Method and apparatus for transitioning between states of security policies used to secure electronic documents

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8127366
  • Patent Number
    8,127,366
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, September 30, 2003
    21 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 28, 2012
    12 years ago
Abstract
Techniques for dynamically altering security criteria used in a file security system are disclosed. The security criteria pertains to keys (or ciphers) used by the file security system to encrypt electronic files to be secured or to decrypt electronic files already secured. The security criteria can, among other things, include keys that are required to gain access to electronic files. Here, the keys can be changed automatically as electronic files transition between different states of a process-driven security policy. The dynamic alteration of security criteria enhances the flexibility and robustness of the security system. In other words, access restrictions on electronic files can be dependent on the state of the process-driven security policy and enforced in conjunction with one or more cryptographic methods.
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is related to: (i) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/677,049, filed concurrently herewith, and entitled “METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SECURING DIGITAL ASSETS USING PROCESS-DRIVEN SECURITY POLICIES,” which is hereby incorporated herein by reference; (ii) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/405,587, filed Apr. 1, 2003, and entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SECURING DIGITAL ASSETS USING CONTENT TYPE DESIGNATIONS,” which is hereby incorporated herein by reference; (iii) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/159,537, filed May 5, 2002, and entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SECURING DIGITAL ASSETS,” which is hereby incorporated herein by reference; and (iv) U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/127,109, filed Apr. 22, 2002, and entitled “EVALUATION OF ACCESS RIGHTS TO SECURED DIGITAL ASSETS,” which is hereby incorporated herein by reference.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention


The present invention relates to security systems for data and, more particularly, to security systems that protect data in an inter/intra enterprise environment.


2. Description of Related Art


The Internet is the fastest growing telecommunications medium in history. This growth and the easy access it affords have significantly enhanced the opportunity to use advanced information technology for both the public and private sectors. It provides unprecedented opportunities for interaction and data sharing among businesses and individuals. However, the advantages provided by the Internet come with a significantly greater element of risk to the confidentiality and integrity of information. The Internet is an open, public and international network of interconnected computers and electronic devices. Without proper security means, an unauthorized person or machine may intercept information traveling across the Internet and even gain access to proprietary information stored in computers that interconnect to the Internet.


There are many efforts in progress aimed at protecting proprietary information traveling across the Internet and controlling access to computers carrying the proprietary information. Cryptography allows people to carry over the confidence found in the physical world to the electronic world, thus allowing people to do business electronically without worries of deceit and deception. Every day millions of people interact electronically, whether it is through e-mail, e-commerce (business conducted over the Internet), ATM machines, or cellular phones. The perpetual increase of information transmitted electronically has led to an increased reliance on cryptography.


One of the ongoing efforts in protecting the proprietary information traveling across the Internet is to use one or more cryptographic techniques to secure a private communication session between two communicating computers on the Internet. The cryptographic techniques provide a way to transmit information across an unsecure communication channel without disclosing the contents of the information to anyone eavesdropping on the communication channel. Using an encryption process in a cryptographic technique, one party can protect the contents of the data in transit from access by an unauthorized third party, yet the intended party can read the encrypted data after using a corresponding decryption process.


A firewall is another security measure that protects the resources of a private network from users of other networks. However, it has been reported that many unauthorized accesses to proprietary information occur from the inside, as opposed to from the outside. An example of someone gaining unauthorized access from the inside is when restricted or proprietary information is accessed by someone within an organization who is not supposed to do so. Due to the open nature of networks, contractual information, customer data, executive communications, product specifications, and a host of other confidential and proprietary intellectual property remain available and vulnerable to improper access and usage by unauthorized users within or outside a supposedly protected perimeter.


Many businesses and organizations have been looking for effective ways to protect their proprietary information. Typically, businesses and organizations have deployed firewalls, Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), and Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) to provide protection. Unfortunately, these various security means have been proven insufficient to reliably protect proprietary information residing on private networks. For example, depending on passwords to access sensitive documents from within often causes security breaches when the password of a few characters long is leaked or detected. Consequently, various cryptographic means are deployed to provide restricted access to electronic data in security systems.


Various security criteria, such as encryption or decryption keys, are often used to facilitate restricted access to data in security systems. Conventional uses of security criteria provide static assignment of security criteria to electronic resources being secured. However, the assigning of security criteria in a static manner does not permit subsequent alteration of the security criteria under certain conditions. Although an administrator may be able to change the security criteria for an electronic resource that has already been secured, such alteration would be a manual process only available to the administrator. Further, given that an administrator is managing secure electronic resources (e.g., data) for many users, it is not feasible for the administrator to participate in the changing of security criteria for a large volume of electronic resources. Therefore, there is a need to provide more effective ways for security systems to permit security criteria imposed on electronic resources to be changed, thereby altering the security used to protect the electronic resources.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates to techniques for dynamically altering security criteria used in a system (e.g., a file security system for an enterprise). The security criteria pertains to keys (or ciphers) used by the file security system to encrypt electronic files to be secured, or to decrypt electronic files already secured. The security criteria can, among other things, include keys that are required to gain access to electronic files. Here, the keys can be changed automatically as electronic files transition between different states of a process-driven security policy. The dynamic alteration of security criteria enhances the flexibility and robustness of the security system. In other words, access restrictions on electronic files can be dependent on the state of the process-driven security policy and enforced in conjunction with one or more cryptographic methods.


According to one aspect of the invention, methods and systems for securing electronic files use process-driven security policies. As an electronic file transitions through a process, access restrictions can automatically change. The process can be defined by a number of states, with each state having different security policies associated therewith. The security policies control, for example, which users are permitted to access the electronic files, or how the electronic files can be accessed. In one embodiment, the access restrictions are imposed by one or more keys that are required to decrypt electronic files that were previously secured. The process can also be referred to as a workflow, where the workflow has a series of states through which files (documents) can move, where different security policies can be imposed at different states.


Another aspect of the invention is that process-driven security policies are enforced or controlled at a server of a file security system. A group of one or more electronic documents are bound together and progress together through states of a process specified by process-driven security policies. The server can automatically and remotely enforce the process-driven security policies on the group of electronic documents.


Still another aspect of the invention is that process-driven security policies are controlled at a client of a file security system. Here, each individual electronic document can be separately and independently bound to process-driven security policies. The process-driven security policies can thus operate at the client with little or no communication with a central server in most cases.


The process-driven security policies typically offer persistent states. Each state can specify a different set of users or groups of users that are permitted access to an electronic document. The states are also independent of the electronic documents themselves.


The invention can be implemented in numerous ways, including as a method, system, device, and computer readable medium. Several embodiments of the invention are discussed below.


As a document security system for restricting access to documents, one embodiment of the invention includes at least: a process-driven security policy that includes a plurality of states and transition rules, each of the states corresponding to one or more access restrictions, and the transition rules specify when the secured document is to transition from one state to another; and an access manager that determines whether access to a secured document is permitted by a requestor based on the state and the corresponding one or more access restrictions thereof for the process-driven security policy.


As a method for transitioning at least one secured document through a security-policy state machine having a plurality of states, one embodiment of the invention includes at least the acts of: receiving an event; determining whether the event causes a state transition for the at least one secured document from a former state to a subsequent state of the security-policy state machine; and automatically transitioning from the former state to the subsequent state of the security-policy state machine when the determining determines that the event causes the state transition.


As a method for imposing access restrictions on electronic documents, one embodiment of the invention includes at least the acts of: providing at least one process-driven security policy at a server machine, the process-driven security policy having a plurality of states associated therewith, each of the states having distinct access restrictions; providing a reference to the process-driven security policy at a client machine, the reference referring to the process-driven security policy resident on the server machine; associating the reference to an electronic document; transitioning the process-driven security policy from one state to a current state; and subsequently determining at the server computer whether a requestor is permitted to access the electronic document, the access being based on a current state of the process-driven security policy, the current state being informed to the server computer by sending the reference to the server computer.


As a computer readable medium including at least computer program code for transitioning at least one secured document through a security-policy state machine having a plurality of states, one embodiment of the invention includes at least: computer program code for receiving an event; computer program code for determining whether the event causes a state transition for the at least one secured document from a former state to a subsequent state of the security-policy state machine; and computer program code for automatically transitioning from the former state to the subsequent state of the security-policy state machine when the computer program code for determining determines that the event causes the state transition.


As a computer readable medium including at least computer program code for imposing access restrictions on electronic documents, one embodiment of the invention includes at least: computer program code for providing at least one process-driven security policy at a server machine, the process-driven security policy having a plurality of states associated therewith, each of the states having distinct access restrictions; computer program code for providing a reference to the process-driven security policy at a client machine, the reference referring to the process-driven security policy resident on the server machine; computer program code for associating the reference to an electronic document; computer program code for transforming the process-driven security policy from one state to a current state; and computer program code for determining at the server computer whether a requester is permitted to access the electronic document, the access being based on a current state of the process-driven security policy, the current state being informed to the server computer by sending the reference to the server computer.


Other objects, features, and advantages of the present invention will become apparent upon examining the following detailed description of an embodiment thereof, taken in conjunction with the attached drawings.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

These and other features, aspects, and advantages of the invention will become better understood with regard to the following description, appended claims and accompanying drawings, wherein:



FIG. 1 is a diagram of an exemplary process-driven security policy (PDSP) according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 2 is a flow diagram of a transition process according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 3 illustrates a security policy state machine according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 4A is a diagram of a document securing system according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 4B is a flow diagram of a document securing process according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 4C is a detailed flow diagram of an encryption process according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 5A is a diagram of a document unsecuring system according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIGS. 5B and 5C are flow diagrams of a document access process according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 5D is a flow diagram of a decryption process according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 6 is a flow diagram of a transition process according to one embodiment of the invention.



FIG. 7 shows a basic security system in which the invention may be practiced in accordance with one embodiment thereof.



