The present invention is generally directed to managing the security of a network. More specifically, the present invention facilitates the configuration and scheduling of security audits of machines in a distributed computer network.
The security of computing networks is an increasingly important issue. With the growth of wide area networks (WANs), such as the Internet and the World Wide Web, people rely on computing networks to transfer and store an increasing amount of valuable information. This is also true of local area networks (LANs) used by companies, schools, organizations, and other enterprises. LANs are used by a bounded group of people in the organization to communicate and store electronic documents and information. LANs typically are coupled to or provide access to other local or wide area networks. Greater use and availability of computing networks produces a corresponding increase in the size and complexity of computing networks.
With the growth of networks and the importance of information available on the networks, there is also a need for better and more intelligent security. One approach to securing larger and more complex computer networks is to use a greater number and variety of security assessment devices. Security assessment devices can be used to evaluate elements in the network such as desktop computers, servers, and routers, and determine their respective vulnerability to attack from hackers. These network elements are commonly referred to as hosts and the terms “element” and “host” are used interchangeably herein. Security assessment devices can also be used more frequently to monitor the activity or status of the elements in a computing network.
One problem with increasing the number of security assessment devices and the frequency with which they are used is deciding which elements in the network need to be audited, how frequently they should be audited, and what checks need to be run. These are decisions that often involve a variety of complicated factors and they are decisions that in practicality cannot be made every time a security audit is conducted. Increased assessment also produces a corresponding increase in the amount of security data that must be analyzed. A network administrator that is overwhelmed with security data is unable to make intelligent decisions about which security vulnerabilities should be addressed first.
An additional problem associated with maintaining adequate network security is finding the time to conduct security audits. Security audits generally must be initiated by a security professional and can hinder or entirely interrupt network performance for several hours at a time. Furthermore, existing security assessment devices typically perform a variety of security scans on a machine, some of which may not be necessary. These unnecessary scans can translate into additional “down time” for the network.
In view of the foregoing, there is a need in the art for a system which will support the auditing of a distributed computing network. Specifically, a need exists to be able to automatically survey a network and determine the role and value of each element in the network. A further need exists to be able to assess the vulnerability of each element in the network. There is also a need to automatically schedule security auditing based on the vulnerability assessment of each element and to adjust future scheduling as audit data change. In this manner, those elements deemed to have the greatest risk can be monitored more closely. Finally, a need exists to be able to manage and present data pertaining to the survey, the vulnerability assessment, and the scheduling in a convenient graphical format.
The present invention satisfies the above-described needs by providing a system and method for scheduling and performing security audits in a distributed computing environment. Assessing the security of a relatively large or complex computer network can require hundreds of decisions about the types and timing of security checks. By facilitating the selection and scheduling of security audits, the present invention improves existing network security techniques. The present invention can identify the various elements in a distributed computing network and determine their role and relative importance. Using an element's role and relative importance, a more thorough security audit is chosen and scheduled to be run at an appropriate time. Information from the security audit can be used to calculate a security score and to modify the type and scheduling of future security audits. Security audit information can also be prioritized and presented to a user in a convenient format.
In one aspect, the present invention comprises a method for configuring and scheduling security scans of a computer network. A security audit system can conduct a discovery scan to identify elements that exist in a distributed computing network. Elements typically identified include, but are not limited to, desktop computers, servers, routers, and data storage devices. From the information collected during the discovery scan, the security audit system can determine the operating system and/or services associated with an element. The element's function and importance in the network can be used to configure an audit scan. An audit scan is a more thorough examination than a discovery scan and different types of audit scans involve different types of checks. The security audit system can schedule the selected audit scan to run at a time that will not interrupt the normal functioning of the computer network. The information collected during the audit scan can be used by the security audit system to calculate a security score for each element or group of elements. A security score is useful for identifying and prioritizing vulnerabilities that need to be remedied in the network.
