In general, authentication is a process of determining whether someone is who they claim to be. In the computer industry, authentication is commonly performed via use of logon passwords. Knowledge of the password is assumed to guarantee a user is authentic. In many applications, each user initially registers (or is registered by someone else) using an assigned or self-declared password. On each subsequent use of a computer, the user must know and use the previously declared password in order to log onto a computer and use a respective network. For security reasons, passwords are generally not transmitted over a network in raw form. Instead, hashing functions are applied to passwords (provided by the user) prior to transmission over a respective network.
One type of authentication protocol is known as NTLM (e.g., Windows™ NT LAN Manager). In general, the NTLM authentication protocol involves a series of communications with a user attempting to use a respective network.
According to the NTLM authentication protocol, a client initially sends a respective server a Negotiate CIFS protocol request message. In the header of this CIFS message is a bit-mask indicating the client's capabilities, such as authentication methods supported by the client.
In response to receiving the CIFS NegProt_Request message, the server chooses a CIFS dialect for future communications based on the list presented in the NegProt_Request message. If the negotiated authentication scheme is NTLM, the server receiving the NegProt_Request message includes an 8-byte “challenge” in the NegProt_Response message.
Upon receipt of the challenge message from the server, the client encrypts the 8-byte challenge value using a derivation of a user provided password (e.g., an encryption key that is an MD4 hash of the password that is turned into a DES key). The result is a 24-byte challenge “response.” The challenge response is encoded into the SessionSetup CIFS message sent to the server.
Upon receipt of the challenge response from the client, the server performs the same computation (e.g., encryption of the 8-byte challenge) the client performed using a password hash function associated with the client. The password hash function used by the server is stored in a so-called Windows SAM database. If the result generated by the server matches encrypted value received from the client, the server returns an authentication-success message to the client allowing a respective connection. the server communicates with a domain controller of the respective network using the NetLogon Microsoft RPC protocol for purposes of authenticating a respective client. If authentication is successful in this last step. the client is cleared to send file operations to the server.
In addition to conventional NTLM techniques as discussed above, a so-called Kerberos V5 authentication model discloses a way for a client to delegate the authority for an intermediary system (e.g., another computer) to perform authentication on behalf of the client. This makes it possible to allow one's identity to flow through a multi-tier system where decisions about authority can be made in the originating identity at each tier. For example, if a user “JC” connects to machine “A,” through delegation, machine “A” can be granted the authority to authenticate a session to an application on machine “B” as user “JC.” Thus, on machine “B,”
access control is applied in the context of user “JC” rather than the context of machine “A.”
Conventional mechanisms such as those explained above suffer from a variety of shortcomings According to the Kerberos authentication model as discussed above, a proxy is delegated the authority to establish a downstream connection to a target device using the information (e.g., username) associated with the client delegating the authority to the proxy. Accordingly, the proxy is able to establish a connection with a target server based on use of information from the client. After performing an authentication according to the Kerberos model between the client and proxy and between the proxy and the target server, the client computer is able to communicate with the target device thru the proxy computer.
The conventional NTLM (Windows NT LAN Management) protocol lends itself to applications in which the client authenticates a direct communication link between the client and a target device. However, there is no provision in the conventional NTLM protocol to authenticate tandem communication links (e.g., successive CIFS connections) in a local area network environment connecting a client to a respective target device.
In contradistinction to the techniques discussed above as well as additional techniques known in the prior art, embodiments discussed herein include novel techniques associated with implementing authentication in a respective network environment. For example, embodiments herein are directed to a proxy device (e.g., a switch) residing in a respective network environment between one or more clients and multiple servers (e.g., a distributed storage system). One purpose of the proxy device is to provide one or more respective clients a unified view of a distributed file system having respective resources spread amongst multiple storage locations in a network. Accordingly, clients can connect to the proxy and view data information available from the multiple servers such as backend filers, file systems, etc.
In one embodiment, the proxy device manages the distributed data and enables the clients to access information from the multiple servers through the proxy device. That is, a client directly communicates with the proxy device via a first authenticated communication link; the proxy device also accesses data stored in the distributed file system (e.g., backend filers, storage systems, etc.) on behalf of the client via a corresponding set of authenticated links between the proxy device and the multiple servers.
More specifically, according to one embodiment herein, the proxy device enables the clients to establish connections with the proxy. However, the proxy terminates a respective client's CIFS TCP connection and negotiates a new CIFS dialect/session to each of multiple remote target locations (e.g., backend filers, servers, etc.) on behalf of the respective client. As discussed above, the connections between the proxy and multiple servers enables the proxy to access corresponding stored data in the multiple servers on behalf of the clients. Unfortunately, the proxy device needs access to the clients' password information so the proxy device is able to establish the connection between the client and the proxy device as well as establish similar types of connections between the proxy device and each of multiple servers.
For example, according to an embodiment herein, when the proxy attempts to establish a connection between the client and the proxy, the proxy must be able to verify the client is authentic. That is, the proxy must be able to verify that a client provides appropriate password information for a given username in order to establish respective connections or communication links (on behalf of the client) with the multiple servers.
One way of authenticating the client without sending password information over a respective network is to generate a “challenge” to the client. In this case, however, the proxy initiates forwarding the challenge to the client. The challenge includes a numerical value (e.g., an 8-byte value generated by a random number generator) sent to the client. In response to the challenge, the client sends a first encrypted value (e.g., a 24 byte value) of the 8-byte value back to the proxy. For example, in one embodiment, the client generates the 24-byte challenge response by applying a password hash key (e.g., a 3DES key generated by applying an MD4 algorithm to a plain text password provided by a user) to the numerical value in the challenge. To verify authorization of the client, the proxy forwards i) the numerical value associated with the challenge, ii) the client's username, and iii) the encrypted value (e.g., the 24-byte challenge response) received from the client in response to the challenge to a source (e.g., an authentication agent) that resides in the respective network at a location other than at the client. In one embodiment, the source is an authentication agent residing at a domain controller associated with a respective network. The domain controller stores username and corresponding password information associated with the respective network environment.
Upon receiving the i) the numerical value associated with the challenge, ii) the client's username, and iii) the encrypted value (e.g., the 24-byte challenge response) from the proxy, the authentication agent retrieves a password hash key associated with the client, applies the password hash key to the numerical value (received from the proxy) to produce a second encrypted value, and determines whether the 24-byte challenge response (e.g., the first encrypted value) provided by the client matches the second encrypted value generated by the authentication agent. If so, the authentication agent determines that the client is authentic. Based on the comparison, the authentication agent notifies the proxy whether the client (e.g., the user) has been authenticated and whether the proxy can allow the connection (e.g., communication link) between the proxy and the client.
As mentioned, the authentication agent performing the “compare” function can be a secured agent. For example, in such an embodiment, the proxy communicates with the authentication agent over a respective network via a secured link.
The authentication agent can maintain password hash key information associated with users of a respective network based on communications with the domain controller. For example, in one embodiment, the authentication agent periodically (or occasionally) receives a memory dump from the domain controller including usernames and corresponding password hash keys. Thus, for purposes of verifying authentication of the client, the secured agent can retrieve respective password hash key associated with the client (e.g., a user attempting to access stored data) and initiate the steps as discussed above to verify the challenge response provided to the proxy by the client.