FIG. 8 shows an exemplary data structure of a secured file that may be used in one embodiment of the invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates to techniques for dynamically altering security criteria used in a system (e.g., a file security system for an enterprise). The security criteria pertains to keys (or ciphers) used by the file security system to encrypt electronic files to be secured, or to decrypt electronic files already secured. The security criteria can, among other things, include keys that are required to gain access to electronic files. Here, the keys can be changed automatically as electronic files transition between different states of a process-driven security policy. The dynamic alteration of security criteria enhances the flexibility and robustness of the security system. In other words, access restrictions on electronic files can be dependent on the state of the process-driven security policy.


As used herein, a file may include, but not be limited to, one or more various types of documents, multimedia files, data, executable code, images and texts, and in some cases, a collection of files. Accordingly, a secured file means that an electronic file typically stored or presented in a form that is nearly impossible to read without authorization and authentication. Its purpose is to ensure privacy by keeping the content in a file hidden from anyone for whom it is not intended, even those who may have a copy of the file.


According to one aspect of the invention, methods and systems for securing electronic files use process-driven security policies. As an electronic file transitions through a process, access restrictions can automatically change or remain intact depending on the process. The process can be defined by a number of states, with each state having its corresponding security policies associated therewith. The security policies control, for example, which users are permitted to access the electronic files or how the electronic files can be accessed. In one embodiment, the access restrictions are imposed by one or more keys that are required to decrypt electronic files that were previously secured. The process can also be referred to as a workflow, where the workflow has a series of states through which files (documents) can move, where different security policies can be imposed at different states.


Another aspect of the invention is that process-driven security policies are controlled at a server of a file security system. A group of one or more electronic documents are bound together and progress together through states of a process specified by process-driven security policies. The server can automatically and remotely enforce the process-driven security policies on the group of electronic documents.


Still another aspect of the invention is that process-driven security policies are controlled at a client of a file security system. Here, each individual electronic document can be separately and independently bound to process-driven security policies. The process-driven security policies can thus operate at the client with little or no communication with a central server.


The process-driven security policies typically offer persistent states. Each state can specify a different set of users that are permitted access to an electronic document. The states are also independent of the electronic documents themselves.


Secured files are files that require one or more keys, passwords, access privileges, etc. to gain access to their content. The security is often provided through encryption and access rules. The files, for example, can pertain to documents, multimedia files, data, executable code, images and text. In general, a secured file can only be accessed by authenticated users with appropriate access rights or privileges. In one embodiment, each secured file is provided with a header portion and a data portion, where the header portion contains, or points to, security information. The security information is used to determine whether access to associated data portions of secured files is permitted.


In one embodiment, security information provided with an electronic document controls restrictive access to a data portion which is encrypted. The security information can employ access rules together with cipher keys (e.g., a file key and various other keys) to ensure that only those users with proper access privileges or rights can access the encrypted data portion.


As used herein, a user may mean a human user, a software agent, a group of users, a member of the group, a device and/or application. Besides a human user who needs to access a secured document, a software application or agent sometimes needs to access secured files in order to proceed. Accordingly, unless specifically stated, the “user” as used herein does not necessarily pertain to a human being.


The invention is related to processes, systems, architectures and software products for providing pervasive security to digital assets (e.g., electronic documents). The invention is particularly suitable in an enterprise environment. In general, pervasive security means that digital assets are secured (i.e., secured data) and can only be accessed by authenticated users with appropriate access rights or privileges. Digital assets may include, but not be limited to, various types of documents, multimedia files, data, executable code, images and texts.


In the following description, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the invention. However, it will become obvious to those skilled in the art that the invention may be practiced without these specific details. The description and representation herein are the common meanings used by those experienced or skilled in the art to most effectively convey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. In other instances, well-known methods, procedures, components, and circuitry have not been described in detail to avoid unnecessarily obscuring aspects of the invention.


Reference herein to “one embodiment” or “an embodiment” means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment can be included in at least one embodiment of the invention. The appearances of the phrase “in one embodiment” in various places in the specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment, nor are separate or alternative embodiments mutually exclusive of other embodiments. Further, the order of blocks in process flowcharts or diagrams representing one or more embodiments of the invention do not inherently indicate any particular order, nor imply any limitations in the invention.


Embodiments of the invention are discussed herein with reference to FIGS. 1-8. However, those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that the detailed description given herein with respect to these figures is for explanatory purposes as the invention extends beyond these limited embodiments.



FIG. 1 is a diagram of an exemplary process-driven security policy (PDSP) 100 according to one embodiment of the invention. The process-driven security policy 100 includes a plurality of different states. As shown in FIG. 1, the process-driven security policy 100 can include state A 102, state B 104, state C 106, and state D 108. Each of these different states can be associated with one or more access restrictions.


The process-driven security policy 100 is used by a file (document) security system to restrict access to files (documents). As files are placed in different ones of the states of the process-driven security policy 100, the access restrictions being utilized to secure access to the files typically changes. More particularly, as the files move from state-to-state in accordance with a process, the access restrictions utilized by the files often changes. Indeed, the access restrictions can change automatically based upon the state the file is in, and thus does not necessarily require user or administrator interaction in order to change the access restrictions. Typically, access restrictions will designate which users (or groups of users) are able to access secure documents, whether certain clearance levels are needed, whether off-line access is permitted, and which of various other possible criteria or considerations are utilized. A set of access restrictions for the various states can be referred to as a security policy.


A file can transition between the various states of the process-driven security policy 100 in a controlled manner. Often, the process-driven security policy 100 defines the transitions that are permissible. In one embodiment, the state transitions are event-driven. The events can be either internal to the file security system or external to the file security system. When event-driven, the transitions between states can be automatic and thus do not require user or administrator interaction. However, some events can be triggered or initiated by user or administrator interaction.


As shown in FIG. 1, a file (document) can transition between the different states 102-108 offered by the process-driven security policy 100. For example, a file currently in state A 102 can transition to state B 104 or state D 108, depending upon process-related conditions (e.g., events). Similarly, a file in state D 108, depending upon process considerations, can transition to state A 102, state B 104 or state C 106. Likewise, a file in state B 104 or state C 106 can transition to one or more other states. Additional details on states, security policies and transitions between states are discussed in additional detail below.



FIG. 2 is a flow diagram of a transition process 200 according to one embodiment of the invention. The transition process 200 can be used to transition a document (file) between different states of a process-driven security policy, such as the process-driven security policy shown in FIG. 1. The transition process 200 is typically deemed process-driven because it is driven by a process. The process is, for example, defined by transition rules. The transition rules typically rely upon events to cause transitions between states. Often user or administrator interaction is not involved when activating transitions. However, the transition process 200 can permit a user or administrator to participate in activating transitions, such as by causing an event to occur which initiates a transition.


The transition process 200 begins with a decision 202 that determines whether an event relevant to the process-driven security policy imposed on a document has been received. Typically, the process-driven security policy is imposed on the document by a file security system. One implementation of a process-driven security policy is a security policy state machine. The process-driven security policy (or security policy state machine) has a plurality of states, and transition rules for transitioning between the various states. In any case, the transition process 200 monitors events that are relevant to the process-driven security policy (or the security policy state machine). When the decision 202 determines that an event has not yet been received, the transition process 200 awaits such an event.


On the other hand, when the decision 202 determines that an event has been received, then the transition process 200 determines 204 whether the event causes a state transition. Here, the rules by which transitions between states occur, i.e., transition rules, can be specified by the process-driven security policy. For example, an administrator for the document security system may have created the process-driven security policy and thus defined its states and its transition rules. Hence, when an event is received, it is evaluated to determine 204 whether the event causes a state transition. When the decision 206 determines that a state transition is to occur, the state transition is performed 208 to transfer one or more documents from one state to another state. Alternatively, when the decision 206 determines that a state transition is not to occur, the block 208 is bypassed so that no state transition is performed. Once the one or more documents transition to the new state, the access restrictions for the new state govern when access to the documents, which are secured, is permitted. Following the block 208 or its being bypassed, the transition process 200 is complete and ends.



FIG. 3 illustrates a security policy state machine 300 according to one embodiment of the invention. As previously noted, a security policy state machine is one implementation of a process-driven security policy. In this exemplary embodiment, the security policy state machine 300 includes four distinct states, namely, a state A (“Draft”) 302, state B (“Final Draft”) 304, state C (“Retain”) 306, and state D (“Delete”) 308. Each of these states has one or more associated access restriction for documents (files) which reside in that state. Further, the permitted transitions between the various states 302-308 are identified by transitions T1-T5. In particular, a document in the Draft state 302 can follow the transition T1 to the Final Draft state 304. A document in the Final Draft state 304 can follow the transition T2 to the Retain state 306. A document in the Retain state 306 can follow transition T3 to the Delete state 308. Further, a document in the Final Draft state 304 can follow transition T4 to the Draft state 302, and a document in the Retain state 306 can follow transition T5 to the Final Draft state 304.


A file security system can enforce the security policy state machine 300 on one or more electronic documents. In doing so, the security policy state machine 300 is typically described in a textual manner, such as in a markup language (e.g., XML), pseudo-code, and the like. One representative example of a textual description of the security policy state machine 300 is as follows.


State=DRAFT


Accessors=Finance, unrestricted


Deny off-line access


Grant audit access


State=FINAL DRAFT


Accessors=Finance, restricted; Finance Managers, unrestricted


Deny off-line access


Grant audit access


State=RETAIN


Accessors=All


Allow off-line access


Deny audit access


State=DELETE


Accessors=None


Note that in the Draft state, the users with permission to access the electronic document (referred to as “Accessors”) include those users that are members of a Finance group. The access is also unrestricted in this Draft state. Also, in the Draft state, offline access to the electronic document is not permitted, but audit access is permitted. Note, however, in the Final Draft state, those users that are members of the Finance group now only have restricted access. In one embodiment, restricted access means that the data (content) of the document can be accessed but that such data cannot be further disseminated through operations such as cut, paste, print, etc.