In another aspect, the present invention provides a method for assessing the security of a network using a security audit system. The security audit system can receive information about elements in the network from an initial scan of the network. Using the information, the security audit system can select a more thorough audit scan to perform on a particular network. The selection of the audit scan can be based on the types of checks that need to be made on a particular element. The security audit system can also schedule the audit scan based on information collected during the initial scan. An element with greater importance or more serious vulnerabilities can be scanned more frequently than other elements in the network. Once the audit scan is performed, the security audit system receives more detailed information about the element and a security score can be computed for the element. The security score is useful in assessing the security of the network and prioritizing issues that need to be addressed.
For yet another aspect, the present invention further provides a security audit system for configuring and scheduling security scans of a computer network. The system comprises various types of scanning engines for running different scans and an active scan engine for coordinating the selection and scheduling of the different scans. The security audit system can conduct an initial scan to assess the functions and importance of various elements in the network. The initial scan provides information for deciding when to perform a more thorough audit scan and what type of audit scan to select. A console can also be coupled to the system for communicating information concerning the scans between a user and the security audit system.
These and other aspects of the invention will be described below in connection with the drawing set and the appended specification and claim set.
The present invention supports the automated assessment of the security risks of a computing network. Specifically, the present invention allows a security auditing system to collect initial information about the identity and importance of elements in a computing network. Using this initial information, the invention then provides for automatic selection and scheduling of security audit scans to be performed on the network elements. A user can provide parameters, if so desired, as to when to schedule audit scans and what types of audit scans to run. Taking the information collected from the audit scan, the auditing system can compute a security score for a network element based on its vulnerability and importance. The security score can be presented to the user in a manageable format to facilitate interpretation and response. The user may use the security score as a basis for adjusting the scheduling and configuration of future audit scans.
Although the exemplary embodiments will be generally described in the context of software modules running in a distributed computing environment, those skilled in the art will recognize that the present invention also can be implemented in conjunction with other program modules for other types of computers. In a distributed computing environment, program modules may be physically located in different local and remote memory storage devices. Execution of the program modules may occur locally in a stand-alone manner or remotely in a client/server manner. Examples of such distributed computing environments include local area networks of an office, enterprise-wide computer networks, and the global Internet.
The detailed description that follows is represented largely in terms of processes and symbolic representations of operations in a distributed computing environment by conventional computer components, including database servers, application servers, mail servers, routers, security devices, firewalls, clients, workstations, memory storage devices, display devices and input devices. Each of these conventional distributed computing components is accessible via a communications network, such as a wide area network or local area network.
The processes and operations performed by the computer include the manipulation of signals by a client or server and the maintenance of these signals within data structures resident in one or more of the local or remote memory storage devices. Such data structures impose a physical organization upon the collection of data stored within a memory storage device and represent specific electrical or magnetic elements. These symbolic representations are the means used by those skilled in the art of computer programming and computer construction to most effectively convey teachings and discoveries to others skilled in the art.
The present invention also includes a computer program that embodies the functions described herein and illustrated in the appended flow charts. However, it should be apparent that there could be many different ways of implementing the invention in computer programming, and the invention should not be construed as limited to any one set of computer program instructions. Further, a skilled programmer would be able to write such a computer program to implement the disclosed invention based on the flow charts and associated description in the application text, for example. Therefore, disclosure of a particular set of program code instructions is not considered necessary for an adequate understanding of how to make and use the invention. The inventive functionality of the claimed computer program will be explained in more detail in the following description in conjunction with the remaining figures illustrating the program flow.
Referring now to the drawings, in which like numerals represent like elements throughout the several figures, aspects of the present invention and the preferred operating environment will be described.
The active scan engine's 120 primary task is acquiring and maintaining current data about the configuration and security posture of the network 110. The active scan engine 120 utilizes the subsidiary scan engines 130, 140 and 150 as a means for gathering information about the network 110. The network 110 typically comprises elements such as desktop computers, routers, and various servers. The active scan engine 120 is responsible for coordinating the configuration, scheduling, and running of scans of these elements found in the network 110. Typically, the active scan engine 120 is continuously running so that the scheduled scans can be run at their designated times, and the resultant data processed in a timely manner.