According to further embodiments herein, in addition to or in lieu of the verification process discussed above, the secured agent is also able to act on behalf of the respective client and establish individual sessions between the proxy and each of multiple servers and/or backend storage systems. For example, to establish a connection (a.k.a., a session) with a given one of the multiple servers, the proxy generates and forwards a message (e.g., an NTLM negotiate protocol request) to the server for purposes of requesting a connection on behalf of the client. The server replies to the proxy with an authentication challenge including a random 8-byte numerical value generated by the server. The proxy responds to the challenge without communicating again with the client.
For example, according to one embodiment, the proxy communicates the 8-byte challenge received from the server to the authentication agent. The authentication agent obtains (from its own local memory or storage) the respective password hash key associated with the username for which the connection is being established and applies the password hash key to the 8-byte numerical value received from the server to produce an encrypted value. The authentication agent forwards the encrypted value to the proxy. The proxy, in turn, forwards the encrypted value to the server in response to the challenge. The server, in turn, communicates with the domain controller to verify that the proxy, acting on behalf of the client, is able to establish the connection with the server. In other words, the server forwards the encrypted value to the domain controller. The domain controller then verifies whether the encrypted value forwarded by the server matches the encrypted value that the proxy should have generated in response to the challenge. If there is an appropriate match, the proxy is authenticated and the server is allowed to notify (e.g., via an NTLM session setup response) the proxy that the session or connection can be established. Note that according to one embodiment, the proxy can setup multiple sessions over a single so-called TCP connection.
The proxy can repeat the above procedure for each link to the multiple servers (e.g., backend filers) in order to establish and authenticate connections (i.e., sessions) with each of the multiple servers. Accordingly, a client connects to the proxy via a first connection and the proxy connects to the multiple servers via a set of multiple second connections.
Embodiments described herein are useful in the context of proxy authentication. For example, a proxy switch according to embodiments herein needs to proxy a user's identity (e.g., a username) to potentially more than one backend filer. Since the proxy switch herein terminates a client's CIFS session, there is a need to create a new TCP connection and negotiate a new CIFS dialect/session to each backend filer on behalf of the client. In certain embodiments, the proxy switch herein establishes two sessions to a backend filer such as one from the NSM (data plane) to the backend filer and one from the ASM (control plane) to the backend filer, and so on. For each backend filer connection, a NegProt_Request and NegProt_Response exchange takes place. That is, the proxy switch herein attempts to establish a respective connection between the proxy and a first backend filer as well as between the proxy and a second backend filer. During each negotiate protocol request, a respective backend filer sends a different challenge value to the proxy switch. To respond to each challenge, the proxy switch needs the password hash key associated with a respective user for which the connection is being established for authentication purposes. This information is available from a domain controller that stores username and corresponding password hash key information.
One solution for supporting proxy authentication is to create a static database in the proxy switch to store user names and passwords in lieu of using a remote authentication agent as discussed above. In such a case, the proxy switch could use the information to appropriately respond to the backend filers generating the unique challenge values. Such a static database could be configured on the proxy switch using a respective CLI (Command Line Interface). An administrator would manually enter usernames and passwords.
However, this solution may not scale for larger customers who manage many user accounts. For example, assume that a large customer had to manage 35,000 accounts in their Windows Domain. Using the above-mentioned statically configured NTLM authentication database, the large customer would have to painstakingly enter every user (e.g., 35K users in this example) in their domain into an NTLM authentication database via the CLI. The database would have to be manually updated each time a user updated his/her password. The earlier discussed embodiments of using a remote authentication agent solve this scalability problem because username and password information is automatically and periodically dumped for storage at a respective authentication agent that handles verify and compare operations on behalf of the proxy for authentication purposes. Thus, earlier embodiments eliminate the need for manual updating of information. Also, the authentication agent as discussed above can be located at any location in a respective network even at the proxy switch, although a usual place for the authentication agent is at the domain controller.
Note that techniques herein are well suited for use in applications in which a proxy initiates authentication of a respective client and establishment of connections for communicating messages. However, it should be noted that configurations herein are not limited to use in such applications and thus configurations herein and deviations thereof are well suited for other applications as well.
In addition to the techniques discussed above, example embodiments herein also include one or more computerized devices configured to support proxy authentication and related services. According to such embodiments, the computerized device includes a memory system, a processor (e.g., a processing device), and an interconnect. The interconnect supports communications among the processor and the memory system. The memory system is encoded with an application that, when executed on the processor, produces a process to support proxy authentication technology and related services as discussed herein.
Yet other embodiments of the present application disclosed herein include software programs to perform the method embodiment and operations summarized above and disclosed in detail below under the heading Detailed Description. More particularly, a computer program product (e.g., a computer-readable medium) including computer program logic encoded thereon may be executed on a computerized device to support proxy authentication and related techniques as further explained herein. The computer program logic, when executed on at least one processor with a computing system, causes the processor to perform the operations (e.g., the methods) indicated herein as embodiments of the present application. Such arrangements of the present application are typically provided as software, code and/or other data structures arranged or encoded on a computer readable medium such as an optical medium (e.g., CD-ROM), floppy or hard disk or other medium such as firmware or microcode in one or more ROM or RAM or PROM chips or as an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) or as downloadable software images in one or more modules, shared libraries, etc. The software or firmware or other such configurations can be installed onto a computerized device to cause one or more processors in the computerized device to perform the techniques explained herein.
One particular embodiment of the present application is directed to a computer program product that includes a computer readable medium having instructions stored thereon to support proxy authentication and related services. The instructions, when carried out by a processor of a respective first router (e.g., a computer device), cause the processor to perform the steps of: i) engaging in a first set of communications to establish a first communication link with a client; ii) engaging in a second set of communications to obtain and/or utilize security information associated with the client from a resource other than the client for purposes of establishing a set of second communication links with multiple servers on behalf of the client; and iii) facilitating a flow of traffic between the first communication link and the set of second communication links to enable the client to access information from the multiple servers. Other embodiments of the present application include software programs to perform any of the method embodiment steps and operations summarized above and disclosed in detail below.
It is to be understood that the embodiments of the invention can be embodied strictly as a software program, as software and hardware, or as hardware and/or circuitry alone, such as within a data communications device. The features of the invention, as explained herein, may be employed in data communications devices and/or software systems for such devices such as those manufactured by Acopia Networks, Inc. of Lowell, Mass.
The foregoing and other objects, features and advantages of the invention are apparent from the following description of particular embodiments of the invention, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention.
According to embodiments herein, at least one proxy (e.g., a switch) resides in a respective network environment between one or more clients and multiple servers. One purpose of the proxy (or multiple proxies as the case may be) is to provide the clients a unified view of a distributed file system having respective data stored amongst multiple remote and disparate storage locations over a network. The proxy can manage the distributed file system. Another purpose of the proxy is to enable the clients to retrieve data stored at the multiple servers. As discussed above, according to conventional methods, a client communicates directly with a server that authenticates the client for purposes of enabling the client to access data in the server. Adding the proxy according to embodiments herein requires providing a different authentication procedure to authenticate clients. However, use of the proxy eliminates a need for the client to directly communicate and establish links with multiple servers because the proxy handles such communication on behalf of the client.
To establish a (first) connection between the proxy and a respective client, the proxy communicates with an authentication agent (residing at a location other than at the client such as in a network domain controller) to verify a challenge response received from the client. Further downstream, when establishing a set of (second) connections between the proxy and the multiple servers, the proxy communicates with the authentication agent to generate challenge responses on behalf of the client. After authenticating and establishing the first connection and set of second connections, the proxy facilitates a flow of data on the first connection and the set of second connections to enable an authenticated client to access information from the multiple servers.