Additionally, the security policy state machine 300 transitions between the various states in accordance with transition rules. Typically, the transition rules are triggered by the occurrence of events. The events can be internal or external. The external events can originate from users or from another system (e.g., a document management system). In a specific case of the security policy state machine 300, a representative description of a transition rule is as follows.

    • On event ( ), transition from STATE1 to STATE2


Some exemplary transition rules using internal or external events are as follows.

    • On (time=Sep. 1, 2008), RETAIN to DELETE
    • On (ExtEvent==docCheckIn), FINAL DRAFT to RETAIN
    • On (ExtEvent==docFinalize), DRAFT to FINAL DRAFT
    • On (ExtEvent==docReject), FINAL DRAFT to DRAFT
    • On (period=event transition day (FINAL DRAFT)+90 days), FINAL DRAFT to RETAIN


Of these exemplary transition rules, the first and last transition rules are triggered by internal events and the others are triggered by external events. For example, the external events can be from a document management system that is separate from the file (document) security system.



FIG. 4A is a diagram of a document securing system 400 according to one embodiment of the invention. The document securing system 400 is, for example, performed by a computing device, such as client computer 701 or 702 shown in FIG. 7 below.


The document securing system 400 creates or obtains an electronic document 402 that is to be secured. The electronic document 402 is then supplied to a securing engine 404. The securing engine 404 receives a designation of a classifier 406 to be associated with the electronic document 402. The classifier 406 refers to an accessor user list, and possibly other forms of access restriction. In one embodiment, the classifier 406 can be a label to a categorization of the electronic document with respect to a plurality of different types of content. Examples of classifiers include: External, Financial, Sales Forecast, Sales Quota, Press Release, Budget, Marketing Presentation, Marketing Planning, Engineering Planning, Engineering Project X, Engineering Specification, and Engineering Design. In addition, the securing engine 404 can receive a process-driven security policy 407 to be used to secure the electronic document 402. In one embodiment, the process-driven security policy 407 is chosen from a plurality of process-driven security policies based on the classifier 406. In another embodiment, the process-driven security policy 407 is made up of states, and each of the states correspond to one of the classifiers 406.


The securing engine 404 operates to produce a secured electronic document 408. The secured electronic document 408 includes an encrypted data portion 410 and a header portion 412. The encrypted data portion 410 is the electronic document 402 after having been encrypted. The encryption can result from the use of one or more keys and encryption algorithms. For stronger security, a hierarchy of encryption may be used. The header portion 412 is also referred to as encrypted security information, because the header portion 412 includes the encrypted security information as at least a substantial component of the header portion 412. The encrypted security information can include a classifier, access rules and at least one key (e.g., file key, private state key). The access rules and the keys utilized to encrypt the electronic document 402 depend on the state of the associated process-driven security policy 407 which is indicated by the classifier. Initially, the electronic document 402 is encrypted in accordance with an initial state of the process-driven security policy 407. Typically, one of the states of the process-driven security policy 407 is designated as its initial state.


Hence, if the encrypted security information is able to be decrypted, the file key is able to be retrieved from the header portion 412 and used to decrypt the encrypted data portion 410 of the secured electronic document 408, as will be discussed in more detail below with respect to FIG. 5C. However, the encrypted security information in the header portion 412 is often secured through one or multiple layers of encryption, which can use various keys. These various keys are used to encrypt the security information. Typically, these various keys are managed by a server, but made available to client computers so that decryption can be performed locally. In one implementation, the encrypted security information within the header portion 412 can be decrypted if, and only if, the decrypting party has possession of both of the following: a group key (a private key for a group specified in the header), and a state key (a private key for the classifier specified in the header). As previously noted, the classifier is used to determine the state of the process-driven security policy 407.


Additional details on securing files or documents is provided in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/159,537, filed May 5, 2002, and entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SECURING DIGITAL ASSETS,” which is hereby incorporated by reference.



FIG. 4B is a flow diagram of a document securing process 440 according to one embodiment of the invention. The document securing process 440 represents processing performed by a document securing system, such as the document securing system 400 illustrated in FIG. 4A.


The document securing process 440 initially opens or creates 442 an electronic document. Next, a decision 444 determines whether the electronic document is to be secured. When the decision 444 determines that the electronic document is not to be secured, then the electronic document is saved 446 in the normal course. Here, the electronic document is not secured but simply stored in a conventional fashion.


On the other hand, when the decision 444 determines that the electronic document is to be secured, then an initial policy reference for the electronic document is assigned 448. In one implementation, the policy reference is a pointer to an accessor user list. A classifier for an electronic document can be assigned in a variety of different ways. In one implementation, a user or creator of the electronic document is able to assign the classifier. For example, the user or creator of the electronic document might interact with a graphical user interface to select a classifier from a list of available classifiers.


After the policy reference is assigned 448, the electronic document is secured 450 in accordance with a process-driven security policy associated with the policy reference. Here, the electronic document is typically secured in accordance with the initial state of the process-driven security policy. Thereafter, the secured electronic document is saved 452. Following the operations 452 and 446, the document securing process 440 is complete and ends. The subsequent transitions to other states of the process-driven security policy is discussed below with reference to FIG. 6.



FIG. 4C is a detailed flow diagram of an encryption process 460 according to one embodiment of the invention. The encryption process 460 is, for example, processing suitable for being performed by the block 450 shown in FIG. 4B in which an electronic document is secured in accordance with a process-driven security policy.


According to the encryption process 460, a file key is obtained 462. In one implementation, the file key is a symmetric key used to encrypt and decrypt a data portion of a secured document. After the file key is obtained 462, the data portion of the electronic document is then encrypted 464 using at least the file key.


In one embodiment, each of the different states of the process-driven security policy would include a different public state key that would be used to encrypt documents being placed into such state. An initial state of the process-driven security policy associated with the policy reference is then determined 466. Next, a public state key associated with the initial state is obtained 468. Typically, the public state key is a public key of a public and private cryptography key pair that is to be utilized to encrypt documents associated with the initial state of the process-driven security policy. Once the public state key associated with the initial state has been obtained 468, the file key is encrypted 470 using the public state key. Thereafter, security information is attached 472 to the encrypted data portion. The security information, for example, can include the policy reference and the encrypted file key. For example, the policy reference can be used as a state indicator to identify the applicable state of the process-driven security policy.


In one embodiment, the policy reference has a key pair associated therewith. The file (document) security system (e.g., server) maintains the current state of the process-driven security policy associated with the policy reference. The public key in this pair is used to encrypt the document and bind it with the process-driven security policy.


In this implementation, the electronic document has at least a data portion and a security information portion. The data portion is encrypted using at least the file key. In one embodiment, the electronic document can be encrypted many times over such that a plurality of different keys are needed to encrypt (and consequently to decrypt) the electronic document. In another embodiment, a key used to encrypt the electronic document can be encrypted many times over after being used to encrypt the electronic document. In other words, although the document securing process 440 refers to encryption of the data portion through use of the file key and then encryption of the file key through use of the public state key, it should be understood that additional keys can be used to directly encrypt the electronic document, or indirectly encrypt the electronic document by encrypting a key used to encrypt the electronic document. For example, the additional keys might include one or more of a classifier key, a user or group key, or a security clearance level key.


The security information is typically provided in a header (or header portion) of the electronic document. The header is thus typically attached to the encrypted data portion. The header together with the encrypted data portion represents a secured electronic document. Typically, the security information would include access rules, a policy reference (classifier), a private state key and at least one key (e.g., file key). The at least one key can be encrypted by a public state key that corresponds to the state, as well as possibly one or more other keys. The at least one key is often secured by encrypting either the at least one key itself, or the security information more generally, through use of one or more various other keys (e.g., group key, content type key, and/or clearance key).



FIG. 5A is a diagram of a document unsecuring system 500 according to one embodiment of the invention. The document unsecuring system 500 represents a counterpart to the document securing system 400 illustrated in FIG. 4A.


The document unsecuring system 500 cooperates to receive a secured electronic document 502. The secured electronic document typically includes an encrypted data portion 504 and a header 506. Often, but not necessarily, the header 506 is encrypted. The header 506 includes a policy reference and at least one key, e.g., a file key, that is needed to decrypt the encrypted data portion 504. The secured electronic document 502 is supplied to an unsecuring engine 508. The unsecuring engine 508 examines the header 506 of the secured electronic document 502 to determine the policy reference. The policy reference identifies a process-based security policy 510, or a state thereof, that governs the security of the secured document 502. The unsecuring engine 508 also receives at least that portion of the process-based security policy that pertains to the state of the secured electronic document 502. In other words, the unsecuring engine 508 needs the access restrictions for the current state of the process-driven security policy 510 to unsecure the secured electronic document 502, and thus gain access to its contents. The unsecuring engine 508 then evaluates whether the secured electronic document 502 is permitted to be accessed by the requester, based on the access restrictions so retrieved. When the unsecuring engine 508 determines that the requestor is authorized to access the secured electronic document 502, then the unsecuring engine 508 can decrypt the encrypted data portion 504 of the secured electronic document 502 (and also eliminate at least significant portions of the header 506) to yield an electronic document 512 that is unsecured. In other words, the electronic document 512 is primarily (or exclusively) composed of the data portion of the encrypted data portion 504 after such has been decrypted. The decryption can involve the use of a number of keys (e.g., private keys) and decryption algorithms, one of such keys is the file key of the secured electronic document, and another of such keys is the private state key for the state of the secured electronic document.



FIGS. 5B and 5C are flow diagrams of a document access process 520 according to one embodiment of the invention. The document access process 520 operates to determine whether access to a particular document is permitted to a particular user (or group of users). The document access process 520 begins with a decision 522 that determines whether a request to access a secured electronic document has been received. When the decision 522 determines that such a request has not yet been received, the document access process 520 awaits such a request. Once the decision 522 determines that a request to access a secured electronic document has been received, the document access process 520 continues. In other words, the document access process 520 can be considered to be invoked once a request to access a secured electronic document has been received.


