:
Imagine the following:
For a total of 2008 violation of EVENTS_PER_ER NEs seen (20.08%). Note that all of these violations have been logged.
After this rate has continued for another 9 execution runs (i.e. FILTER_ER_LAG execution runs are observed where the violation rate is higher than FILTER_START_HIGH_VOLUME) and rate limiting is now enabled.
The logger then starts to filter the rule/disposition pair with the highest rates, by calculating the maximum of a slowly trailing average of the normal number of violations for this pair or X % of violations. Note that this average is not updated when rate limiting is in effect.
Once filtering is enabled and the FILTER_HIGH_START value is reached, the following applies per rule/disposition:
In such case, the rule/disposition pair max is calculated as, for example, 175 violations (with the minimum set at 5). This implies that no more Ip_Deny/Ip_Rogue_Router events are logged, although the statistics table are updated accurately.
It should be appreciated that only 198 of the 1550 Ip_Deny/Ip_Rouge_Router events are logged, while all other violating NEs are logged. It should be further appreciated that the correct count, being 1550, of Ip_Deny/Ip_Rouge_Router events is logged with the summary rollup data for this period of time.
Because the total number of violations is still greater than FILTER _START_HIGH_VOLUME, the logger leaves rate limiting enabled for the next ER.
Now, the process starts logging only critical violations, and collecting the count statistics for all other violations.
The ExecutionRun object of the monitor Database preferably has counters added to indicate the following:
This information is then sent to the EM within a batch file that is generated periodically, such as every 5 minutes.
One preferred embodiment of the invention provides a monitor program (i.e. a harvester and a monitor) including two rate limiting options. This section describes the changes to an existing monitor program and how to use such changes according to one preferred embodiment of the invention. It should be appreciated that variations on rate limiting and monitoring rate limiting are apparent to one skilled in the art to be within scope of the present invention.
Following is a table showing the two rate limiting options added:
The specific chosen numbers correspond to where in the pipeline the option appears. The RL0 code comes into play just after packets are received. The RL1 code comes into play after the monitor has processed packets.
The RL0 option is useful in the following situations:
The RL1 option is useful in the following situation:
It is apparent that the RL0 option protects the monitor 127 itself, and the RL1 option protects the SPM 106 downstream from the monitor 127. Clearly, RL0 also has effects downstream and can be used to protect the SPM 106, but the RL1 option is the preferred option.
RL0 Algorithm
The RL0 algorithm causes the monitor 127 to discard packets when the number of packets received per unit time is too great. The input is the number of packets per second that may be processed by the monitor 127, as:
Such command runs the harvester on a local network device, SPFM2, generating a stream of events in a TCP connection to localhost port 6669, and restricting the average processing rate to 10,000 packets/second.
The algorithm works by defining a measurement interval. An exemplary interval is 71 seconds. The argument value is normalized to the number of packets that may be received in a single measurement interval. When that number of packets is received, no more packets are received until the interval is over.
For example:
This technique is somewhat coarse. When rate limiting is needed, it causes the monitor to sample the wire, going “deaf” for a certain portion of each 71 second interval. This is a heuristic to ensure that the monitor 127 generates the best possible event data for the SPM 106 while it is “on” and then generates nothing while it is “off”.
RL1. Algorithm
The RL1 algorithm causes the monitor 127 to choose not to pass data to the SPM 106 about one or more connections (a “network event”) when the rate of new connections exceeds a fixed number of connections per second. The argument is the number of events/second*100 (or the number of events in 100 seconds).
The argument is normalized to the measurement interval (exemplary value=10 seconds) to yield ‘S’:
The RL1 algorithm works by measuring the number, M, of new connections over the interval Iv (exemplary value=10 seconds). The succeeding interval of Iv seconds is then rate limited based on this measured value M and the specified limit S. Thus the algorithm is always at least one measurement interval behind the input.
To smooth out the performance of the algorithm, the number of connections measured in one interval (M) is time averaged over the last avgN (currently 8, in one embodiment) intervals using the algorithm:
Ma=(Ma*(avgN−1)+M)/avgN
This is intended to allow a small spike through the rate limiting code, while a steady trend is limited.