As shown, network environment 100 includes client 110-1, client 110-2, . . . , client 110-N (collectively, clients 110), computer system 120, computer system 121, storage system 180-1, storage system 180-2, . . . , storage system 180-J (collectively, storage systems 180), authentication agent 150, and domain controller 160. Computer system 120 executes proxy 140. Computer system 121 executes authentication agent 150 and domain controller 160.
Connection 115-1 connects clients 110 to proxy 140. Connection 115-2 connects client 110-2 to proxy 140. Connection 115-N connects client 110-N to proxy 140. Connection 117-1 connects proxy 140 to storage systems 180. Connection 117-2 connects proxy 140 to storage system 180-2. Connection 117-J connects proxy 140 to storage system 180-J. Based on such connectivity, client 110-1 can communicate through proxy 140 for purposes of viewing data stored at storage system 180-1 and 180-2. Thus, embodiments herein support point-to-multipoint as well as any other kind of connectivity between one or more clients 110 and one or more servers (e.g., storage system 180).
Note that the configuration of network environment 100 shown in
As mentioned above, embodiments herein are directed to a proxy 140 (e.g., a switch, network manager, etc.) residing in a respective network environment 100 between one or more clients 110 and multiple servers associated with storage systems 180 (e.g., a distributed storage system). As discussed above, one purpose of the proxy 140 is to provide one or more respective clients 110 a unified view of a distributed file system having respective resources (e.g., data, files, etc.) spread amongst disparately located storage systems 180 in network environment 100. In other words, proxy can manage a hierarchical tree of data stored in storage systems 180 and present the hierarchical tree to a client for choosing which data to retrieve from the storage systems 180. Accordingly, each client 110 can connect to the proxy 140 and view data information available from the multiple servers such as backend filers, files systems, etc. Note that the storage systems 180 can enforce access control lists indicating which clients are able to retrieve and view corresponding stored data.
In one embodiment, the proxy 140 manages the distributed data associated with network environment 100 and enables the clients 110 to access information in storage system 180. As mentioned, each of the storage systems 180 can include a corresponding one or more servers that facilitate access to data stored in storage system 180. That is, a respective client in network environment 100 directly communicates with the proxy 140 via a first authenticated communication connection 115 (a.k.a., a communication link for purposes of this disclosure). The proxy 140 connects to the storage systems 180 via additional authenticated connections 117 (a.k.a., communication links for purposes of this disclosure) on behalf of the client and/or clients to access corresponding data stored in the distributed file system (e.g., backend filers, storage systems, etc.).
More specifically, the proxy 140 enables the clients 110 to establish connections 115 with the proxy 140. However, according to embodiments herein, the proxy 140 terminates a respective client's connection 115 (e.g., a CIFS TCP connection) and negotiates one or more new connections 117 (e.g., CIFS dialect/session) to each of multiple remote target locations (e.g., storage system 180) on behalf of the respective client. As discussed above, the connections 117 between the proxy 140 and multiple storage systems 180 (e.g., servers) enable the proxy 140 to access corresponding stored data in the multiple storage system 180 on behalf of the clients 110.
In one embodiment, each of the connections 115 and connections 117 are authenticated and utilized on a per user basis. In other words, according to one embodiment, each of connections 115 and connections 117 is dedicated for use by a particular authenticated client. Consequently, at any given time, proxy 140 can establish many different connections 117 (e.g., one per each respective user) from computer system 120 to a respective server so that multiple clients can send file operations to the same server or storage system 180.
According to a conventional technique as mentioned above, the clients 110 can establish a connection directly with the storage system 180 without use of proxy 140 via use of the conventional NTLM protocol. Unfortunately, the conventional NTLM protocol does not lend itself for use in a proxy mode in which the proxy 140 has access to information in the domain controller 160. According to embodiments herein, the proxy 140 needs access to the clients' password information so that the proxy 140 is able to establish a connection 115-1 between the client 110-1 and the proxy 140 as well as establish similar types of connections 117 between the proxy 140 and each of multiple storage system 180. Based on techniques herein, proxy 140 is transparent to the user because the client uses the same protocol to connect with the proxy 140 as the client would otherwise use to connect directly with a respective server or storage system 180.
When the proxy 140 attempts to establish a connection 115-1 between the client 110-1 and the proxy 140, the proxy 140 must be able to verify that the client 110-1 is authentic. This could appropriately be named a “verification” procedure. In this procedure, the proxy 140 must be able to verify that, during a connection negotiation process utilizing an NTLM-like protocol, the client 110-1 provides the appropriate password information for a given username in order to establish a connection 115. The proxy 140 also must be able to act on behalf of the client to establish connections 117 with corresponding storage systems 180.
In the context of the present example, one way of authenticating the client 110-1 without sending password information over a respective network is to generate a challenge from the proxy 140 to the client 110-1. The challenge includes a numerical value (e.g., an 8-byte value generated by a random number generator) sent to the client 110-1. The random numerical value can be generated by a source such as the proxy 140 or authentication agent 150.
In response to the challenge, the client 110-1 sends a first encrypted value (e.g., a 24-byte value) of the 8-byte value back to the proxy 140. For example, in one embodiment, the client 110-1 generates a 24-byte challenge response by applying a password hash key (e.g., a 3DES key generated by applying an MD4 algorithm to a plain text password provided by the client 110-1) to the numerical value in the challenge value received from the proxy 140.
To verify the authentication of the client 110-1 (e.g., a user attempting to mount a file system stored in storage systems 180), the proxy 140 forwards i) the numerical value associated with the challenge, ii) the client's username, and iii) the encrypted value (e.g., the 24-byte challenge response received from the client 110-1 in response to the challenge) to authentication agent 150 over connection 131 (e.g., a secured communication link in which communications are encrypted for security reasons) to the authentication agent 150.
Authentication agent 150 (e.g., a processing function) resides in the respective network environment 100 at a location other than at client 110-1. For example, according to one embodiment, the authentication agent 150 is an independently operating secured agent residing and/or being executed by the domain controller 160. Among other things, the domain controller 160 manages password information and corresponding usernames associated with persons authorized to use network environment 100. The domain controller 160 oversees which clients 110 in network environment 100 are allowed to establish communication sessions (e.g., connections) and retrieve information from storage systems 180.
Upon receiving i) the numerical value associated with the challenge, ii) the client's username, and iii) the encrypted value (e.g., the 24-byte challenge response from the client 110-1) from the proxy 140, the authentication agent 150 retrieves a password hash key associated with the client 110-1 based on a previous dumping of password and username information from the domain controller 160 to the authentication agent 150.
The authentication agent 150 applies the appropriate password hash key to the numerical value (received from the proxy 140) to produce a second encrypted value. The authentication agent 150 performs a compare function to determine whether the 24-byte challenge response (e.g., the first encrypted value) provided by the client 110-1 matches the second encrypted value generated by the authentication agent 150. If there is a match, the authentication agent 150 determines that the client is authentic. Effectively, the authentication agent 150 identifies whether a user (e.g., client 110-1) provides the appropriate password information for establishing connections 115 and 117. After applying the compare function, the authentication agent 150 notifies the proxy 140 whether the client (e.g., the user) has been authenticated (e.g., provides the appropriate response to the challenge) and whether the proxy 140 can allow the connection 115-1 between the proxy 140 and the client 110-1.