In any case, once a request to access a secured electronic document has been received, a policy reference for the secured electronic document to be accessed is determined 524. In one embodiment, the security information portion of a secured electronic document contains the policy reference. Next, a process-driven security policy associated with the policy reference is determined 526. Then, the current state of the process-driven security policy for the secured electronic document is determined 528. In one embodiment, the policy reference (or other indicator) can indicate the current state of the state-based security policy. Next, access restriction are obtained 530 for the current state. Each of the different states of the process-driven security policy often has a different access restriction. Here, the state policy restrictions are those restrictions associated with the current state of a process-driven security policy.


Thereafter, a decision 542 determines whether the state policy restrictions are satisfied. In other words, the secured electronic document to be accessed is presently in the current state of the process-driven security policy. This current state has the access restriction associated therewith, that must be satisfied in order to gain access to the secured electronic document. Hence, the decision 542 determines whether the access restriction is satisfied by the requestor (e.g., user or group of users) seeking access to the secured electronic document. When the decision 542 determines that the access restriction is not satisfied, access to the secured electronic document is denied 544.


On the other hand, when the decision 542 determines that the access restriction has been satisfied, then a data portion of the secured electronic document is decrypted 546. Then, the data portion of the electronic document is returned 548 to the requestor. Following the block 548, as well as following the block 544, the document access process 520 ends.



FIG. 5D is a flow diagram of a decryption process 560 according to one embodiment of the invention. The decryption process 560 can, for example, pertain to detailed operations performed by the block 546 illustrated in FIG. 5C. In any event, the decryption process 560 initially obtains 562 an encrypted file key from the security information portion of the secured electronic document. In addition, a private state key associated with the current state of the process-driven security policy for the secured electronic document is obtained 564. Normally, only authorized users would be able to gain access to the private state key. The private state key is the private key of the same public and private cryptography key pair that provided the public state key that was used to encrypt the file key. Then, the encrypted file key is decrypted 566 using the private state key. Thereafter, the data portion of the secured electronic document is decrypted 568 using at least the file key. Consequently, the data portion of the secured electronic document is decrypted and is in the “clear” and thus usable by the requester. Following the block 568, the decryption process 560 is complete and ends.



FIG. 6 is a flow diagram of a transition process 600 according to one embodiment of the invention. The transition process 600 pertains to processing that can be utilized to transition between states of a process-driven security policy. More particularly, the transition process 600 is, for example, suitable for use as the processing performed by the block 208 illustrated in FIG. 2.


The transition process 600 initially obtains 602 an encrypted file key from the electronic document. Typically, the encrypted file key would be retrieved from the security information portion of the electronic document. Then, a private state key is obtained 604. Here, the private state key is associated with a previous state of a process-driven security policy that is imposed on the electronic document. After the private state key has been obtained 604, the encrypted file key is decrypted 606 using the private state key. At this point, the file key has been decrypted and could be used to decrypt the data portion of the electronic document. However, the file key is instead re-encrypted in accordance with a next (current) state. More specifically, a public state key is then obtained 608. The public state key is associated with the next state of the state-based security policy that is to be imposed on the electronic document. Then, using the public state key, the file key can be encrypted 610. Thereafter, the electronic document is re-saved 612. By re-saving 612 the electronic document, the security information portion of the electronic document is updated to include the new encrypted file key in accordance with the next state (or current state). Note that the data portion of the electronic document (which is secured by the file key) advantageously need not be decrypted in the transition process 600; instead, the encryption of the file key is changed whenever a state transition occurs. Following the block 612, the transition process 600 is complete.


In one embodiment, to effect a state transition, the user only needs permission to effect the state transition. Additionally, users authorized to effect state changes with respect to a document, might be quite different from users authorized to access the document.



FIG. 7 shows a basic security system 700 in which the invention may be practiced in accordance with one embodiment thereof. The security system 700 may be employed in an enterprise or inter-enterprise environment. It includes a first server 706 (also referred to as a central server) providing centralized access management for the enterprise. The first server 706 can control restrictive access to files secured by the security system 700. To provide dependability, reliability and scalability of the system, one or more second servers 704 (also referred to as local servers, of which one is shown) may be employed to provide backup or distributed access management for users or client machines serviced locally. The server 704 is coupled to a network 708 and a network 710. For illustration purposes, there are two client machines 701 and 702 being serviced by the local server 704. Alternatively, one of the client machines 701 and 702 may be considered as a networked storage device.


Secured files may be stored in any one of the devices 701, 702, 704 and 706. When a user of the client machine 701 attempts to exchange a secured file with a remote destination 712 being used by an external user, one or more of the processing 300, 400, 500 and 600 discussed above are activated to ensure that the requested secure file is delivered without compromising the security imposed on the secured file.


According to one embodiment, a created document is caused to go through an encryption process that is preferably transparent to a user. In other words, the created document is encrypted or decrypted under the authoring application so that the user is not aware of the process. One or more keys, such as a state key, a user key and/or a content type key, can be used to retrieve a file key to decrypt an encrypted document. Typically, the user key is associated with an access privilege for the user or a group of users, and the content type key is associated with the type of content of the created document. For a given secured document, only a user with proper access privileges can access the secured document.


In one setting, a secured document may be uploaded via the network 710 from the client computer 701 to a computing or storage device 702 that may serve as a central repository. Although not necessary, the network 710 can provide a private link between the computer 701 and the computing or storage device 702. Such link may be provided by an internal network in an enterprise or a secured communication protocol (e.g., VPN and HTTPS) over a public network (e.g., the Internet). Alternatively, such link may simply be provided by a TCP/IP link. As such, secured documents on the computer 702 may be remotely accessed.


In another setting, the computer 701 and the computing or storage device 702 are inseparable, in which case the computing or storage device 702 may be a local store to retain secured documents or receive secured network resources (e.g., dynamic Web contents, results of a database query, or a live multimedia feed). Regardless of where the secured documents or secured resources are actually located, a user, with proper access privileges, can access the secured documents or resources from the client computer 701 or the computing or storage device 702 using an application (e.g., Microsoft Internet Explorer, Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat Reader).


Accordingly, respective local modules in local servers, in coordination with the central server, form a distributed mechanism to provide distributed access control enforcement. Such distributed access control enforcement ensures the dependability, reliability and scalability of centralized access control management undertaken by the central server for an entire enterprise or a business location.



FIG. 8 shows an exemplary data structure 820 of a secured file that may be used in one embodiment of the invention. The data structure 820 includes two portions: a header (or header portion) 822 and encrypted data (or an encrypted data portion) 824. The header 822 can be generated in accordance with a security template associated with a data store and thus provides restrictive access to the data portion 824 which is an encrypted version of a plain file. Optionally, the data structure 820 may also include an error-checking portion 825 that stores one or more error-checking codes, for example, a separate error-checking code for each block of encrypted data 824. These error-checking codes may also be associated with a Cyclical Redundancy Check (CRC) for the header 822 and/or the encrypted data 824. The header 822 includes a flag bit or signature 827 and security information 826 that is in accordance with the security template for the store. According to one embodiment, the security information 826 is encrypted and can be decrypted with a user key associated with an authenticated user (or requester).


The security information 826 can vary depending upon implementation. However, as shown in FIG. 8, the security information 826 includes a user identifier (ID) 828, access policy (access rules) 829, a file key 830, a classifier 831 and other information 832. Although multiple user identifiers may be used, a user identifier 828 is used to identify a user or a group that is permitted to access the secured file. The access rules 829 provide restrictive access to the encrypted data portion 824. The file key 830 is a cipher key that, once obtained, can be used to decrypt the encrypted data portion 824 and thus, in general, is protected. In one implementation of the data structure 820, the file key 830 is encrypted in conjunction with the access rules 829. In another implementation of the data structure 820, the file key 830 is encrypted with a private state key and further protected by the access rules 829. The other information 832 is an additional space for other information to be stored within the security information 826. For example, the other information 832 may be used to include other information facilitating secure access to the secured file, such as version number or author identifier.


The invention is preferably implemented by software or a combination of hardware and software, but can also be implemented in hardware. The invention can also be embodied as computer readable code on a computer readable medium. The computer readable medium is any data storage device that can store data which can thereafter be read by a computer system. Examples of the computer readable medium include read-only memory, random-access memory, CD-ROMs, DVDs, magnetic tape, optical data storage devices, and carrier waves. The computer readable medium can also be distributed over network-coupled computer systems so that the computer readable code is stored and executed in a distributed fashion.


The various embodiments, implementations and features of the invention noted above can be combined in various ways or used separately. Those skilled in the art will understand from the description that the invention can be equally applied to or used in various other settings with respect to different combinations, embodiments, implementations or features as provided in the description herein.


The invention may be practiced in two broad approaches: one, where document move asynchronously through a persistent workflow (here, the state changes are typically triggered by the users); and two, where documents move synchronously through a single-use workflow, a plurality of which however can be initiated from a workflow template (here, the state changes are typically due to administrator central command). The two approaches may be combined for use in a single enterprise. State changes due to external events may occur with both approaches.


The advantages of the invention are numerous. Different embodiments or implementations may yield one or more of the following advantages. One advantage of the invention is that file security systems are able to automatically enforce process-driven security policies on files (e.g., documents). The automatic nature of the enforcement of the process-driven security policies alleviates otherwise excessive burdens on an administrator. Another advantage of the invention is that changing of the security policies for files (e.g., documents) in accordance with a process allows greater flexibility in utilizing security policies. Still another advantage of the invention is that the process-driven security policies can be enforced centrally or locally. Still another advantage is that a workflow ordered through a centralized document management system (DMS) may be extended to a plurality of documents stored in a distributed fashion, thereby allowing a system administrator to use the well-known DMS interface.