From Ma and S, the number of connections that should have been dropped by rate limiting over the last interval is derived, as well as the fraction of connections that should have been dropped:
D=Ma−S, (when Ma>S, 0 otherwise)
frac=D/Ma
To apply this number to the next interval, frac is added to a sum every time there is a new connection. When frac crosses an integer boundary, the connection is dropped. Such is analogous to drawing a line from (0,0) to (D, Ma) as shown in
Refer to
It should be appreciated that connections are not really “dropped” in RL1. They are still maintained by monitor 127, but the SPM 106 is not informed of them.
This section describes a system and method of an automatic monitor 127 to policy engine 102 rate limiting. It should be appreciated that the discussion below is meant by example only and that variations of specific configurations of components are readily apparent to one skilled in the art as being within scope of the invention.
In one preferred embodiment of the invention, the monitor 127 includes automatic rate limiting to the SPM 106. This rate limiting algorithm, referred to as RLE, enhances the RL1 algorithm described, above.
RLE accepts as an input parameter the buffer size for encoding DME data to the SPM 106. An exemplary value is 2 MB. A second input parameter specifies a fraction of the buffer to reserve for rate limiting. An exemplary value is 0.5 (one half).
A third input parameter, NB, specifies the number of bytes to write at one time. An exemplary value is 8192.
RLE may be combined with the previously defined RL0 and RL1 options in the section, Description of Monitor Rate Limiting, herein. RLE represents an automatic tuning mechanism for performing the RL1 function, so typically RL1 is not used in conjunction with RLE. RL0 is independent of RL1 and RLE.
The RLE option is useful when the output of the monitor 127 is too great for the SPM 106 to process. RLE protects the SPM from overload of data, and protects the monitor from being back pressured by the SPM 106.
RLE Algorithm
The output section of the preferred monitor 127 implements the RLE algorithm in the follow way:
When the monitor 127 determines that a new connection has appeared, it queries the RLE code to see if the output buffer is currently using the reserved section.
For automatic RLE algorithm, the following should be appreciated (refer to
The flow goes from Monitor 127 Output to DME encoder to Ring Buffer;
For a new connection:
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides a packet filter system based on a preferred packet filter module design according to the invention. This section discusses an exemplary packet filter module, Securify Packet Filter Module (SPFM).
It should be appreciated that the discussion herein below is meant by example only and that variations of specific configurations and descriptions are readily apparent to one skilled in the art as being within scope of the invention.
Overview
A Monitor Configuration
One configuration for data capture included a monitor 127 component and a PCAP Library in a User space, and NIC Driver(s) in Kernel space. It has been found that data capture rates were restricted by packet flow through the PCAP library. The monitor 127 would request a packet, which would be copied from the NIC driver to a PCAP buffer and then handed to monitor. This resulted in numerous switches from user to kernel space and yielded limited performance.
SPFM
Then, an SPFM module is introduced in the Kernel space between the PCAP Library of the User space and the NIC Driver(s) of the Kernel space, as follows:
The PCAP Library is modified as follows:
Referring to
SPFM Initialization
The initialization process incorporates the following:
SPFM Packet Initialization
Each buffer has an owner flag set to module.
SPFM Start Capture
PCAP starts capture by issuing a IOCTL_SET_START to the SPFM device. This sets an internal flag that cause SPFM to start capture for the interface that issued the start command.
SPFM Packet Copies
Such IOCTL_GET_NEXT command causes data to be copied from the backlog[ ] queues to the appropriate user space queue. Once copied, the owner flag is switched to user which allows the PCAP Library to access the packet.
SPFM Streams
The preferred embodiment of the invention provides the following innovative SPFM Streams processing.
To maximize the usefulness of captured data, SPFM has the concept of data streams. A stream uses a hash of the SRC and DST IP addresses (in either order). The hash function used has the property that hashiD=hash(SRC,DST)=hash(DST,SRC). This hashID is used to identify a stream. It should be appreciated that, such “stream” could be composed of numerous connections between two servers.