As mentioned, the authentication agent 150 performing the “compare” function can be a secured agent. For example, in such an embodiment, the proxy 140 utilizes encryption techniques to communicate with the authentication agent 150 over connection 131. In a reverse direction, the authentication agent 150 encrypts corresponding messages sent over connection 131 to proxy 140.
As discussed briefly above, the authentication agent 150 can maintain password information (i.e., password hash key information) associated with users authorized to use network environment 100.
Note that authentication agent 150 herein is not limited to communicating with only a single proxy. For example, as shown, the authentication agent 150 can execute a separate processing thread for each of multiple proxies 140 operating in network environment 100. In the context of such an example, authentication agent 150 executes a first thread to manage communications over connection 130-A to proxy 140-A; authentication agent 150 executes a second thread to manage communications over connection 130-B to proxy 140-B, and so on. Thus, authentication agent 150 initiates execution of individual processing threads for each proxy 140. Accordingly, authentication agent 150 can more quickly authenticate connections on behalf of one or more respective proxies 140. As discussed above, messages sent over the connections 130 (e.g., connection 130-A, connection 130-B, etc.) can be encrypted for security reasons.
Referring again to
The proxy 140 can respond to the challenge from the server or storage system 180 without having to communicate again with the client 110. For example, according to one embodiment, the proxy communicates the 8-byte challenge received from the server or storage system 180 as well as a username associated with the client 110-1 to the authentication agent 150. As discussed above, the authentication agent 150 stores username and corresponding password information. In this example, the proxy 140 need only provide the authentication agent 150 the username of the client 110-1 to obtain password information.
Based on stored information, the authentication agent 150 obtains the respective password hash key associated with the client 110-1 (e.g., username) for which the connection is being established and applies the password hash key to the 8-byte numerical value received from the proxy 140 to produce an encrypted value. In a particular embodiment, the encrypted value is 24 bytes in length if the authentication agent 150 was able to successfully generate a challenge response and 4 bytes in length indicating a respective error code if the authentication agent 150 is unable to generate a proper challenge response.
The authentication agent 150 forwards the encrypted value (e.g., challenge response) to the proxy 140. The proxy 140, in turn, replies to the challenge received from the server or storage system 180 by forwarding the encrypted challenge response value (as generated by the authentication agent 150) to the server or storage system 180. The server or storage system 180, in turn, communicates with the domain controller 160 (similar to the conventional case as if the client 110-1 sent the server the negotiate protocol request and the server uses the net logon RPC protocol to communication with the domain controller) to verify that the proxy 140, acting on behalf of the client 110-1, is able to establish the connection 117-1 with the backend server or storage system 180-1. In other words, a server or storage system 180 receiving the challenge response from the proxy 140 verifies the received challenge response by forwarding the encrypted value to the domain controller 160. The domain controller 160 verifies whether the encrypted value forwarded by the server or storage system 180-1 matches the encrypted value that the proxy 140 generated in response to the challenge. If there is a match (e.g., success), the proxy 140 and corresponding client 110-1 is authenticated and the server or storage system 180-1 is allowed to notify (e.g., via an NTLM session setup response) proxy 140 that the connection 117-1 can be established. If there is not a match (e.g., a failure), the server or storage system 180 notifies the proxy 140 that the corresponding client 110-1 has not been authenticated for purposes of establishing connection 117.
The proxy 140 can repeat this above procedure for different challenges on each link to the multiple servers or storage systems 180 in order to establish and authenticate connections 117 with each of the multiple servers or storage system 180. Accordingly, a client 110 can connect to the proxy 140 via a respective first connection 115 and, on behalf of the client 110, the proxy 140 connects to the multiple servers or storage system 180 via a set of multiple second connections 117.
Upon successfully establishing a point-to-multipoint communication topology including connection 115-1, connection 117-1, and connection 117-2, the client 110-1 is cleared to send messages to through proxy 140 to target destinations such as storage system 180-1 and storage system 180-2.
Typically, in a multi-domain windows environment, there is at least one agent instance per domain. This allows authentication to support multi-domain type environments.
Computer system 120 is a computerized device such as a personal computer, workstation, portable computing device, console, network terminal, processing device, router, server, etc. As shown, computer system 120 of the present example includes an interconnect 111 that couples a memory system 112, a processor 113, I/O interface 114, and a communications interface 415. I/O interface 114 potentially provides connectivity to optional peripheral devices such as a keyboard, mouse, display screens, etc. Communications interface 115 enables computer system 120 to establish respective connections 131 to authentication agent 150 for purposes of authenticating connections 115 between clients 110 and computer system 120 as well as connections 117 between computer system 120 and servers 180.
As shown, memory system 112 is encoded with proxy application 140-1 supporting authentication procedures as discussed above and as further discussed below. Proxy application 140-1 may be embodied as software code such as data and/or logic instructions (e.g., code stored in the memory or on another computer readable medium such as a disk) that supports processing functionality according to different embodiments described herein.
During operation, processor 113 accesses memory system 112 via the interconnect 111 in order to launch, run, execute, interpret or otherwise perform the logic instructions of the proxy application 140-1. Execution of the proxy application 140-1 produces processing functionality in proxy process 140-2. In other words, the proxy process 140-2 represents one or more portions of the proxy application 140-1 (or the entire application) performing within or upon the processor 113 in computer system 120. It should be noted that, in addition to proxy process 140-2, embodiments herein include the proxy application 140-1 itself (i.e., the un-executed or nonperforming logic instructions and/or data). The proxy application 140-1 may be stored on a computer readable medium such as a floppy disk, hard disk or in an optical medium. The proxy application 140-1 may also be stored in a memory type system such as in firmware, read only memory (ROM), or, as in this example, as executable code within the memory system 112 (e.g., within Random Access Memory or RAM). In addition to these embodiments, it should also be noted that other embodiments herein include the execution of proxy application 140-1 in processor 113 as proxy process 140-2. Thus, those skilled in the art will understand that the computer system 120 (e.g., a data communication device or computer system) can include other processes and/or software and hardware components, such as an operating system that controls allocation and use of hardware resources.
Functionality supported by computer system 120 and, more particularly, proxy 140 will now be discussed via the flowcharts shown in
Note that the following discussion of flowcharts and corresponding steps may overlap with respect to concepts and techniques discussed above for
In step 510, proxy 140 engages in a first set of communications to establish a first type (e.g., a client-proxy type connection) of communication link (i.e., connection 115) with a respective client 110-1. The first type of communication link connects the client 110-1 to the proxy 140.
In step 520, proxy 140 engages in a second set of communications to: i) obtain security information (e.g., password hash key information) associated with the client 110-1 from a resource (e.g., authentication agent 150) other than the client 110-1, and ii) utilize the security information on behalf of the client 110-1 to establish a set of second type (e.g., a proxy-server type of connection) of communication links with the multiple servers (e.g., storage systems 180). In other words, the proxy 140 engages the authentication agent 150 to obtain and utilize a password hash key associated with the client 110-1 for purposes of establishing the connection 117-1 between the proxy 140 and a respective server. As discussed above, one use of the password hash key is to generate a challenge response for the proxy 140. Although embodiments can vary, according to a particular embodiment herein, the authentication agent 150 does not send the password hash over connection 131 between the authentication agent 150 and the proxy 140 for security purposes. If the password hash were passed over connection 131, the security model according to embodiments herein, may become questionable. However, note that in certain applications, sending the password hash value between the authentication agent and the proxy 140 may be acceptable.