The foregoing description of embodiments is illustrative of various aspects/embodiments of the present invention. Various modifications to the invention can be made to the preferred embodiments by those skilled in the art without departing from the true spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. Accordingly, the scope of the present invention is defined by the appended claims rather than the foregoing description of embodiments.

Claims
  • 1. A document security system for restricting access to secured documents, the system comprising: a processor;a policy system configured to enable the processor to store at least one process-driven security policy on a computer readable storage medium, wherein the process-driven security policy includes a plurality of different states and transition rules, wherein each of the different states is associated with one or more access restrictions, wherein at least one of the different states has distinct access restrictions for secured documents which reside in that state, and wherein the transition rules specify circumstances under which a secured document is to transition from one state to another, wherein the secured document includes at least a security information portion and an encrypted data portion, the security information portion including at least an encrypted file key, wherein the circumstances include the occurrence of internal and external events, wherein the external events originate from outside the policy system and wherein in response to detecting a transition from a previous state of the process-driven security policy for the secured document to a current state, the secured document is modified by decrypting the file key and then re-encrypting the file key, whereby the file key is encrypted differently for the current state than the previous state;wherein the policy system is configured to enable the processor to provide a reference to the process-driven security policy to a client computer, the reference referring to the process-driven security policy and an accessor user list resident on the policy system; andan access manager configured to enable the processor to access the process-driven security policy and determine whether a requestor is permitted to access a secured document based on the policy state associated therewith at the time access is requested, the requestor being listed in the accessor user list, and the corresponding one or more access restrictions thereof for the process-driven security policy.
  • 2. The document security system as recited in claim 1, wherein the one or more access restrictions for the secured document are automatically changed in response to detecting a change in the state of the process-driven security policy for the secured document.
  • 3. The document security system as recited in claim 1, wherein events cause the state of the process-driven security policy for the secured document to automatically transition from one state to another.
  • 4. The document security system as recited in claim 3, wherein the internal events originate from the document security system and wherein external events originate from outside the document security system.
  • 5. The document security system as recited in claim 4, wherein at least one of the external events originates from a document management system.
  • 6. The document security system as recited in claim 1, wherein one or more of the corresponding one or more access restrictions for access to the secured document remain intact when the state of the process-driven security policy for the secured document changes.
  • 7. The document security system as recited in claim 1, wherein events cause the state of the process-driven security policy to automatically transition from one state to another, wherein the process-driven security policy includes at least a first state, a second state, and a third state, and wherein a first event causes transition from the first state to the second state, and a second event causes transition from the second state to a third state.
  • 8. The document security system as recited in claim 1, wherein events cause the state of the process-driven security policy to automatically transition from one state to another, wherein the process-driven security policy includes at least a first state and a second state, and wherein a first event causes transition from the first state to the second state.
  • 9. The document security system as recited in claim 1, wherein the external events originate from a second document security system.
  • 10. The document security system as recited in claim 9, wherein the transition rules are written in XML.
  • 11. The document security system as recited in claim 1, wherein events cause the state of the process-driven security policy for the secured document to transition from a previous state to a current state, and wherein the secured document is modified in response to detecting a transition from the previous state of the process-driven security policy for the secured document to the current state.
  • 12. The document security system as recited in claim 11, wherein the file key is decrypted in order to decrypt the encrypted data portion.
  • 13. The document security system as recited in claim 11, wherein, in response to determining, by the access manager, that access to a secured document is permitted by a requestor, access to the secured document is available at a client machine associated with the requestor.
  • 14. A method for transitioning at least one secured document through a security-policy state machine having a plurality of different states, each of the plurality of different states having distinct access restrictions for secured documents which reside in that state, the method comprising: receiving an event, wherein the event is one of a group of internal and external events, wherein the external events originate from outside the security-policy state machine;determining whether the event causes a state transition for the at least one secured document from a former state to a subsequent different state of the security-policy state machine;automatically transitioning from the former state to the subsequent different state of the security-policy state machine in response to determining that the event causes the state transition, wherein the at least one secured document includes at least a security information portion and an encrypted data portion, the security information portion including at least an encrypted file key, and wherein the transitioning comprises modifying the at least one secured document by decrypting the encrypted file key and then re-encrypting the file key, whereby the file key is encrypted differently for the current state than the former state; andproviding a reference to the security-policy state machine to a client computer, the reference referring to a current state of the security-policy state machine and an accessor user list resident in the security-policy state machine.
  • 15. The method as recited in claim 14, wherein the security-policy state machine implements a process-driven security policy, and wherein each state of the security-policy state machine has different access restrictions.
  • 16. The method as recited in claim 14, wherein each of the states of the security-policy state machine have different access policies.
  • 17. The method as recited in claim 16, wherein the security-policy state machine is provided as part of a document security system, and wherein the different access policies of the security-policy state machine are enforced by the document security system.
  • 18. The method as recited in claim 14, wherein the transitioning comprises modifying the secured document to reflect the subsequent state of the security-policy state machine.
  • 19. The method as recited in claim 14, wherein the transitioning further comprises: retrieving the encrypted file key from the secured document;decrypting the encrypted file key to yield the file key;subsequently encrypting the file key in accordance with the subsequent state of the security-policy state machine; andstoring the secured document, the secured document including at least an encrypted data portion and the subsequently encrypted file key.
  • 20. The method as recited in claim 14, wherein the transitioning further comprises: retrieving the encrypted file key from the secured document;obtaining a private state key associated with the former state of the security-policy state machine;decrypting the encrypted file key using the private file key;obtaining a public state key associated with the subsequent state of the security-policy state machine;subsequently encrypting the file key in accordance with the public state key; andstoring the secured document, the secured document including at least an encrypted data portion and the subsequently encrypted file key.
  • 21. A method for imposing access restrictions on electronic documents, the method comprising: providing at least one process-driven security policy at a server computer, wherein the process-driven security policy is associated with a plurality of different states, and wherein each of the different states has distinct access restrictions for secured documents which reside in that state;providing a reference to the process-driven security policy to a client computer, the reference referring to the process-driven security policy and an accessor user list resident on the server computer;associating the reference to an electronic document;transitioning the process-driven security policy from one state to a current state in response to the occurrence of an event, wherein the event is one of a group of internal and external events, wherein the external events are external to the server computer, wherein the electronic document includes at least a security information portion and an encrypted data portion, the security information portion including at least an encrypted file key, and wherein the transitioning comprises modifying the electronic document by decrypting the encrypted file key and then re-encrypting the file key, whereby the file key is encrypted differently for the current state than the former state; andsubsequently determining at the server computer whether a requestor is permitted to access the electronic document, the access being based on a current state of the process-driven security policy and the requestor being listed in the accessor user list, the current state being informed to the server computer by sending the reference to the server computer.
  • 22. The method as recited in claim 21, wherein the external events originate from a system external to the server computer.