The user input 205 and the discovery scan data 210 are combined to formulate state data 215 describing each of the elements in the network 110. In step 220, the active scan engine 120 makes decisions regarding the types of scans to be run and when they will be run on the network 110. Ultimately, scheduled audit scans will be run against each of the elements on the network 110 in step 225. The audit scan involves a more thorough examination of a network element than the discovery scan. The audit scan data 230 is collected and fed back into the accumulated state data 215 describing each element on the network 110. The feedback mechanism shown in
An exemplary process overview for operating the security audit system 115 is illustrated in
In step 315, the active scan engine 120 configures the scans that are to be run on the network 110. The configuring of scans, discussed in greater detail in connection with
In step 325, the security audit system 115 runs the scheduled scans on the network 110. The first time that a security audit system 115 scans the network 110 it will conduct a discovery scan to identify network elements and their function. The discovery scan collects information for use in subsequent configuring and scheduling of more thorough audit scans. After these scans are performed, the active scan engine 120 analyzes the data that are collected in step 330. The analysis of the data can be used to readjust the configurations and scheduling of scans by returning to step 315. Alternatively, the user can shut down the security audit system 115 in step 340. The security audit system 115 performs tasks asynchronously from the user's perspective. When engaged in a potentially time-consuming task such as the analysis of scan results (step 330), the active component periodically checks for a user-initiated shutdown signal. This allows the security audit system 115 to shut down in a timely manner even when engaged in lengthy tasks. As mentioned above, if a shutdown occurs when the security audit system 115 is engaged upon one or more tasks, sufficient state information is stored to allow for recovery upon reactivation. The foregoing steps are merely an exemplary embodiment of how to use the security audit system 115. In an alternative embodiment of the invention, the foregoing steps may be performed in a different order or certain steps may be skipped entirely.
The Internet scanning engine 130 is a network scanning tool used to conduct the initial discovery scans performed on the network. The Internet scanning engine 130 can also be used to identify security vulnerabilities that exist across an entire network. The database scanning engine 140 performs audits of database servers identified by the Internet scanning engine 130 during the discovery scan. The system scanning engine 150 is a security auditing tool comprising software that is generally installed on individual hosts in the network. The system scanning engine 150 is typically installed on desktop computers, servers, and routers that have at least a specific asset value. Because they execute on the local host, the system scanning engine 150 is able to detect vulnerabilities that may be unidentifiable by the Internet scanning engine 130. The active scan engine 120 works with the system scanning engine 150 to configure and schedule particular scans to be run on network elements.
In steps 415, 420, and 425, components of the active scan engine 120 are initialized in preparation for conducting scans. Identified in step 415, the decision maker component 121 receives the results of prior audit and discovery scans and determines which audit scans to run on which elements and when to run them. The job manager component 122, initialized in step 420, receives instructions from the decision maker component 121 and monitors what audit scans have been scheduled, when the audit scans have been scheduled, and whether the audit scans are complete. Finally, in step 425 the analyzer component 123 is initialized so that it can receive and store the results of audit scans such as a network element's functions and vulnerabilities. In alternative embodiments of the present invention, the functions performed by the analyzer component 123, the decision maker component 121, the blackout manager 124, and the job manager component 122 can be performed by other components separate from the active scan engine 120.
An exemplary method for configuring scans is illustrated in
The type of scan that is run on each host for an element in the network 110 can be selected manually by the user or done automatically by the active scan engine 120. The advantage of automating the scan configuration is that there are often numerous elements to scan in a network and hundreds of possible scanning checks that can be performed on each element. By automating the process, configuring and scheduling scans of each element of the network can be performed periodically, or whenever a new element is found during a discovery scan
A scan policy comprises a list of vulnerabilities to be checked during a scan. Scanning all the hosts with the same policy at one time allows the active scan engine 120 to coordinate scans efficiently. Once the other hosts with the same policy are located in step 905, a job is scheduled for the audit scan in step 910 in the same way that a job is scheduled for a discovery scan. If more host ranges have been configured for scans, step 915 will return to step 905 and the process will repeat for the next host range. Otherwise, the process is complete.