In step 530, proxy 140 facilitates a flow of data traffic between the first communication link (e.g., connection 115-1) and the set of second communication links (e.g., connection 117-1 and connection 117-2) to enable the client 110-1 to access information from multiple servers.
In step 610 of flowchart 600-1 of
In sub-step 615 of step 610, the proxy 140 forwards a challenge to the client 110-1 for purposes of authenticating that the client is authorized to establish the first communication link (e.g., connection 115-1). As discussed above, the challenge is a request generated by a proxy 140 for the client 110-1 to produce an encrypted value (e.g., challenge response) based on a proper password associated with the client. In one embodiment, the challenge includes an 8-byte value generated by the authentication agent 150 or proxy 140.
In sub-step 615 of step 610, the proxy 140 receives a challenge response from the client 110-1 and forwards the challenge response to an authentication agent 150 that stores security information (e.g., username and password information) retrieved from a domain controller 160 in order to verify that a respective message received from the client 110-1 includes an encrypted value generated by the client 110-1 indicating that the client 110-1 is authentic. In other words, the authentication agent checks whether a user at client 110-1 provides the appropriate response for a respective username.
In step 625, proxy 140 engages in a second set of communications to utilize security information (e.g., password hash key information) associated with the client 110-1 from a resource (e.g., authentication agent 150) other than the client 110-1 for purposes of establishing a set of second communication links (e.g., connections 117) with multiple servers or storage systems 180 on behalf of the client 110-1.
In sub-step 630 of step 625, for each server (or storage system 180) of the multiple servers (of storage systems 180), the proxy 140 communicates with the authentication agent 150 to: i) generate a message and corresponding encrypted value (e.g., a challenge response) based on use of the security information and a respective data value (e.g., 8-byte challenge value) received from a respective server. The proxy 140 receives and forwards the corresponding encrypted value (e.g., challenge response) received from the authentication agent 150 to the respective server for purposes of establishing and authenticating a respective second communication link (e.g., connection 117) with the respective server or storage system 180 on behalf of the client 110-1.
In sub-step 635 of step 625, the authentication agent 150 generates different encrypted values (e.g., challenge responses) depending on challenge values received from different servers. The proxy 140 forwards the different challenge responses generated by the authentication agent 150 to the respective servers or storage systems 180.
In step 710 of flowchart 600-2 of
In sub-step 715 of step 710, the proxy 140 receives an access request from the client 110-1 over the first communication link (e.g., connection 115-1).
In sub-step 720 of step 710, in response to receiving the access request, the proxy 140 communicates with the multiple servers or storage systems 180 over one or more of the second communication links (e.g., connections 117-1 and 117-2) to retrieve requested information associated with the access request.
In sub-step 725 of step 710, the proxy 140 forwards the requested information retrieved from the multiple servers or storage system 180 to the client 110-1 over the first communication link (e.g., connection 115-1).
In sub-step 730 of step 710, the servers or storage systems 180 utilize one or more respective access controls list to enable the client (or clients) to retrieve information stored in the multiple servers or storage systems 180. The access control lists can be used to prevent other clients from accessing at least some of the information stored in the multiple servers or storage systems 180.
In step 810, the proxy 140 receives a request to communicate from the client 110-1.
In step 815, the proxy 140 generates a numerical value (e.g., an 8-byte challenge value). Note also that authentication agent 150 can alternatively generate an 8-byte challenge value to the proxy 140 that in turn forwards the challenge value to the client 110-1.
In step 820, the proxy 140 forwards the numerical value (e.g., challenge value) to the client 110-1.
In step 825, the proxy 140 receives a username and a first encrypted value (e.g., a challenge response from the client 110-1) which is generated based on the client 110-1 applying a password hash function or key to the numerical challenge value.
In step 830, the proxy 140 forwards the username associated with the client 110-1, the numerical value (e.g., challenge value), and the first encrypted value (e.g., the challenge response received from the client 110-1) over a network connection 131 to an authentication agent 150 that: i) generates a second encrypted value (e.g., an expected challenge response) based on the numerical value and security information such as a respective password hash function associated with the username of the client 110-1, and ii) compares the first encrypted value (e.g., actual challenge response received from the client 110-1) and the second encrypted value (e.g., an expected challenge response that should have been received from the client 110-1) to authenticate the client 110-1 and corresponding communications with the client 110-1 over the first communication link (e.g., connection 115-1).
In step 910, the proxy 140 originates a request to a respective server or storage system 180 for establishing a respective second type of communication link such as a connection 117.
In step 915, the proxy 140 receives a numerical value associated with a challenge from the respective server or storage system 180. The challenge from the server or storage system 180 is received in response to the proxy 140 sending a request session message to the respective server of storage system 180.
In step 920, the proxy 140 forwards the numerical value (e.g., randomly generated 8-byte unique value) associated with the challenge as well as username information associated with the client over connection 131 of network environment 100 to authentication agent 150 that: i) obtains a password hash function associated with the username, and ii) applies the password hash function to the numerical value to generate an encrypted value (e.g., challenge response).
In step 925, the proxy 140 receives the encrypted value (e.g., challenge response) from the authentication agent 150 over connection 131. Accordingly, authentication agent 150 generates the response on behalf of the client.
In step 935, the proxy 140 forwards the encrypted value (e.g., challenge response) to the respective server or storage system 180 as a response to the challenge from the respective server or storage system 180.
In step 935, the proxy 140 receives confirmation from the respective server or storage system 180 indicating whether the respective second communication link (e.g., connection 117) and/or corresponding client has been authenticated for conveying futures communications on behalf of the client.