  • 23. The method as recited in claim 22, wherein the transitioning is performed at the server computer.
  • 24. The method as recited in claim 21, wherein the associating associates the reference to a group of documents.
  • 25. The method as recited in claim 21, wherein the method pertains to a group of electronic documents, and wherein all of the electronic documents of the group are always in the same state of the process-driven security policy.
  • 26. The method as recited in claim 21, wherein the determining comprises evaluating the process-driven security policy of an electronic document at the server computer based on at least the security policy restrictions for the current state of the process-driven security policy for the electronic document.
  • 27. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having instructions stored thereon, the instructions comprising: instructions to detect an occurrence of an event, wherein the event is one of a group of internal and external events;instructions to determine whether the event causes a state transition for at least one secured document from a former state to a subsequent different state of a security-policy state machine having a plurality of different states, each of the plurality of different states having distinct access restrictions for secured documents which reside in that state; andinstructions to automatically transition from the former state to the subsequent different state of the security-policy state machine upon determining that the event causes the state transition, wherein the external events originate from outside the security-policy state machine, and wherein the at least one secured document includes at least a security information portion and an encrypted data portion, the security information portion including at least an encrypted file key, and wherein the transitioning comprises modifying the at least one secured document by decrypting the encrypted file key and then re-encrypting the file key, whereby the file key is encrypted differently for the current state than the former state; andinstructions to provide a reference to the process-driven security policy to a client machine, wherein the reference refers to the process-driven security policy and an accessor user list resident in the security-policy state machine.
  • 28. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having instructions stored thereon, the instructions comprising: instructions to provide at least one process-driven security policy at a server machine, wherein the process-driven security policy has a plurality of different states and transition rules associated therewith, wherein each of the different states has distinct access restrictions for secured documents which reside in that state, wherein the transition rules specify circumstances under which an electronic document is to transition from one state to another, wherein the circumstances include the occurrence of internal and external events, wherein the external events originate from outside the server machine, and wherein the at least one secured document includes at least a security information portion and an encrypted data portion, the security information portion including at least an encrypted file key, and wherein the transitioning comprises modifying the at least one secured document by decrypting the encrypted file key and then re-encrypting the file key, whereby the file key is encrypted differently for the current state than the former state;instructions to provide a reference to the process-driven security policy to a client machine, wherein the reference refers to the process-driven security policy and an accessor user list resident on the server machine;instructions to associate the reference to an electronic document;instructions to transform the process-driven security policy from one state to a current state; andinstructions to determine at the server computer whether a requestor is permitted to access the electronic document, wherein the access is based on a current state of the process-driven security policy and the requestor being listed in the accessor user list, and wherein the current state is informed to the server computer by sending the reference to the server computer.
US Referenced Citations (665)
Number Name Date Kind
4203166 Ehrsam et al. May 1980 A
4238854 Ehrsam et al. Dec 1980 A
4423387 Sempel Dec 1983 A
4734568 Watanabe Mar 1988 A
4757533 Allen et al. Jul 1988 A
4796220 Wolfe Jan 1989 A
4799258 Davies Jan 1989 A
4827508 Shear May 1989 A
4887204 Johnson et al. Dec 1989 A
4888800 Marshall et al. Dec 1989 A
4912552 Allison et al. Mar 1990 A
4972472 Brown et al. Nov 1990 A
5032979 Hecht et al. Jul 1991 A
5052040 Preston et al. Sep 1991 A
5058164 Elmer et al. Oct 1991 A
5144660 Rose Sep 1992 A
5204897 Wyman Apr 1993 A
5212788 Lomet et al. May 1993 A
5220657 Bly et al. Jun 1993 A
5235641 Nozawa et al. Aug 1993 A
5247575 Sprague et al. Sep 1993 A
5267313 Hirata Nov 1993 A
5276735 Boebert et al. Jan 1994 A
5301247 Rasmussen et al. Apr 1994 A
5319705 Halter et al. Jun 1994 A
5369702 Shanton Nov 1994 A
5375169 Seheidt et al. Dec 1994 A
5404404 Novorita Apr 1995 A
5406628 Beller et al. Apr 1995 A
5414852 Kramer et al. May 1995 A
5434918 Kung et al. Jul 1995 A
5461710 Bloomfield et al. Oct 1995 A
5467342 Logston et al. Nov 1995 A
5495533 Linehan et al. Feb 1996 A
5497422 Tysen et al. Mar 1996 A
5499297 Boebert Mar 1996 A
5502766 Boebert et al. Mar 1996 A
5535375 Eshel et al. Jul 1996 A
5557765 Lipner et al. Sep 1996 A
5570108 McLaughlin et al. Oct 1996 A
5584023 Hsu Dec 1996 A
5600722 Yamaguchi et al. Feb 1997 A
5606663 Kadooka Feb 1997 A
5619576 Shaw Apr 1997 A
5638501 Gough et al. Jun 1997 A
5640388 Woodhead et al. Jun 1997 A
5655119 Davy Aug 1997 A
5661668 Yemini et al. Aug 1997 A
5661806 Nevoux et al. Aug 1997 A
5671412 Christiano Sep 1997 A
5673316 Auerbach et al. Sep 1997 A
5677953 Dolphin Oct 1997 A
5680452 Shanton Oct 1997 A
5682537 Davies et al. Oct 1997 A
5684987 Mamiya et al. Nov 1997 A
5689688 Strong et al. Nov 1997 A
5689718 Sakurai et al. Nov 1997 A
5699428 McDonnal et al. Dec 1997 A
5708709 Rose Jan 1998 A
5715403 Stefik Feb 1998 A
5717755 Shanton Feb 1998 A
5719941 Swift et al. Feb 1998 A
5720033 Deo Feb 1998 A
5729734 Parker et al. Mar 1998 A
5732265 Dewitt et al. Mar 1998 A
5745573 Lipner et al. Apr 1998 A
5745750 Porcaro Apr 1998 A
5748736 Mittra May 1998 A
5751287 Hahn et al. May 1998 A
5757920 Misra et al. May 1998 A
5765152 Erickson Jun 1998 A
5768381 Hawthorne Jun 1998 A
5778065 Hauser et al. Jul 1998 A
5778350 Adams et al. Jul 1998 A
5781711 Austin et al. Jul 1998 A
5787169 Eldridge et al. Jul 1998 A
5787173 Seheidt et al. Jul 1998 A
5787175 Carter Jul 1998 A
5790789 Suarez Aug 1998 A
5790790 Smith et al. Aug 1998 A
5813009 Johnson et al. Sep 1998 A
5821933 Keller et al. Oct 1998 A
5825876 Peterson Oct 1998 A
5835592 Chang et al. Nov 1998 A
5835601 Shimbo et al. Nov 1998 A
5850443 Van Oorschot et al. Dec 1998 A
5857189 Riddle Jan 1999 A
5862325 Reed et al. Jan 1999 A
5870468 Harrison Feb 1999 A
5870477 Sasaki et al. Feb 1999 A
5881287 Mast Mar 1999 A
5892900 Ginter et al. Apr 1999 A
5893084 Morgan et al. Apr 1999 A
5898781 Shanton Apr 1999 A
5922073 Shimada Jul 1999 A
5923754 Angelo et al. Jul 1999 A
5933498 Schneck et al. Aug 1999 A
5944794 Okamoto et al. Aug 1999 A
5953419 Lohstroh et al. Sep 1999 A
5968177 Batten-Carew et al. Oct 1999 A
5970502 Salkewicz et al. Oct 1999 A
5978802 Hurvig Nov 1999 A
5987440 O'Neil et al. Nov 1999 A
5991879 Still Nov 1999 A
5999907 Donner Dec 1999 A
6011847 Follendore, III Jan 2000 A
6014730 Ohtsu Jan 2000 A
6023506 Ote et al. Feb 2000 A
6031584 Gray Feb 2000 A
6032216 Schmuck et al. Feb 2000 A
6035404 Zhao Mar 2000 A
6038322 Harkins Mar 2000 A
6044155 Thomlinson et al. Mar 2000 A
6055314 Spies et al. Apr 2000 A
6058424 Dixon et al. May 2000 A
6061790 Bodnar May 2000 A
6069057 Wu May 2000 A
6070244 Orchier et al. May 2000 A
6085323 Shimizu et al. Jul 2000 A
6088717 Reed et al. Jul 2000 A
6088805 Davis et al. Jul 2000 A
6098056 Rusnak et al. Aug 2000 A
6101507 Cane et al. Aug 2000 A
6105131 Carroll Aug 2000 A
6122630 Strickler et al. Sep 2000 A
6134327 Van Oorschot Oct 2000 A
6134658 Multerer et al. Oct 2000 A
6134660 Boneh et al. Oct 2000 A
6134664 Walker Oct 2000 A
6141754 Choy Oct 2000 A
6145084 Zuili Nov 2000 A
6148338 Lachelt et al. Nov 2000 A
6158010 Moriconi et al. Dec 2000 A
6161139 Win et al. Dec 2000 A
6182142 Win et al. Jan 2001 B1
6185684 Pravetz et al. Feb 2001 B1
6192408 Vahalia et al. Feb 2001 B1
6199070 Polo-Wood et al. Mar 2001 B1
6205549 Pravetz Mar 2001 B1
6212561 Sitaraman et al. Apr 2001 B1
6223285 Komuro et al. Apr 2001 B1
6226618 Downs et al. May 2001 B1
6226745 Wiederhold May 2001 B1
6240188 Dondeti et al. May 2001 B1
6249755 Yemini et al. Jun 2001 B1
6249873 Richard et al. Jun 2001 B1
6253193 Ginter et al. Jun 2001 B1
6260040 Kauffman et al. Jul 2001 B1
6260141 Park Jul 2001 B1
6263348 Kathrow et al. Jul 2001 B1
6266420 Langford et al. Jul 2001 B1
6272631 Thomlinson et al. Aug 2001 B1
6272632 Carman et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282649 Lambert et al. Aug 2001 B1
6289450 Pensak et al. Sep 2001 B1
6289458 Garg et al. Sep 2001 B1
6292895 Baltzley Sep 2001 B1
6292899 McBride Sep 2001 B1
6295361 Kadansky et al. Sep 2001 B1
6299069 Shona Oct 2001 B1
6301614 Najork et al. Oct 2001 B1
6308256 Folmsbee Oct 2001 B1
6308273 Goertzel et al. Oct 2001 B1
6314408 Salas et al. Nov 2001 B1
6314409 Schneck et al. Nov 2001 B2
6317777 Skarbo et al. Nov 2001 B1
6332025 Takahashi et al. Dec 2001 B2
6336114 Garrison Jan 2002 B1
6339423 Sampson et al. Jan 2002 B1
6339825 Pensak et al. Jan 2002 B2
6341164 Dilkie et al. Jan 2002 B1
6343316 Sakata Jan 2002 B1
6347374 Drake et al. Feb 2002 B1
6349337 Parsons et al. Feb 2002 B1
6351813 Mooney et al. Feb 2002 B1
6356903 Baxter et al. Mar 2002 B1
6356941 Cohen Mar 2002 B1
6357010 Viets et al. Mar 2002 B1
6363480 Perlman Mar 2002 B1
6366298 Haitsuka et al. Apr 2002 B1
6370249 Van Oorschot Apr 2002 B1
6381698 Devanbu et al. Apr 2002 B1
6385644 Devine et al. May 2002 B1
6389433 Bolosky et al. May 2002 B1
6389538 Gruse et al. May 2002 B1
6393420 Peters May 2002 B1
6405315 Burns et al. Jun 2002 B1
6405318 Rowland Jun 2002 B1
6408404 Ladwig Jun 2002 B1
6421714 Rai et al. Jul 2002 B1
6442688 Moses et al. Aug 2002 B1
6442695 Dutcher et al. Aug 2002 B1
6446090 Hart Sep 2002 B1
6449721 Pensak et al. Sep 2002 B1
6453353 Win et al. Sep 2002 B1
6453419 Flint et al. Sep 2002 B1
6466476 Wong et al. Oct 2002 B1
6466932 Dennis et al. Oct 2002 B1
6477544 Bolosky et al. Nov 2002 B1
6487662 Kharon et al. Nov 2002 B1
6490680 Scheidt et al. Dec 2002 B1
6505300 Chan et al. Jan 2003 B2
6510349 Schneck et al. Jan 2003 B1
6519700 Ram et al. Feb 2003 B1
6529956 Smith et al. Mar 2003 B1