In another embodiment of the invention, the hash function includes the destination and source port numbers for UDP and TCP packets, such that hashID=hash(SRC, SrcPort, DST, DstPort)=hash(Dst,DstPort,Src,SrcPort).
A Most Recently Used (MRU) queue is kept for all connections with a given hashID. The hashID indexes into a hash_struct array.
Command line parameters for the streams are as follows:
It should be appreciated that lowWater=LLLL is the rate limiting point.
It should be appreciated that while the preferred embodiment of the invention uses a hash of addresses, the particular hash chosen, and the choice of SRC and DST is a specific implementation and that it is readily apparent to one skilled in the art that other hashes can equally be used.
It should be appreciated that with the SPFM feature, stream rate limiting (RL) is compatible with Monitor Connections or Network Events, resulting in complete connections being transmitted.
It should further be appreciated that without the SPFM feature, rate limiting occurs at the monitor 127 interface, resulting in random packet loss being very high and a loss of connection integrity.
SPFM Discard Policy
This sub-section describes a preferred embodiment of the invention in the case of limited memory. Following is a list of the SPFM discard policy according to the invention:
SPFM Streams Structures is described with reference to
The preferred hashStruct is indexed via a hashID. If the stream has a most recently used (MRU) element already, it is moved to the top of the queue. Otherwise, an element is removed from the bottom of the MRU and placed on the top with a back pointer to the hashStruct.
The following table summarizes processing streams using low water marks (LWM) and high water marks (HWM) according to the invention.
Also,
MRU Circular queue
Referring to
It should be appreciated that the MRU feature is optionally added to the RL algorithm.
It should be appreciated that if sizeof mru.q==sizeof hasharray, then the MRU algorithm above has no effect.
SPFM VLAN Tags Background
VLAN tags, as specified in IEEE 802.1Q, typically are used by a switch to create virtual LANs inside a switch (or series of switches). VLAN tags typically consist of 4 bytes of protocol information that is inserted in what would be the TYPE field of an Ethernet frame. Also, the 4 bytes consist of the Tag Protocol Identifier (TPID) and Tag Control Information (TCI).
Innovative SPFM VLAN Support
According to one preferred embodiment of the invention, VLAN configuration is via the setupVlan program, as follows:
Item A is described with reference to
Item B is illustrated in
Item A+B is illustrated in
If the embodiment of the monitor 127 does not support VLAN tags, the tags are stripped off by SPFM. However the VLAN tags are used to show which monitor 127 is interested in which VLAN stream.
Separate portions of multiple Ethernets 2412 can be grouped into a single SPFM device 1704.
Innovative SPFM Physical Replication
Following is a list of considerations for SPFM physical replication according to one preferred embodiment of the invention:
Refer to
That is, according to a preferred embodiment of the invention, a configuration item is added: use_hash_only (UHO) to a region of the Hash table, e.g. [0,127][128,255]. Thus, packets in its respective region are processed as normal; other packets are discarded.
It should be appreciated that an application of SPFM physical replication is load balancing. Refer to
Innovative SPFM Cascade
One embodiment of the invention uses a cascading design with each harvester taking a portion of the traffic. Refer to
It should be appreciated that SPFM Cascade design is similar to SPFM Physical Replication. However, for packets in Harvester1 2602, process events as normal. For other packets, send to the next machine, i.e. Harvester2-HarvesterN 2604, 2606. SPFM Cascade avoids using an expensive splitter device.
It should be appreciated that an embodiment of the SPM Cascade design may use a plurality of network interface cards for both/either input and for output, with a tree-like interconnection, the SPFM VLAN support, described above, being used to combine streams, and other packet selection criteria (e.g., protocol identity) being used to split the output packet data that is destined for the said next machine to a plurality of said next machines.
Accordingly, although the invention has been described in detail with reference to particular preferred embodiments, persons possessing ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains will appreciate that various modifications and enhancements may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the claims that follow.