Note again that techniques herein are well suited for use in applications in which a proxy and authentication agent 150 handle authentication on behalf of a client to support point-to-multipoint type of communications in a respective network environment. For example, in the context of HTTP web services, an authenticated client can communicate with multiple servers (e.g., storage systems) through the proxy. Although the embodiments herein, at times, indicate a specific use and configuration, it should again be noted that configurations herein are not limited to use in such applications and thus configurations herein and deviations thereof are well suited for other applications as well. Thus, while this invention has been particularly shown and described with references to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. For example, the above techniques are not limited to 2-tiers. It is possible, for example, to deploy several tiers of proxies to produce a client-proxyl-proxy-2-server connection. Also, note that each tier can include several proxy devices.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/346,415, filed Feb. 2, 2006, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/650,201, filed Feb. 4, 2005, the entire disclosures of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4993030 | Krakauer et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
| 5218695 | Noveck et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5303368 | Kotaki | Apr 1994 | A |
| 5473362 | Fitzgerald et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
| 5511177 | Kagimasa et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5537585 | Blickenstaff et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5548724 | Akizawa et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5550965 | Gabbe et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5583995 | Gardner et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5586260 | Hu | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5590320 | Maxey | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5649194 | Miller et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5649200 | Leblang et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5668943 | Attanasio et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5692180 | Lee | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5721779 | Funk | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5724512 | Winterbottom | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5806061 | Chaudhuri et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5832496 | Anand et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5832522 | Blickenstaff et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5838970 | Thomas | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5862325 | Reed et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5884303 | Brown | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5893086 | Schmuck et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5897638 | Lasser et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5905990 | Inglett | May 1999 | A |
| 5917998 | Cabrera et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5920873 | Van Huben et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5937406 | Balabine et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5999664 | Mahoney et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6012083 | Savitzky et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6029168 | Frey | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6044367 | Wolff | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6047129 | Frye | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6072942 | Stockwell et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6078929 | Rao | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6085234 | Pitts et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6088694 | Burns et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6128627 | Mattis et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6128717 | Harrison et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6161145 | Bainbridge et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6161185 | Guthrie et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6181336 | Chiu et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6202156 | Kalajan | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6223206 | Dan et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6233648 | Tomita | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6237008 | Beal et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6256031 | Meijer et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6282610 | Bergsten | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6289345 | Yasue | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6308162 | Ouimet et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6324581 | Xu et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6339785 | Feigenbaum | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6349343 | Foody et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6374263 | Bunger et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6389433 | Bolosky et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6393581 | Friedman et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6397246 | Wolfe | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6412004 | Chen et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6438595 | Blumenau et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6477544 | Bolosky et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6487561 | Ofek et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6493804 | Soltis et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6516350 | Lumelsky et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6516351 | Borr | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6549916 | Sedlar | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6553352 | Delurgio et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6556997 | Levy | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6556998 | Mukherjee et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6601101 | Lee et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6606663 | Liao et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6612490 | Herrendoerfer et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6721794 | Taylor et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6738790 | Klein et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6742035 | Zayas et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6748420 | Quatrano et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6757706 | Dong et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6775673 | Mahalingam et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6775679 | Gupta | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6782450 | Arnott et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6801960 | Ericson et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6826613 | Wang et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
| 6839761 | Kadyk et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6847959 | Arrouye et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 6847970 | Keller et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6850997 | Rooney et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
| 6871245 | Bradley | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6889249 | Miloushev et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6922688 | Frey, Jr. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
| 6934706 | Mancuso et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
| 6938039 | Bober et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
| 6938059 | Tamer et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6959373 | Testardi | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6961815 | Kistler et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
| 6973455 | Vahalia et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
| 6973549 | Testardi | Dec 2005 | B1 |
| 6985936 | Agarwalla et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6985956 | Luke et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6986015 | Testardi | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6990547 | Ulrich et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6990667 | Ulrich et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6996841 | Kadyk et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7003533 | Noguchi et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7006981 | Rose et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7010553 | Chen et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7013379 | Testardi | Mar 2006 | B1 |
| 7020644 | Jameson | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7020669 | McCann et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
| 7024427 | Bobbitt et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7051112 | Dawson | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7054998 | Arnott et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7072917 | Wong et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7089286 | Malik | Aug 2006 | B1 |
| 7111115 | Peters et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7113962 | Kee et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
| 7120728 | Krakirian et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7120746 | Campbell et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7127556 | Blumenau et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7133967 | Fujie et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7143146 | Nakatani et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7146524 | Patel et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7155466 | Rodriguez et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7165095 | Sim | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7167821 | Hardwick et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7171469 | Ackaouy et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7173929 | Testardi | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7194579 | Robinson et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7234074 | Cohn et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
| 7280536 | Testardi | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7284150 | Ma et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7293097 | Borr | Nov 2007 | B2 |
| 7293099 | Kalajan | Nov 2007 | B1 |
| 7293133 | Colgrove et al. | Nov 2007 | B1 |
| 7343351 | Bishop et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
| 7343398 | Lownsbrough | Mar 2008 | B1 |
| 7346664 | Wong et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7383288 | Miloushev et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7401220 | Bolosky et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7406484 | Srinivasan et al. | Jul 2008 | B1 |
| 7415488 | Muth et al. | Aug 2008 | B1 |
| 7415608 | Bolosky et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
| 7440982 | Lu et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7457982 | Rajan | Nov 2008 | B2 |
| 7467158 | Marinescu | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7475146 | Bazot et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7475241 | Patel et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7477796 | Sasaki et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7509322 | Miloushev et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7512673 | Miloushev et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7519813 | Cox et al. | Apr 2009 | B1 |