An exemplary method for scheduling a job is illustrated in
Once a job is scheduled, the scan is ready to run against the appropriate elements in the network 110. An exemplary method for running a scan, as referred to in step 325 of
Referring to
If the scan was a discovery scan, the analysis process ends at step 1130. However, if the scan was an audit scan, the analysis process continues in step 1135, where a new security score is computed for the host. An advantageous means for calculating a security score is described in U.S. non-provisional patent application entitled “Method and System for Calculating Risk Associated with a Security Audit,” filed concurrently herewith, having attorney docket number 05456.105036. An exemplary method for processing a security score is discussed in greater detail with reference to
In
Referring to
An exemplary method for processing service records, as referred to in step 1125 of
An exemplary method for processing the security score of a host is illustrated in
The security audit system 115 keeps a record of security scores over time. In step 2005 of
In conclusion, the present invention enables and supports security auditing of a distributed computing network. The security audit system can conduct a discovery scan of the network to identify network elements and determine their function, vulnerabilities, and relative importance. Using this information, more comprehensive audit scans are scheduled to regularly assess and monitor the security of the network. The security audit system can automatically select particular audit scans based on the types of hosts identified in the network. The audit scans can be automatically scheduled so as not to interfere with the regular functions of the network. Information collected during the audit scans can also be used to compute a security score for a network element.
It will be appreciated that the present invention fulfills the needs of the prior art described herein and meets the above-stated objects. While there has been shown and described the preferred embodiment of the invention, it will be evident to those skilled in the art that various modifications and changes may be made thereto without departing from the spirit and the scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims and equivalence thereof. Although the present invention has been described as operating on a local area network, it should be understood that the invention can be applied to other types of distributed computing environments. Furthermore, it should be readily apparent that the components of the security audit system can be located in various local and remote locations of a distributed computing environment.
The present application claims priority to provisional patent application entitled, “Method and System for Configuring and Scheduling Security Audits of a Computer Network,” filed on Jan. 31, 2001 and assigned U.S. application Ser. No. 60/265,519. The present application also references and incorporates herein a related U.S. non-provisional patent application entitled, “Method and System for Calculating Risk Associated with a Security Audit,” filed concurrently herewith and having attorney docket number 05456.105036.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4223380 | Antonaccio et al. | Sep 1980 | A |
4400769 | Kaneda et al. | Aug 1983 | A |
4672609 | Humphrey et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4773028 | Tallman | Sep 1988 | A |
4819234 | Huber | Apr 1989 | A |
4975950 | Lentz | Dec 1990 | A |
5032979 | Hecht et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5121345 | Lentz | Jun 1992 | A |
5204966 | Wittenberg et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5210704 | Husseiny | May 1993 | A |
5274824 | Howarth | Dec 1993 | A |
5278901 | Shieh et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5309562 | Li | May 1994 | A |
5311593 | Carmi | May 1994 | A |
5345595 | Johnson et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5347450 | Nugent | Sep 1994 | A |
5353393 | Bennett et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5359659 | Rosenthal | Oct 1994 | A |
5371852 | Attanasio et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5398196 | Chambers | Mar 1995 | A |
5414833 | Hershey et al. | May 1995 | A |
5440723 | Arnold et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5452442 | Kephart | Sep 1995 | A |
5454074 | Hartel et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5475839 | Watson et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5511184 | Lin | Apr 1996 | A |
5515508 | Pettus et al. | May 1996 | A |
5522026 | Records et al. | May 1996 | A |
5539659 | McKee et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5557742 | Smaha et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5586260 | Hu | Dec 1996 | A |
5590331 | Lewis et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5606668 | Shwed | Feb 1997 | A |
5623600 | Ji et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5623601 | Vu | Apr 1997 | A |
5630061 | Richter et al. | May 1997 | A |
5649095 | Cozza | Jul 1997 | A |
5649185 | Antognini et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5675711 | Kephart et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5696486 | Poliquin et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5696822 | Nachenberg | Dec 1997 | A |
5706210 | Kumano et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5715395 | Brabson et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5734697 | Jabbarnezhad | Mar 1998 | A |
5745692 | Lohmann, II et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5748098 | Grace | May 1998 | A |
5761504 | Corrigan et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5764887 | Kells et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5764890 | Glasser et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5765030 | Nachenberg et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774727 | Walsh et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5787177 | Leppek | Jul 1998 | A |
5790799 | Mogul | Aug 1998 | A |
5796942 | Esbensen | Aug 1998 | A |
5798706 | Kraemer et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5812763 | Teng | Sep 1998 | A |
5815574 | Fortinsky | Sep 1998 | A |
5822517 | Dotan | Oct 1998 | A |
5826013 | Nachenberg | Oct 1998 | A |