This application is a continuation of and claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. §120 to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/453,824, filed on Jun. 2, 2003, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/385,252, filed May 31, 2002; and is a Continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/311,109, filed Dec. 13, 2002, which is a national filing of International Patent Application No. PCT/US01/19063 filed Jun. 14, 2001, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/212,126 filed Jun. 16, 2000, the benefit of priority of each of which is claimed hereby, and each of which are incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5262956 | DeLeeuw | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5557747 | Rogers et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5661668 | Yemini et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
| 5679940 | Templeton et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5701400 | Amado | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5751965 | Mayo et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5781629 | Haber et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5819226 | Gopinathan et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5825361 | Rubin et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5867483 | Ennis, Jr. et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5870561 | Jarvis et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5872928 | Lewis et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5884025 | Baehr et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5887139 | Madison, Jr. et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5960460 | Marasco et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5968176 | Nessett et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5978475 | Schneier et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5983270 | Abraham et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5987610 | Franczek et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5987611 | Freund | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5991877 | Luckenbaugh | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6026397 | Sheppard | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6049621 | Jain et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6058193 | Cordery et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6064304 | Arrowsmith et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6064810 | Raad et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6065119 | Sandford, II et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6069563 | Kadner et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6073142 | Geiger et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6091835 | Smithies et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6108782 | Fletcher et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6119103 | Basch et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6134532 | Lazarus et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6157707 | Baulier et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6212558 | Antur et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6263349 | Anderson | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6269447 | Maloney et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6271845 | Richardson | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6279037 | Tams et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6301668 | Gleichauf et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6317788 | Richardson | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6381649 | Carlson | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6442615 | Nordenstam et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6453345 | Trcka et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
| 6460050 | Pace et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6463470 | Mohaban et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6484143 | Swildens et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6484261 | Wiegel | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6499107 | Gleichauf et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6502131 | Vaid et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6505245 | North et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6526044 | Cookmeyer, II et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6578077 | Rakoshitz et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6636873 | Merchant et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6651099 | Dietz et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6665725 | Dietz et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6704873 | Underwood | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6711699 | Kanevsky et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6738933 | Fraenkel et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