| 7562110 | Miloushev et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7571168 | Bahar et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7574433 | Engel | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7587471 | Yasuda et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7590747 | Coates et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7599941 | Bahar et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7610307 | Havewala et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7610390 | Yared et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7624109 | Testardi | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7639883 | Gill | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7644109 | Manley et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7653699 | Colgrove et al. | Jan 2010 | B1 |
| 7689596 | Tsunoda | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7694082 | Golding et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7711771 | Kirnos | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7734603 | McManis | Jun 2010 | B1 |
| 7743035 | Chen et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7752294 | Meyer et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7769711 | Srinivasan et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7788335 | Miloushev et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7793342 | Ebrahimi et al. | Sep 2010 | B1 |
| 7822939 | Veprinsky et al. | Oct 2010 | B1 |
| 7831639 | Panchbudhe et al. | Nov 2010 | B1 |
| 7836493 | Xia et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7849112 | Mane et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7870154 | Shitomi et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7877511 | Berger et al. | Jan 2011 | B1 |
| 7885970 | Lacapra | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7913053 | Newland | Mar 2011 | B1 |
| 7953701 | Okitsu et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7958347 | Ferguson | Jun 2011 | B1 |
| 8005953 | Miloushev et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 20010014891 | Hoffert et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010047293 | Waller et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010051955 | Wong | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020035537 | Waller et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020059263 | Shima et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020065810 | Bradley | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020073105 | Noguchi et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083118 | Sim | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087887 | Busam et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020120763 | Miloushev et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020133330 | Loisey et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020133491 | Sim et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020138502 | Gupta | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020143909 | Botz et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020147630 | Rose et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020150253 | Brezak et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020156905 | Weissman | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161911 | Pinckney, III et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188667 | Kirnos | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030005280 | Bobde et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030009429 | Jameson | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030012382 | Ferchichi et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030028514 | Lord et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030033308 | Patel et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030033535 | Fisher et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030061240 | McCann et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030065956 | Belapurkar et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030115218 | Bobbitt et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030115439 | Mahalingam et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030135514 | Patel et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030149781 | Yared et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030159072 | Bellinger et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030171978 | Jenkins et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030177364 | Walsh et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030177388 | Botz et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030204635 | Ko et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20040003266 | Moshir et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040006575 | Visharam et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040010654 | Yasuda et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040025013 | Parker et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040028043 | Maveli et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040028063 | Roy et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040030857 | Krakirian et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040054777 | Ackaouy et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040098383 | Tabellion et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040098595 | Aupperle et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133573 | Miloushev et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133577 | Miloushev et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133606 | Miloushev et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133607 | Miloushev et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040133650 | Miloushev et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040139355 | Axel et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040148380 | Meyer et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040153479 | Mikesell et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040181605 | Nakatani et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040236798 | Srinivasan et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040267830 | Wong et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050021615 | Arnott et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050050107 | Mane et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091214 | Probert et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108575 | Yung | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114291 | Becker-Szendy et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114701 | Atkins et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050160161 | Barrett et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050187866 | Lee | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050198501 | Andreev et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050246393 | Coates et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050289109 | Arrouye et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050289111 | Tribble et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060010502 | Mimatsu et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060075475 | Boulos et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060080353 | Miloushev et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060106882 | Douceur et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060112151 | Manley et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060123062 | Bobbitt et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060161518 | Lacapra | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060167838 | Lacapra | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060184589 | Lees et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060190496 | Tsunoda | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060200470 | Lacapra et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060212746 | Amegadzie et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060224687 | Popkin et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060230265 | Krishna | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060259949 | Schaefer et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060271598 | Wong et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060277225 | Mark et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060282471 | Mark et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070022121 | Bahar et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070024919 | Wong et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070027929 | Whelan | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070027935 | Haselton et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070028068 | Golding et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070088702 | Fridella et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070098284 | Sasaki et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070136308 | Tsirigotis et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070208748 | Li | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070209075 | Coffman | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070226331 | Srinivasan et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20080046432 | Anderson et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080070575 | Claussen et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080104443 | Akutsu et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080209073 | Tang | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080222223 | Srinivasan et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080243769 | Arbour et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080282047 | Arakawa et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20090007162 | Sheehan | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090037975 | Ishikawa et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090041230 | Williams | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090055607 | Schack et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090077097 | Lacapra et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090089344 | Brown et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090094252 | Wong et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090106255 | Lacapra et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090106263 | Khalid et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090132616 | Winter et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090204649 | Wong et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090204650 | Wong et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090204705 | Marinov et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090210431 | Marinkovic et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090254592 | Marinov et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2003300350 | Jul 2004 | AU |
| 2512312 | Jul 2004 | CA |
| 0 738 970 | Oct 1996 | EP |
| 63010250 | Jan 1988 | JP |
| 06-332782 | Dec 1994 | JP |
| 08-328760 | Dec 1996 | JP |
| 08-339355 | Dec 1996 | JP |
| 9016510 | Jan 1997 | JP |
| 11282741 | Oct 1999 | JP |
| 566291 | Dec 2008 | NZ |
| WO 02056181 | Jul 2002 | WO |
| WO 2004061605 | Jul 2004 | WO |
| WO 2008130983 | Oct 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008147973 | Dec 2008 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Aguilera, Marcos K. et al., “Improving recoverability in multi-tier storage systems,” International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN-2007), Jun. 2007, 10 pages, Edinburgh, Scotland. |
| Anderson, Darrell C. et al., “Interposed Request Routing for Scalable Network Storage,” ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 20(1): (Feb. 2002), pp. 1-24. |