6530020 Aoki Mar 2003 B1
6530024 Proctor Mar 2003 B1
6542608 Scheidt et al. Apr 2003 B2
6549623 Scheidt et al. Apr 2003 B1
6550011 Sims Apr 2003 B1
6557039 Leong et al. Apr 2003 B1
6567914 Just et al. May 2003 B1
6571291 Chow May 2003 B1
6574733 Langford Jun 2003 B1
6584466 Serbinis et al. Jun 2003 B1
6587878 Merriam Jul 2003 B1
6587946 Jakobsson Jul 2003 B1
6588673 Chan et al. Jul 2003 B1
6591295 Diamond et al. Jul 2003 B1
6594662 Sieffert et al. Jul 2003 B1
6598161 Kluttz et al. Jul 2003 B1
6601170 Wallace, Jr. Jul 2003 B1
6603857 Batten-Carew et al. Aug 2003 B1
6608636 Roseman Aug 2003 B1
6611599 Natarajan Aug 2003 B2
6611846 Stoodley Aug 2003 B1
6615349 Hair Sep 2003 B1
6615350 Schell et al. Sep 2003 B1
6625650 Stelliga Sep 2003 B2
6625734 Marvit et al. Sep 2003 B1
6629140 Fertell et al. Sep 2003 B1
6629243 Kleinman et al. Sep 2003 B1
6633311 Douvikas et al. Oct 2003 B1
6640307 Viets et al. Oct 2003 B2
6646515 Jun et al. Nov 2003 B2
6647388 Numao et al. Nov 2003 B2
6678835 Shah et al. Jan 2004 B1
6683954 Searle Jan 2004 B1
6687822 Jakobsson Feb 2004 B1
6693652 Barrus et al. Feb 2004 B1
6698022 Wu Feb 2004 B1
6711683 Laczko et al. Mar 2004 B1
6718361 Basani et al. Apr 2004 B1
6735701 Jacobson May 2004 B1
6738908 Bonn et al. May 2004 B1
6751573 Burch Jun 2004 B1
6754657 Lomet Jun 2004 B2
6754665 Futagami et al. Jun 2004 B1
6775779 England et al. Aug 2004 B1
6779031 Picher-Dempsey Aug 2004 B1
6782403 Kino et al. Aug 2004 B1
6801999 Venkatesan et al. Oct 2004 B1
6807534 Erickson Oct 2004 B1
6807636 Hartman et al. Oct 2004 B2
6810389 Meyer Oct 2004 B1
6810479 Barlow et al. Oct 2004 B1
6816871 Lee Nov 2004 B2
6816969 Miyazaki et al. Nov 2004 B2
6826698 Minkin et al. Nov 2004 B1
6834333 Yoshino et al. Dec 2004 B2
6834341 Bahl et al. Dec 2004 B1
6842825 Geiner et al. Jan 2005 B2
6845452 Roddy et al. Jan 2005 B1
6851050 Singhal et al. Feb 2005 B2
6862103 Miura et al. Mar 2005 B1
6865555 Novak Mar 2005 B2
6870920 Henits Mar 2005 B2
6874139 Krueger et al. Mar 2005 B2
6877010 Smith-Semedo et al. Apr 2005 B2
6877136 Bess et al. Apr 2005 B2
6882994 Yoshimura et al. Apr 2005 B2
6889210 Vainstein May 2005 B1
6891953 DeMello et al. May 2005 B1
6892201 Brown et al. May 2005 B2
6892306 En-Seung et al. May 2005 B1
6898627 Sekiguchi May 2005 B1
6907034 Begis Jun 2005 B1
6909708 Krishnaswamy et al. Jun 2005 B1
6915425 Xu et al. Jul 2005 B2
6915434 Kuroda et al. Jul 2005 B1
6915435 Merriam Jul 2005 B1
6920558 Sames et al. Jul 2005 B2
6922785 Brewer et al. Jul 2005 B1
6924425 Naples et al. Aug 2005 B2
6931450 Howard et al. Aug 2005 B2
6931530 Pham et al. Aug 2005 B2
6931597 Prakash Aug 2005 B1
6938042 Aboulhosn et al. Aug 2005 B2
6938156 Wheeler et al. Aug 2005 B2
6941355 Donaghey et al. Sep 2005 B1
6941456 Wilson Sep 2005 B2
6941472 Moriconi et al. Sep 2005 B2
6944183 Iyer et al. Sep 2005 B1
6947556 Matyas, Jr. et al. Sep 2005 B1
6950818 Dennis et al. Sep 2005 B2
6950936 Subramaniam et al. Sep 2005 B2
6950941 Lee et al. Sep 2005 B1
6950943 Bacha et al. Sep 2005 B1
6952780 Olsen et al. Oct 2005 B2
6957261 Lortz Oct 2005 B2
6959308 Gramsamer et al. Oct 2005 B2
6961849 Davis et al. Nov 2005 B1
6961855 Rich et al. Nov 2005 B1
6968060 Pinkas Nov 2005 B1
6968456 Tripathi et al. Nov 2005 B1
6971018 Witt et al. Nov 2005 B1
6976259 Dutta et al. Dec 2005 B1
6978366 Ignatchenko et al. Dec 2005 B1
6978376 Giroux et al. Dec 2005 B2
6978377 Asano et al. Dec 2005 B1
6987752 Sarraf et al. Jan 2006 B1
6988133 Zavalkovsky et al. Jan 2006 B1
6988199 Toh et al. Jan 2006 B2
6990441 Bolme et al. Jan 2006 B1
6993135 Ishibashi Jan 2006 B2
6996718 Henry et al. Feb 2006 B1
7000150 Zunino et al. Feb 2006 B1
7003116 Riedel et al. Feb 2006 B2
7003117 Kacker et al. Feb 2006 B2
7003560 Mullen et al. Feb 2006 B1
7003661 Beattie et al. Feb 2006 B2
7010689 Matyas et al. Mar 2006 B1
7010809 Hori et al. Mar 2006 B2
7013332 Friedel et al. Mar 2006 B2
7013485 Brown et al. Mar 2006 B2
7020645 Bisbee et al. Mar 2006 B2
7024427 Bobbitt et al. Apr 2006 B2
7035854 Hsiao et al. Apr 2006 B2
7035910 Dutta et al. Apr 2006 B1
7043637 Bolosky et al. May 2006 B2
7046807 Hirano et al. May 2006 B2
7047404 Doonan et al. May 2006 B1
7051213 Kobayashi et al. May 2006 B1
7058696 Phillips et al. Jun 2006 B1
7058978 Feuerstein et al. Jun 2006 B2
7073063 Peinado Jul 2006 B2
7073073 Nonaka et al. Jul 2006 B1
7076067 Raike et al. Jul 2006 B2
7076312 Law et al. Jul 2006 B2
7076469 Schreiber et al. Jul 2006 B2
7076633 Tormasov et al. Jul 2006 B2
7080077 Ramamurthy et al. Jul 2006 B2
7095853 Morishita Aug 2006 B2
7096266 Lewin et al. Aug 2006 B2
7099926 Ims et al. Aug 2006 B1
7103911 Spies et al. Sep 2006 B2
7107185 Yemini et al. Sep 2006 B1
7107269 Arlein et al. Sep 2006 B2
7107416 Stuart et al. Sep 2006 B2
7113594 Boneh et al. Sep 2006 B2
7116785 Okaue Oct 2006 B2
7117322 Hochberg et al. Oct 2006 B2
7120635 Bhide et al. Oct 2006 B2
7120757 Tsuge Oct 2006 B2
7124164 Chemtob Oct 2006 B1
7126957 Isukapalli et al. Oct 2006 B1
7130964 Ims et al. Oct 2006 B2
7131071 Gune et al. Oct 2006 B2
7134041 Murray et al. Nov 2006 B2
7136903 Phillips et al. Nov 2006 B1
7139399 Zimmermann Nov 2006 B1
7140044 Redlich et al. Nov 2006 B2
7145898 Elliott Dec 2006 B1
7146388 Stakutis et al. Dec 2006 B2
7146498 Takechi et al. Dec 2006 B1
7159036 Hinchliffe et al. Jan 2007 B2
7168094 Fredell Jan 2007 B1
7171557 Kallahalla et al. Jan 2007 B2
7174563 Brownlie et al. Feb 2007 B1
7177427 Komuro et al. Feb 2007 B1
7177839 Claxton et al. Feb 2007 B1
7178033 Garcia Feb 2007 B1
7181017 Nagel et al. Feb 2007 B1
7185364 Knouse et al. Feb 2007 B2
7187033 Pendharkar Mar 2007 B2
7188181 Squier et al. Mar 2007 B1
7194764 Martherus et al. Mar 2007 B2
7197638 Grawrock et al. Mar 2007 B1
7200747 Kallahalla et al. Apr 2007 B2
7203317 Kallahalla et al. Apr 2007 B2
7203968 Asano et al. Apr 2007 B2
7219230 Riedel et al. May 2007 B2
7224795 Takada et al. May 2007 B2
7225256 Villavicencio May 2007 B2
7227953 Shida Jun 2007 B2
7233948 Shamoon et al. Jun 2007 B1
7237002 Estrada et al. Jun 2007 B1
7249044 Kumar et al. Jul 2007 B2
7249251 Todd et al. Jul 2007 B2
7260555 Rossmann et al. Aug 2007 B2
7265764 Alben et al. Sep 2007 B2
7266684 Jancula Sep 2007 B2
7280658 Amini et al. Oct 2007 B2
7281272 Rubin et al. Oct 2007 B1
7287055 Smith et al. Oct 2007 B2
7287058 Loveland et al. Oct 2007 B2
7290148 Tozawa et al. Oct 2007 B2
7308702 Thomsen et al. Dec 2007 B1
7313824 Bala et al. Dec 2007 B1
7319752 Asano et al. Jan 2008 B2
7340600 Corella Mar 2008 B1
7343488 Yadav Mar 2008 B2
7359517 Rowe Apr 2008 B1
7362868 Madoukh et al. Apr 2008 B2
7380120 Garcia May 2008 B1
7383586 Cross et al. Jun 2008 B2
7386529 Kiessig et al. Jun 2008 B2
7386599 Piersol et al. Jun 2008 B1
7401220 Bolosky et al. Jul 2008 B2
7406596 Tararukhina et al. Jul 2008 B2
7415608 Bolosky et al. Aug 2008 B2
7434048 Shapiro et al. Oct 2008 B1
7454612 Bolosky et al. Nov 2008 B2
7461157 Ahlard et al. Dec 2008 B2
7461405 Boudreault et al. Dec 2008 B2
7478243 Bolosky et al. Jan 2009 B2
7478418 Supramaniam et al. Jan 2009 B2
7484245 Friedman et al. Jan 2009 B1
7496959 Adelstein et al. Feb 2009 B2
7509492 Boyen et al. Mar 2009 B2
7512810 Ryan Mar 2009 B1
7539867 Bolosky et al. May 2009 B2
7555558 Kenrich et al. Jun 2009 B1
7562232 Zuili et al. Jul 2009 B2
7565683 Huang et al. Jul 2009 B1
7631184 Ryan Dec 2009 B2
7681034 Lee et al. Mar 2010 B1
7698230 Brown et al. Apr 2010 B1
7702909 Vainstein Apr 2010 B2
7703140 Nath et al. Apr 2010 B2
7707427 Kenrich et al. Apr 2010 B1
7729995 Alain et al. Jun 2010 B1
7730543 Nath et al. Jun 2010 B1
7748045 Kenrich et al. Jun 2010 B2
20010000265 Schreiber et al. Apr 2001 A1
20010011254 Clark Aug 2001 A1
20010014882 Stefik et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010018743 Morishita Aug 2001 A1
20010021255 Ishibashi Sep 2001 A1
20010021926 Schnek et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010023421 Numao et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010032181 Jakstadt et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010033611 Grimwood et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010034839 Karjoth et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010042110 Furusawa et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010044903 Yamamoto et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010056541 Matsuzaki et al. Dec 2001 A1
20010056550 Lee Dec 2001 A1
20020003886 Hillegass et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020007335 Millard et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020010679 Felsher Jan 2002 A1
20020013772 Peinado Jan 2002 A1
20020016921 Olsen et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020016922 Richards et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020023208 Jancula Feb 2002 A1
20020026321 Faris et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020027886 Fischer et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020029340 Pensak et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020031230 Sweet et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020035624 Kim Mar 2002 A1
20020036984 Chiussi et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020041391 Bannai Apr 2002 A1
20020042756 Kumar et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020046350 Lordemann et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020050098 Chan May 2002 A1
20020052981 Yasuda May 2002 A1
20020056042 van der Kaay et al. May 2002 A1
20020062240 Morinville May 2002 A1
20020062245 Niu et al. May 2002 A1
20020062451 Scheidt et al. May 2002 A1
20020069077 Brophy et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020069272 Kim et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020069363 Winburn Jun 2002 A1
20020073320 Rinkevich et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020077986 Kobata et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020077988 Sasaki et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020078239 Howard et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020078361 Giroux et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020087479 Malcolm Jul 2002 A1
20020089602 Sullivan Jul 2002 A1
20020091532 Viets et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020091745 Ramamurthy et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020091928 Bouchard et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020093527 Sherlock et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020099947 Evans Jul 2002 A1
20020112035 Carey et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020112048 Gruyer et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020120851 Clarke Aug 2002 A1
20020124180 Hagman Sep 2002 A1
20020129158 Zhang et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020129235 Okamoto et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020133500 Arlein et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020133699 Pueschel Sep 2002 A1