| 6771646 | Sarkissian et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6779120 | Valente et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6789116 | Sarkissian et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
| 6792458 | Muret et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
| 6816973 | Gleichauf et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
| 6839751 | Dietz et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 6871284 | Cooper et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6901442 | Schwaller et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6954789 | Dietz et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 7007301 | Crosbie et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7020697 | Goodman et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
| 7047288 | Cooper et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7047423 | Maloney et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7047564 | Cohen | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7054930 | Cheriton | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7143439 | Cooper et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7207062 | Brustoloni | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7246370 | Valente et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7272646 | Cooper et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
| 7478422 | Valente et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7506155 | Stewart et al. | Mar 2009 | B1 |
| 7917647 | Cooper et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 20010054097 | Chafe | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020093527 | Sherlock et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020108059 | Canion et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188584 | Ghannam et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030061506 | Cooper et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030208689 | Garza | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20040015579 | Cooper et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040039942 | Cooper et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040042470 | Cooper et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040103315 | Cooper et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20050195964 | Hahn et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0782112 | Jul 1997 | EP |
| 0669032 | Nov 1997 | EP |
| 0849909 | Jun 1998 | EP |
| 0854621 | Jul 1998 | EP |
| 0893763 | Jan 1999 | EP |
| 0909074 | Apr 1999 | EP |
| 0961440 | Dec 1999 | EP |
| 1006701 | Jun 2000 | EP |
| 1026867 | Aug 2000 | EP |
| 1050833 | Nov 2000 | EP |
| 1143660 | Oct 2001 | EP |
| 2335829 | Sep 1999 | GB |
| WO 9311480 | Jun 1993 | WO |
| WO 9403859 | Feb 1994 | WO |
| WO 9406103 | Mar 1994 | WO |
| WO 9826541 | Jun 1998 | WO |
| WO 9915950 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| WO 9922492 | May 1999 | WO |
| WO 9935583 | Jul 1999 | WO |
| WO 9967930 | Dec 1999 | WO |
| WO 0005842 | Feb 2000 | WO |
| WO 0035130 | Jun 2000 | WO |
| WO 0198932 | Dec 2001 | WO |
| WO 0199002 | Dec 2001 | WO |
| WO 0199031 | Dec 2001 | WO |
| WO 0199343 | Dec 2001 | WO |
| WO 0199349 | Dec 2001 | WO |
| WO 0199371 | Dec 2001 | WO |
| WO 0199372 | Dec 2001 | WO |
| WO 0199373 | Dec 2001 | WO |
| WO 02071192 | Sep 2002 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Workstation NT—Recovery Tips for Windows NT Workstation, online}. [archived Oct. 12, 1999]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/19991012224636/http://personal.cfw.com/about.-tkprit/utils/recovery.html>, (1999), 4 pgs. |
| Briody, D., “IT Managers Weigh Legal Issues”, InfoWorld 21, vol. 36, No. 69, (Sep. 6, 1999), 69-70. |
| Castell, S., “The Legal Admissibility of Computer Generated Evidence Towards ‘Legally Reliable’ Information and Communications Technology”, Computer Law and Security Report, vol. 5, No. 2, (Jul.-Aug. 1989), 2-8. |
| Chatterjee, B., et al., “Taxonomy for QoS Specifications”, Proceedings, Third International Workshop on Object-Oriented Real-Time Dependable Systems, (1997), 100-107. |
| Cockcroft, A., “Observability”, Sun BluePrints tm OnLine, .COPYRGT. 1999 Sun Microsystems, Inc., (Dec. 1999), 21 pgs. |
| Deri, L., “Effective Traffic Measurement Using nTop”, IEEE Communications Magazine, (May 2000), 138-143. |
| Goodwin, B., “Cybercrime—An Inside Job”, Computer Weekly, vol. 16, (Aug. 31, 2000), 3 pgs. |
| Guttman, E., “Service Location Protocol: Automatic Discovery of IP Network Services”, IEEE Internet Computing, (Jul. Aug. 1999), 71-80. |
| Heaney, J., et al., “Security Model Development Environment”, Fifth Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, (Dec. 4, 1989-Dec. 8, 1989, Tucson, AZ), (1990), 299-307. |
| Hosmer, C., et al., “Advancing Crime Scene Computer Forensic Techniques”, Proceedings of the 1998 Investigation and Forensic Science Technologies, [online]. [archived Jan. 4, 2001]. Retrieved from the Internet: <http://web.archive.org/web/20010104101500/http://www.wetstonetech.com- /crime.htm>, (1999), 14 pgs. |