| Anderson et al., “Serverless Network File System,” in the 15th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Dec. 1995, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. |
| Anonymous, “How DFS Works: Remote File Systems,” Distributed File System (DFS) Technical Reference, retrieved from the Internet on Feb. 13, 2009: URL<:http://technetmicrosoft.com/en-us/library/cc782417WS.10,printer).aspx> (Mar. 2003). |
| Apple, Inc., “Mac OS X Tiger Keynote Intro. Part 2,” Jun. 2004, www.youtube.com <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSBJwEmRJbY>, p. 1. |
| Apple, Inc., “Tiger Developer Overview Series: Working with Spotlight,” Nov. 23, 2004, www.apple.com using www.archive.org <http://web.archive.org/web/20041123005335/developer.apple.com/macosx/tiger/spotlight.html>, pp. 1-6. |
| “Auspex Storage Architecture Guide,” Second Edition, 2001, Auspex Systems, Inc., www.auspex.com, last accessed on Dec. 30, 2002. |
| Basney, Jim et al., “Credential Wallets: A Classification of Credential Repositories Highlighting MyProxy,” TPRC 2003, Sep. 19-21, 2003. |
| Botzum, Keys, “Single Sign on—A Contrarian View,” Open Group Website, <http://www.opengroup.org/security/topics.htm>, Aug. 6, 2001, pp. 1-5. |
| Cabrera et al., “Swift: Storage Architecture for Large Objects,” In Proceedings of the-Eleventh IEEE Symposium on Mass Storage Systems, pp. 123-128, Oct. 1991. |
| Cabrera et al., “Swift: Using Distributed Disk Striping to Provide High I/O Data Rates,” Computing Systems 4, 4 (Fall 1991), pp. 405-436. |
| Cabrera et al., “Using Data Striping in a Local Area Network,” 1992, technical report No. UCSC-CRL-92-09 of the Computer & Information Sciences Department of University of California at Santa Cruz. |
| Callaghan et al., “NFS Version 3 Protocol Specifications” (RFC 1813), Jun. 1995, The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETN), www.ietf.org, last accessed on Dec. 30, 2002. |
| Carns et al., “PVFS: A Parallel File System for Linux Clusters,” in Proceedings of the Extreme Linux Track: 4th Annual Linux Showcase and Conference, pp. 317-327, Atlanta, Georgia, Oct. 2000, USENIX Association. |
| Cavale, M. R., “Introducing Microsoft Cluster Service (MSCS) in the Windows Server 2003”, Microsoft Corporation, Nov. 2002. |
| “CSA Persistent File System Technology,” Colorado Software Architecture, Inc.: A White Paper, Jan. 1, 1999, p. 1-3, <http://www.cosoa.com/white—papers/pfs.php>. |
| “Distributed File System: Logical View of Physical Storage: White Paper,” 1999, Microsoft Corp., www.microsoft.com, <http://www.eu.microsoft.com/TechNet/prodtechnol/windows2000serv/maintain/DFSnt95>, pp. 1-26, last accessed on Dec. 20, 2002. |
| English Translation of Notification of Reason(s) for Refusal for JP 2002-556371 (Dispatch Date: Jan. 22, 2007). |
| Fan et al., “Summary Cache: A Scalable Wide-Area Protocol”, Computer Communications Review, Association Machinery, New York, USA, Oct. 1998, vol. 28, Web Cache Sharing for Computing No. 4, pp. 254-265. |
| Farley, M., “Building Storage Networks,” Jan. 2000, McGraw Hill, ISBN 0072120509. |
| Gibson et al., “File Server Scaling with Network-Attached Secure Disks,” in Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems (Sigmetrics '97), Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., Jun. 15-18, 1997. |
| Gibson et al., “NASD Scalable Storage Systems,” Jun. 1999, USENIX99, Extreme Linux Workshop, Monterey, California. |
| Hartman, J., “The Zebra Striped Network File System,” 1994, Ph.D. dissertation submitted in the Graduate Division of the University of California at Berkeley. |
| Haskin et al., “The Tiger Shark File System,” 1996, in proceedings of IEEE, Spring COMPCON, Santa Clara, CA, www.research.ibm.com, last accessed on Dec. 30, 2002. |
| Hwang et al., “Designing SSI Clusters with Hierarchical Checkpointing and Single 1/0 Space,” IEEE Concurrency, Jan.-Mar. 1999, pp. 60-69. |
| International Search Report for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2008/083117 (Jun. 23, 2009). |
| International Search Report for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2008/060449 (Apr. 9, 2008). |
| International Search Report for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2008/064677 (Sep. 6, 2009). |
| International Search Report for International Patent Application No. PCT/US02/00720, (Jul. 8, 2004). |
| International Search Report from International Application No. PCT/US03/41202, (Sep. 15, 2005). |
| Karamanolis, C. et al., “An Architecture for Scalable and Manageable File Services,” HPL-2001-173, Jul. 26, 2001. p. 1-114. |
| Katsurashima, W. et al., “NAS Switch: A Novel CIFS Server Virtualization, Proceedings,” 20th IEEE/11th NASA Goddard Conference on Mass Storage Systems and Technologies, 2003 (MSST 2003), Apr. 2003. |
| Kimball, C.E. et al., “Automated Client-Side Integration of Distributed Application Servers,” 13Th LISA Conf., 1999, pp. 275-282 of the Proceedings. |
| Kohl et al., “The Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5),” RFC 1510, Sep. 1993. (http://www.ietf.org/ rfc/rfc1510.txt?number=1510). |
| Long et al., “Swift/RAID: A distributed RAID System”, Computing Systems, Summer 1994, vol. 7, pp. 333-359. |
| “NERSC Tutorials: I/O on the Cray T3E, ‘Chapter 8, Disk Striping’,” National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), http://hpcfnersc.gov, last accessed on Dec. 27, 2002. |
| Noghani et al., “A Novel Approach to Reduce Latency on the Internet: ‘Component-Based Download’,” Proceedings of the Computing, Las Vegas, NV, Jun. 2000, pp. 1-6 on the Internet: Intl Conf. on Internet. |
| Norton et al., “CIFS Protocol Version CIFS-Spec 0.9,” 2001, Storage Networking Industry Association (SNIA), www.snia.org, last accessed on Mar. 26, 2001. |
| Novotny, Jason et al., “An Online Credential Repository for the Grid: MyProxy,” 2001, IEEE. |
| Pashalidis, Andreas et al., “A Taxonomy of Single Sign-On Systems,” 2003. |
| Pashalidis, Andreas et al., “Impostor: a single sign-on system for use from untrusted devices,” 2004. |
| Patterson et al., “A case for redundant arrays of inexpensive disks (RAID)”, Chicago, Illinois, Jun. 1-3, 1998, in Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD conference on the Management of Data, pp. 109-116, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., www.acm.org, last accessed on Dec. 20, 2002. |
| Pearson, P.K., “Fast Hashing of Variable-Length Text Strings,” Comm. of the ACM, Jun. 1990, vol. 33, No. 6. |
| Peterson, M., “Introducing Storage Area Networks,” Feb. 1998, InfoStor, www.infostor.com, last accessed on Dec. 20, 2002. |
| Preslan et al., “Scalability and Failure Recovery in a Linux Cluster File System,” in Proceedings of the 4th Annual Linux Showcase & Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, Oct. 10-14, 2000, pp. 169-180 of the Proceedings, www.usenix.org, last accessed on Dec. 20, 2002. |
| Rodriguez et al., “Parallel-access for mirror sites in the Internet,” InfoCom 2000. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. Proceedings. IEEE Tel Aviv, Israel Mar. 26-30, 2000, Piscataway, NJ, USA, IEEE, US, Mar. 26, 2000, pp. 864-873, XP010376176 ISBN: 0-7803-5880-5 p. 867, col. 2, last paragraph -p. 868, col. 1, paragraph 1. |
| RSYNC, “Welcome to the RSYNC Web Pages,” Retrieved from the Internet URL: http://samba.anu.edu.ut.rsync/. (Retrieved on Dec. 18, 2009). |
| Savage, et al., “AFRAID—a Frequently Redundant Array of Independent Disks,” 1996 USENIX Technical Conf., San Diego, California, Jan. 22-26, 1996. |
| “Scaling Next Generation Web Infrastructure with Content-Intelligent Switching: White Paper,” Apr. 2000, p. 1-9 Alteon Web Systems, Inc.,. |
| Soltis et al., “The Design and Performance of a Shared Disk File System for IRIX,” in Sixth NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Conference on Mass Storage and Technologies in cooperation with the Fifteenth IEEE Symposium on Mass Storage Systems, Mar. 23-26, 1998. |
| Sorenson, K.M., “Installation and Administration: Kimberlite Cluster Version 1.1.0, Rev. Dec. 2000,” Mission Critical Linux, http://oss.missioncriticallinux.corn/kimberlite/kimberlite.pdf. |
| Stakutis, C., “Benefits of SAN-based file system sharing,” Jul. 2000, InfoStor, www.infostor.com, last accessed on Dec. 30, 2002. |
| “The AFS File System in Distributed Computing Environment,” www.transarc.ibm.com/Library/whitepapers/AFS/afsoverview.html, last accessed on Dec. 20, 2002. |
| Thekkath et al., “Frangipani: A Scalable Distributed File System,” in Proceedings of the 16th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Oct. 1997, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. |
| Tulloch, Mitch, “Microsoft Encyclopedia of Security,” 2003, pp. 218, 300-301. |
| “Veritas SANPoint Foundation Suite(tm) and SANPoint Foundation Suite(tm) HA: New VERITAS Volume Management and File System Technology for Cluster Environments,” Sep. 2001, VERITAS Software Corp. |
| Wilkes, J., et al., “The HP AutoRAID Hierarchical Storage System,” ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, Feb. 1996, vol. 14, No. 1. |
| “Windows Clustering Technologies-An Overview,” Nov. 2001, Microsoft Corp., www.microsoft.com, last accessed on Dec. 30, 2002. |
| Zayas, E., “AFS-3 Programmer's Reference: Architectural Overview,” Transarc Corp., version 1.0 of Sep. 2, 1991, doc. No. FS-00-D160. |
| English Language Abstract of JP 08-328760 from Patent Abstracts of Japan. |
| English Language Abstract of JP 08-339355 from Patent Abstracts of Japan. |
| English Translation of paragraphs 17, 32, and 40-52 of JP 08-328760. |
| Harrison, C., May 19, 2008 response to Communication pursuant to Article 96(2) EPC dated Nov. 9, 2007 in corresponding European patent application No. 02718824.2. |
| Hu, J., Final Office action dated Sep. 21, 2007 for related U.S. Appl. No. 10/336,784. |
| Hu, J., Office action dated Feb. 6, 2007 for related U.S. Appl. No. 10/336,784. |
| Klayman, J., Nov. 13, 2008 e-mail to Japanese associate including instructions for response to office action dated May 26, 2008 in corresponding Japanese patent application No. 2002-556371. |
| Klayman, J., response filed by Japanese associate to office action dated Jan. 22, 2007 in corresponding Japanese patent application No. 2002-556371. |
| Klayman, J., Jul. 18, 2007 e-mail to Japanese associate including instructions for response to office action dated Jan. 22, 2007 in corresponding Japanese patent application No. 2002-556371. |
| Korkuzas, V., Communication pursuant to Article 96(2) EPC dated Sep. 11, 2007 in corresponding European patent application No. 02718824.2-2201. |
| Lelil, S., “Storage Technology News: AutoVirt adds tool to help data migration projects,” Feb. 25, 2011, last accessed Mar. 17, 2011, <http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid5—gci1527986,00.html>. |
| Response filed Jul. 6, 2007 to Office action dated Feb. 6, 2007 for related U.S. Appl. No. 10/336,784. |
| Response filed Mar. 20, 2008 to Final Office action dated Sep. 21, 2007 for related U.S. Appl. No. 10/336,784. |
| Soltis et al., “The Global File System,” in Proceedings of the Fifth NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Conference on Mass Storage Systems and Technologies, Sep. 17-19, 1996, College Park, Maryland. |
| Uesugi, H., Nov. 26, 2008 amendment filed by Japanese associate in response to office action dated May 26, 2008 in corresponding Japanese patent application No. 2002-556371. |
| Uesugi, H., English translation of office action dated May 26, 2008 in corresponding Japanese patent application No. 2002-556371. |
| Uesugi, H., Jul. 15, 2008 letter from Japanese associate reporting office action dated May 26, 2008 in corresponding Japanese patent application No. 2002-556371. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60650201 | Feb 2005 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 11346415 | Feb 2006 | US |
| Child | 13152097 | US |