20020138571 Trinon et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020138726 Sames et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020138762 Horne Sep 2002 A1
20020143710 Liu Oct 2002 A1
20020143906 Tormasov et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020150239 Carny et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020152302 Motoyama et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020156726 Kleckner et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020157016 Russell et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020162104 Raike et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020165870 Chakraborty et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020166053 Wilson Nov 2002 A1
20020169963 Seder et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020169965 Hale et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020172367 Mulder et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020174030 Praisner et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020174109 Chandy et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020174415 Hines Nov 2002 A1
20020176572 Ananth Nov 2002 A1
20020178271 Graham et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020184217 Bisbee et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020184488 Amini et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020194484 Bolosky et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020198798 Ludwig et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030005168 Leerssen et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030009685 Choo et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030014391 Evans et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030023559 Choi et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030026431 Hammersmith Feb 2003 A1
20030028610 Pearson Feb 2003 A1
20030033528 Ozog et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030037029 Holenstein et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030037133 Owens Feb 2003 A1
20030037237 Abgrall et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030037253 Blank et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030046176 Hynes Mar 2003 A1
20030046238 Nonaka et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030046270 Leung et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030050919 Brown et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030051039 Brown et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030056139 Murray et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030061482 Emmerichs Mar 2003 A1
20030061506 Cooper et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030074580 Knouse et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030078959 Yeung et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030079175 Limantsev Apr 2003 A1
20030081784 Kallahalla et al. May 2003 A1
20030081785 Boneh et al. May 2003 A1
20030081787 Kallahalla et al. May 2003 A1
20030081790 Kallahalla et al. May 2003 A1
20030088517 Medoff May 2003 A1
20030088783 DiPierro May 2003 A1
20030093457 Goldick May 2003 A1
20030095552 Bernhard et al. May 2003 A1
20030099248 Speciner May 2003 A1
20030101072 Dick et al. May 2003 A1
20030110169 Zuili Jun 2003 A1
20030110266 Rollins et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030110280 Hinchliffe et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030110397 Supramaniam Jun 2003 A1
20030115146 Lee et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030115218 Bobbitt et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030115570 Bisceglia Jun 2003 A1
20030120601 Ouye Jun 2003 A1
20030120684 Zuili et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030126434 Lim et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030132949 Fallon et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030154296 Noguchi et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030154381 Ouye Aug 2003 A1
20030154396 Godwin et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030154401 Hartman et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030159048 Matsumoto et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030159066 Staw et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030163704 Dick et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030165117 Garcia-Luna-Aceves et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030172280 Scheidt et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030177070 Viswanath et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030177378 Wittkotter Sep 2003 A1
20030182310 Charnock et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030182579 Leporini et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030182584 Banes et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030191938 Woods et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030196096 Sutton Oct 2003 A1
20030197729 Denoue et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030200202 Hsiao et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030204692 Tamer et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030208485 Castellanos Nov 2003 A1
20030217264 Martin et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030217281 Ryan Nov 2003 A1
20030217282 Henry Nov 2003 A1
20030217333 Smith et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030220999 Emerson Nov 2003 A1
20030222141 Vogler et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030226013 Dutertre Dec 2003 A1
20030233650 Zaner et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040022390 McDonald et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040025037 Hair Feb 2004 A1
20040039781 LaVallee et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040041845 Alben et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040049702 Subramaniam et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040064507 Sakata Apr 2004 A1
20040064710 Vainstein Apr 2004 A1
20040068524 Aboulhosn et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040068664 Nachenberg et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040073660 Toomey Apr 2004 A1
20040073718 Johannessen et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040088548 Smetters et al. May 2004 A1
20040098580 DeTreville May 2004 A1
20040103202 Hildebrand et al. May 2004 A1
20040103280 Balfanz et al. May 2004 A1
20040117371 Bhide et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040131191 Chen et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040133544 Kiessig et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040158586 Tsai Aug 2004 A1
20040186845 Fukui Sep 2004 A1
20040193602 Liu et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040193905 Lirov et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040193912 Li et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040199514 Rosenblatt et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040205576 Chikirivao et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040215956 Venkatachary et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040215962 Douceur et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040243853 Swander et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040254884 Haber et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050021467 Franzdonk Jan 2005 A1
20050021629 Cannata et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050028006 Leser et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050039034 Doyle et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050050098 Barnett Mar 2005 A1
20050071275 Vainstein et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050071657 Ryan Mar 2005 A1
20050071658 Nath et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050081029 Thornton et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050086531 Kenrich Apr 2005 A1
20050091289 Shappell et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091484 Thornton et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050097061 Shapiro et al. May 2005 A1
20050120199 Carter Jun 2005 A1
20050138371 Supramaniam Jun 2005 A1
20050138383 Vainstein Jun 2005 A1
20050168766 Troyansky et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050177716 Ginter et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050177858 Ueda Aug 2005 A1
20050198326 Schlimmer et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050223242 Nath Oct 2005 A1
20050223414 Kenrich et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050235154 Serret-Avila Oct 2005 A1
20050256909 Aboulhosn et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050268033 Ogasawara et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050273600 Seeman Dec 2005 A1
20050283610 Serret-Avila et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050288961 Tabrizi Dec 2005 A1
20060005021 Torrubia-Saez Jan 2006 A1
20060075258 Adamson et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060075465 Ramanathan et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060093150 Reddy et al. May 2006 A1
20060101285 Chen et al. May 2006 A1
20060149407 Markham et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060168147 Inoue et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060184637 Hultgren et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060230437 Alexander Boyer et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060277316 Wang et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070006214 Dubal et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070067837 Schuster Mar 2007 A1
20070083575 Leung et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070192478 Louie et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070193397 Hwan et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070294368 Bomgaars et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080075126 Yang Mar 2008 A1
20090254843 Van Wie et al. Oct 2009 A1
20100047757 McCurry et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100199088 Nath Aug 2010 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (24)
Number Date Country
0 672 991 Sep 1995 EP
0 674 253 Sep 1995 EP
0 809 170 Nov 1997 EP
0 913 966 May 1999 EP
0 913 967 May 1999 EP
0 950 941 Oct 1999 EP
0 950 941 Oct 1999 EP
1 107 504 Jun 2001 EP
1 107 504 Jun 2001 EP
1 130 492 Sep 2001 EP
1 154 348 Nov 2001 EP
1324565 Jul 2003 EP
2 328 047 Feb 1999 GB
2001-036517 Feb 2001 JP
2006-244044 Sep 2006 JP
2009-020720 Jan 2009 JP
WO 9641288 Dec 1996 WO
WO 0056028 Sep 2000 WO
WO 0161438 Aug 2001 WO
WO 0163387 Aug 2001 WO
WO 0163387 Aug 2001 WO
WO 0177783 Oct 2001 WO
WO 0178285 Oct 2001 WO
WO 0184271 Nov 2001 WO
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20050071275 A1 Mar 2005 US