| Jackson, W., “When It Comes to Web Site Vandalism, Attackers Target Microsoft Software”, Government Computer News, vol. 19, No. 31, (Oct. 23, 2000), 2 pgs. |
| Larsen, A. K., “All Eyes on IP Traffic New apps can monitor internet and intranet traffic, but do they deliver enough data to hold ISPs to their promises”, Data Communications, 26(4), (Mar. 21, 1997), 5 pgs. |
| Lee, W., ““?”: A Context-Sensitive Help System based on Hypertext”, Proceedings of the 24th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference, (1987), 429-435. |
| Lin, H.-C., et al., “An Algorithm for Automatic Topology Discovery of IP Networks”, IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC '98), vol. 2, (1998), 1192-1196. |
| Murray, B., “Army Debuts IT Crime Unit”, Government Computer News, 19(20), (Jul. 20, 2000), 3 pgs. |
| Santo, B., “‘Sherlock Holmes of Software’ Bridges Technical and Legal Guff in Cracking IP-Theft Cases-Software Forensics Expert Takes a Byte Out of Crime”, Electronics Engineering Times, vol. 987, (1998), 3 pgs. |
| Slabodkin, G., “AF Computer Forensics Lab nabs criminals, byte by byte”, Government News, 17(25), (Aug. 10, 1998), 2 pgs. |
| Sommer, P., “Intrusion Detection System as Evidence”, Computer Networks, 13(23-24), (1999), 2477-2487. |
| Sommer, P., “Investigating Cyberspace”, Computer Weekly, (Jan. 27, 2000), 4 pgs. |
| Tadjer, R., “Safeguard Your IT Assets—You Can Prosecute a Hacker, If You Have the Right Systems in Place”, InternetWeek No. 767, (May 31, 1999), 3 pgs. |
| Wright, R., “How to Avoid an Online Breach—The Right Tools to Fight Cybercrime—New Technology Helps E-Business Fight Online Security Breaches”, VARbusiness, (Nov. 13, 2000), 3 pgs. |
| “FireWall-1 Architecture and Administration”, Check Point Software Technologies, Ltd., [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://checkpoint.com/supporUtechnical/online—ug/nat.html>, (Sep. 1998, Accessed Dec. 3, 2007), 60 pgs. |
| “Guidance Software: Encase Computer Forensics Software, FastBloc, Hardware and Training”, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: www.guidancesoftware.com/html/index.html>, (Accessed Apr. 8, 2002), 2 pgs. |
| “Guidance Software: How Encase Works”, Guidance Software Inc., [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20020401223049/http://. |
| “Introduction to SSL”, Netscape Communications Corporation, [Online]. [Archived Apr. 28, 1999]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/19990428233733/http://developer.netscape.com/docs/manuals/security/sslin/contents.htm>, (Updated Oct. 9, 1998), 12 pgs. |
| “PREMIO Computer's Windows NT 4.0 Troubleshooting Guide”, [Online]. [Archived Dec. 30, 2006]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20061230064520/http://ftp.premiopc.com/faqs/nt40.htm>, (Revised Apr. 6, 1999), 3 pgs. |
| “SystemSafe w/SystemRestore”, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20000309172751 lhttp://www.systemrestore.com/>, (Archived Mar. 9, 2000), 1 pg. |
| “T-Berd 2310 Communication Analyzer”, TTC, XP002166224, (Jan. 1999),12 pgs. |
| “The Next Generation in Test”, T-Berd 2310, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www.accusrc.com/objects/catalog/product/extras/5726—T-Berd 231 O.pdf>, (1998), 10 pgs. |
| Armstrong, Illena, “Computer Forensics”, SC/Info Security News Magazine, vol. 11, No. 4, [Online]. [Archived Dec. 18, 2000]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/200012180729/http://www.scmagazine.com/scmagazine/2000—04/cover/cover.html>, (Apr. 2000), 20-24. |
| Holley, J. 0., “Computer Forensics in the New Millennium”, SC/Info Security News Magazine, vol. 10, No. 9, [Online]. [Archived Feb. 6, 2001]. Retrieved from the Internet: http://web.archive.org/web/20010206210529/http://www.scmagazine.com/scmagazine/199909/survey/survey.html>, (Sep. 1999),46-52. |
| Radcliff, D., “Crime in the 21st Century: The New Field of Computer Forensics is Keeping Security Experts on the Trail of Cybercriminals”, Info World, vol. 20, No. 50, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-53404229/crime-21 st-century-new.html>, (Dec. 1998),4 pgs. |
| Sabata, Bikash, et al., “Taxonomy for QoS Specifications”, Proceedings, Third International Workshop on Object-Oriented Real-Time Dependable Systems, (1997), 100-107. |
| Welch, Mark, “A Forensic Computing Utility That Does It All”, The Forensic News Wire, Blue Line Magazine, [Online]. [Archived Mar. 1, 2000] Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20000301174 7 45/http://www.guidancesoftware .com/bl ue Ji ne 1.h tml>, (Nov. 1999),4 pgs. |
| Thomsen D. et al., “Napoleon Network Application Policy Environment”, Proceedings 4th ACM Workshop on Role-Based Access Control, Oct. 28-19, 1999, New York NY. |
| PCT International Search Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/018475 mailed on May 7, 2002. |
| PCT International Preliminary Examination Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US01/018475 mailed Dec. 23, 2002. |
| PCT International Search Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/018669 mailed on May 7, 2002. |