5828833 | Belville et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5832208 | Chen et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5832211 | Blakley, III et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835726 | Shwed et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838903 | Blakely, III et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5842002 | Schnurer et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5845067 | Porter et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5848233 | Radia et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5854916 | Nachenberg | Dec 1998 | A |
5857191 | Blackwell, Jr. et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864665 | Tran | Jan 1999 | A |
5864803 | Nussbaum | Jan 1999 | A |
5872978 | Hoskins | Feb 1999 | A |
5875296 | Shi et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5878420 | de la Salle | Mar 1999 | A |
5881236 | Dickey | Mar 1999 | A |
5884033 | Duvall et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5892903 | Klaus | Apr 1999 | A |
5899999 | De Bonet | May 1999 | A |
5905859 | Holloway et al. | May 1999 | A |
5907834 | Kephart et al. | May 1999 | A |
5919257 | Trostle | Jul 1999 | A |
5919258 | Kayashima et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5922051 | Sidey | Jul 1999 | A |
5925126 | Hsieh | Jul 1999 | A |
5931946 | Terada et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5940591 | Boyle et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5950012 | Shiell et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5961644 | Kurtzberg et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5964839 | Johnson et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5964889 | Nachenberg | Oct 1999 | A |
5974237 | Shurmer et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5974457 | Waclawsky et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5978917 | Chi | Nov 1999 | A |
5983270 | Abraham et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5983348 | Ji | Nov 1999 | A |
5983350 | Minear et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987606 | Cirasole et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987610 | Franczek et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987611 | Freund | Nov 1999 | A |
5991856 | Spilo et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991881 | Conklin et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5999711 | Misra et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
5999723 | Nachenberg | Dec 1999 | A |
6003132 | Mann | Dec 1999 | A |
6006016 | Faigon et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009467 | Ratcliff et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6014645 | Cunningham | Jan 2000 | A |
6016553 | Schneider et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6021510 | Nachenberg | Feb 2000 | A |
6026442 | Lewis et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6029256 | Kouznetsov | Feb 2000 | A |
6035323 | Narayen et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6035423 | Hodges et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6041347 | Harsham et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6052709 | Paul | Apr 2000 | A |
6061795 | Dircks et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067410 | Nachenberg | May 2000 | A |
6070190 | Reps et al. | May 2000 | A |
6070244 | Orchier et al. | May 2000 | A |
6073172 | Frailong et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6081894 | Mann | Jun 2000 | A |
6085224 | Wagner | Jul 2000 | A |
6088803 | Tso et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6088804 | Hill et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6092194 | Touboul | Jul 2000 | A |
6094731 | Waldin et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6098173 | Elgressy et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6104783 | DeFino | Aug 2000 | A |
6108799 | Boulay et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6118940 | Alexander, III et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6119165 | Li et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6119234 | Aziz et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6122738 | Millard | Sep 2000 | A |
6144961 | de la Salle | Nov 2000 | A |
6154844 | Touboul et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6161109 | Matamoros et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6167520 | Touboul | Dec 2000 | A |
6173413 | Slaughter et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6185689 | Todd et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195687 | Greaves et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6199181 | Rechef et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6205552 | Fudge | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6220768 | Barroux | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6226372 | Beebe et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6230288 | Kuo et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6266773 | Kisor et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266774 | Sampath et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6271840 | Finseth et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6272641 | Ji | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6275938 | Bond et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6275942 | Bernhard et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278886 | Hwang | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6279113 | Vaidya | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282546 | Gleichauf et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6298445 | Shostack et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6301668 | Gleichauf et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314520 | Schell et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6314525 | Mahalingham et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6321338 | Porras et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6324627 | Kricheff et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6324647 | Bowman-Amuah | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6324656 | Gleichauf et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6338141 | Wells | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6347374 | Drake et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6353385 | Molini et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6357008 | Nachenberg | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6370648 | Diep | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377994 | Ault et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6396845 | Sugita | May 2002 | B1 |