| PCT International Preliminary Examination Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US01/018669 mailed Dec. 23, 2002. |
| PCT International Search Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/019063 mailed on Apr. 23, 2002. |
| PCT International Preliminary Examination Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/019063, mailed Sep. 4, 2002, 3 pgs. |
| PCT International Search Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/019270 mailed on Mar. 21, 2002. |
| PCT International Preliminary Examination Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/019270, mailed May 21, 2003. |
| PCT International Preliminary Examination Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US01/119331, mailed Mar. 21, 2002. |
| PCT International Preliminary Examination Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US01/119331, mailed Apr. 25, 2003. |
| PCT International Search Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/019332 mailed on Mar. 21, 2002. |
| PCT International Preliminary Examination Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/019332, mailed Jun. 27, 2002. |
| PCT International Search Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US2001/019333 mailed on Jul. 16, 2002. |
| PCT International Preliminary Examination Report in PCT International Application Serial No. PCT/US01/19333 mailed Sep. 16, 2004. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 09/826,602 mailed on Jul. 27, 2005. |
| Response to Non-Final Office Action dated Jul. 27, 2005 in U.S. Appl. No. 09/826,602, filed Oct. 27, 2005. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 09/826,602 mailed on Jan. 11, 2006. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 10/311,109 mailed on Jun. 8, 2006. |
| Response to Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 8, 2006 in U.S. Appl. No. 10/311,109, filed Oct. 10, 2006. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 10/311,109 mailed on Jan. 04, 2007. |
| Request for Continued Examination and Amendment in U.S. Appl. No. 10/311,109 filed on Apr. 4, 2007. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 10/311,109 mailed on Jul. 10, 2007. |
| 312 Amendment in U.S. Appl. No. 10/311,109 filed on Aug. 9, 2007. |
| Non-Final Office Action in Re-Issue Patent U.S. Appl. No. 12/586,313 mailed on Jul. 22, 2011. |
| Final Office Action in Re-Issue U.S. Appl. No. 12/586,131 mailed on Jul. 13, 2012. |
| Request for Continued Examination and Response to Final Office Action in Re-Issue U.S. Appl. No. 12/586,131 filed on Jul. 13, 2012. |
| Non-Final Office Action in Re-Issue U.S. Appl. No. 12/586,313 mailed on Feb. 6, 2013. |
| Response to Non-Final Office Action dated Feb. 6, 2013 in Re-Issue U.S. Appl. No. 12/586,313, filed May 6, 2013. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 09/800,378 mailed on Sep. 28, 2004. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 10/311,400 mailed on Mar. 30, 2007. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 10/311,110 mailed on Jan. 30, 2007. |
| Preliminary Amendment in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,824 filed on Jun. 30, 2006. |
| Preliminary Amendment in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,824 filed on Nov. 2, 2007. |
| Restriction Requirement in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,824 mailed on Sep. 22, 2009. |
| Response to Restriction Requirement dated Sep. 22, 2009 in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,824, filed Oct. 22, 2009. |
| Restriction Requirement in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,824 mailed on Mar. 4, 2010. |
| Response to Restriction Requirement dated Sep. 22, 2009 in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,824 mailed on Oct. 22, 2009. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,824 mailed on Jul. 15, 2010. |
| Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,824 mailed on Oct. 29, 2010. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 09/881,147 mailed on Jan. 19, 2005. |
| Response to Non-Final Office Action dated Jan. 19, 2005 in U.S. Appl. No. 09/881,147 mailed on Apr. 19, 2005. |
| Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 09/881,147 mailed on May 18, 2005. |
| Response to Final Office Action dated May 18, 2005 in U.S. Appl. No. 09/881,147, filed Aug. 18, 2005. |
| Advisory Action in U.S. Appl. No. 09/881,147 mailed on Sep. 6, 2005. |
| Request for Continued Examination in U.S. Appl. No. 09/881,147 filed on Sep. 19, 2005. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 09/881,147 mailed on May 9, 2006. |
| Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 10/453,817 mailed on Oct. 6, 2006. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20110173342 A1 | Jul 2011 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60385252 | May 2002 | US | |
| 60212126 | Jun 2000 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 10453824 | Jun 2003 | US |
| Child | 13073299 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 10311109 | US | |
| Child | 10453824 | US |