6397242 | Devine et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397245 | Johnson, II et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6405318 | Rowland | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6405364 | Bowman-Amuah | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6408391 | Huff et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6415321 | Gleichauf et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6429952 | Olbricht | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6434615 | Dinh et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6438600 | Greenfield et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6445822 | Crill et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6453345 | Trcka et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
6453346 | Garg et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6460141 | Olden | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6463426 | Lipson et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6467002 | Yang | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6470449 | Blandford | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6477585 | Cohen et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6477648 | Schell et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6477651 | Teal | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6484203 | Porras et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487666 | Shanklin et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6493752 | Lee et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496858 | Frailong et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6499107 | Gleichauf et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6510523 | Perlman et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6517587 | Satyavolu et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6519647 | Howard et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6519703 | Joyce | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6530024 | Proctor | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6535227 | Fox et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6546493 | Magdych et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6563959 | Troyanker | May 2003 | B1 |
6574737 | Kingsford et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6578147 | Shanklin et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6584454 | Hummel, Jr. et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6601190 | Meyer et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6606744 | Mikurak | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6618501 | Osawa et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6628824 | Belanger | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6647139 | Kunii et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6647400 | Moran | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6661904 | Sasich et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6668082 | Davison et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6668084 | Minami | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6681331 | Munson et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6691232 | Wood et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6704874 | Porras et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6708212 | Porras et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6711127 | Gorman et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711615 | Porras et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6718383 | Hebert | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6721806 | Boyd et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6725377 | Kouznetsov | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6725378 | Schuba et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6775780 | Muttik | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6792144 | Yan et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6792546 | Shanklin et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6816973 | Gleichauf et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6839850 | Campbell et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6851057 | Nachenberg | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6883101 | Fox et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6886102 | Lyle | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6889168 | Hartley et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6912676 | Gusler et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
7013395 | Swiler et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
20010034847 | Gaul, Jr. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20020032717 | Malan et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020032793 | Malan et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020032880 | Poletto et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020035698 | Malan et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020083331 | Krumel | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020083334 | Rogers et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020138753 | Munson | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020144156 | Copeland, III | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030037136 | Labovitz et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030088791 | Porras et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030212903 | Porras et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040010718 | Porras et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 636 977 | May 2001 | EP |
0 985 995 | Aug 2003 | EP |
WO 9325024 | Dec 1993 | WO |
WO 9841919 | Sep 1998 | WO |
WO 9900720 | Jan 1999 | WO |
WO 9913427 | Mar 1999 | WO |
WO 9915966 | Apr 1999 | WO |
WO 9950734 | Oct 1999 | WO |
WO 9953391 | Oct 1999 | WO |
WO 9957626 | Nov 1999 | WO |
WO 0002115 | Jan 2000 | WO |
WO 0010278 | Feb 2000 | WO |
WO 0025214 | May 2000 | WO |
WO 0025527 | May 2000 | WO |
WO 0034867 | Jun 2000 | WO |
WO 0054458 | Sep 2000 | WO |
WO 0184285 | Nov 2001 | WO |
WO 0206928 | Jan 2002 | WO |
WO 02056152 | Jul 2002 | WO |
WO 02101516 | Dec 2002 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20020104014 A1 | Aug 2002 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60265519 | Jan 2001 | US |