1. Field of the Invention
The field of the invention relates generally to systems and methods of providing security for data. More particularly, the preferred embodiment relates to electronic cleaning metadata from email attachments, which may be sent from webmail on Exchange or PDA, handheld or mobile devices such as Blackberry, Treo etc.
2. Related Background
Electronic documents often include metadata relating to changes or prior versions of the document which may not be readily apparent to a person viewing the document in an application. For example, a Word document may include history information which is not displayed to a person viewing the document using Word on a PC (or may not be displayed in all views of a document). This is true for other types of electronic documents, including PDFs, Excel Spreadsheets, etc. Additionally, electronic documents may include additional metadata concerning the document, such as when the document was created, who created the document, etc. While many users may not be concerned with such information, such information may include sensitive or proprietary information that a user, or others, may not wish to share when the electronic document is shared. For example, a user emailing an electronic document may wish not to share some information relating to the history or creation of the document (or the user's employer may wish the user did not share such information outside the company).
The problem of document metadata is made more complicated by the use of smart phones, PDAs, and other mobile devices which may be used to send email, including email with attachments.
Conventional email and document editing and creation systems allow users to share electronic documents, but also allow users to share documents with sensitive metadata. Many desktop based Metadata removal products exist today including Metadata Sweeper by Litera Corp®, Out of Sight by SoftWise™, Protect by Workshare™, Metadata Assistant by Payne Consulting™ and iScrub by Esquire Innovations™, etc. None of these products offer Metadata cleaning of Documents attached to emails sent from PDA, BlackBerry™, Palm Treo™ or other handheld devices. Accordingly, a need exists to reduce the chances of unwanted or unauthorized sharing of metadata, particularly in the context of sharing electronic documents with mobile communications devices.
Accordingly, a need exists to provide an improved system of preventing unwanted or unauthorized transmission of electronic documents with metadata.
The present invention provides for a computer based system and method for removing metadata from a document attached to an email. An email sent from a mobile device is received by a gateway, email server, or other program. The email is analyzed to determine whether it has an attached document. In the event the email includes an attached document the attached document is analyzed to determine the nature of metadata in the document. If the attached document includes metadata the metadata may be cleaned, or the email and or the attachment may be analyzed to determine whether the metadata is to be removed. If the metadata is to be removed a cleaned version of the attached document is created with the metadata, or the desired portion of the metadata, removed. The attached document is replaced with the cleansed version of the attached document, and the email is sent according to the address (or addresses) included in the email (or other delivery instructions specified in either the email or at the gateway, email server or other program). A copy of the cleansed document may be retained. A person, for example a user or administrator, may be notified of the attempt to send a document with metadata, or a person may be given the option of allowing over-ride cleansing the metadata and sending the original attached document with the metadata. A log of all attachments that were cleaned of Metadata may be optionally saved for any desired duration.
The present invention is described in the context of a specific embodiment. This is done to facilitate the understanding of the features and principles of the present invention and the present invention is not limited to this embodiment. In particular, the present invention is described in the context of a computer system used to compare, edit, view and/or modify electronic documents.
At step 302 the received email is analyzed to determine whether it has an attachment. If at step 302 it is determined that the received email has an attachment, then the process proceeds to step 304. If at step 302 it is determined that the received email does not have an attachment, the process proceeds to step 303. At step 303 the email is sent according to the addressing information contained in the email. The email may be sent to an email server for sending, or if the process 300 is being performed by the email server step 303 may be the process of sending email according to the processes and protocols of the email server.
In the presently preferred embodiment, at step 304 the attached electronic document is analyzed first analyzed for document type, for example MS® OFFICE (e.g. Word), PDF, text (.txt), etc. Next, the document is examined for metadata. If at step 304 the attached electronic document contains metadata that the user or administrator has selected as “to be removed” (Metadata properties can be pre configured to remove some or all metadata), then at step 305 the metadata is removed from the attached electronic document. The metadata may be removed from the attached electronic document by invoking a metadata removal application, for example: Metadata Sweeper by Litera®, Metadata Assistant by Payne Consulting™, iScrub by Esquire™ Innovations™, Protect by Workshare™, Out of Sight by Softwise™, etc. At step 306 a cleansed version of the attached electronic document is created from the output of step 305. In the presently preferred embodiment, the cleansed version of the attached electronic document contains all of the primary data of the electronic document, but without the metadata associated with the attached electronic document. In one alternative embodiment, step 305 removes only a portion of the metadata of the original document, the portion removed which may be configurable or in accordance with a metadata removal policy. In the presently preferred embodiment, the cleansed version of the attached electronic document has all of the same attributes, such as the ability to edit and modify the document.
At step 307 the cleansed version of the attached electronic document, or cleansed electronic document, is used to replace the attached electronic document in the received email. At step 308 the received email, with the cleansed electronic document attached, is sent. In one preferred embodiment, the email is sent to an email server, which would then handle the email according to the addressing information and instructions. In alternate embodiments the email server may have already performed the necessary sending operation and the process 300 is an after-sending check to prevent unauthorized or unwanted transmission of metadata. In another alternative embodiment, the process 300 may be performed by the email server, and step 308 may include the process of sending the email performed by the email server.
At step 309 cleansed version of the attached electronic document may be saved, either on a server, in attached or networked storage, or on the end-user's electronic device.
Alternate embodiments of the present invention may alert the end user that the attached electronic document has been cleansed prior to transmitting a cleansed version. Additionally, alerts may be sent to an admin, or a log of an attempted sending of an un-cleansed document may be stored and/or reported.
While process 300 describes the intercept of all emails with attachments, alternate embodiments could determine whether to intercept an email according to one or more policies or algorithms. For example, policies may be used to determine whether to cleanse an email according to sender, recipient, type of attachment, aspects of primary data, aspects of metadata, etc.
At step 402 the received email is analyzed to determine whether it has an attachment. If at step 402 it is determined that the received email has an attachment, then the process proceeds to step 404. If at step 402 it is determined that the received email does not have an attachment, the process proceeds to step 403. At step 403 the email is sent according to the addressing information contained in the email. The email may be sent to an email server, or if the process 400 is being performed by the email server step 403 may include sending email according to the processes and protocols of the email server.
At step 404 the attached document is analyzed to determine whether to remove metadata from the attached document. A cleansing policy is compared to the information obtained from analyzing the attached document to determine whether the attached document is to be cleansed prior to sending the document. The cleaning policy may specify certain types of metadata such as document properties, specific aspects of metadata, for example specific authors, titles, etc., or any other type of metadata that may be included in a document.
If at step 404 the determination is made that the attached document is not to be cleansed, i.e., the attached document will not have metadata removed, then the process proceeds to step 409 where the email with the attached document is sent.
If at step 404 the determination is made to cleanse the attached document, then the process proceeds to step 405 where the attached electronic document is analyzed for metadata. If at step 405 the attached electronic document contains metadata, then at step 406 the pre specified (ether as a default preference, a configured preference, etc.) metadata is removed from the attached electronic document. The metadata may be removed from the attached electronic document by invoking a metadata removal application, such as the examples listed above or other such programs. At step 407 a cleansed version of the attached electronic document is created from the output of step 406. In the presently preferred embodiment, the cleansed version of the attached electronic document contains all of the primary data of the electronic document, but without the metadata associated with the attached electronic document. In the presently preferred embodiment, the cleansed version of the attached electronic document has all of the same attributes, such as the ability to edit and modify the document.
At step 408 the cleansed version of the attached electronic document, or cleansed electronic document, is used to replace the attached electronic document in the received email. At step 409 the received email, with the cleansed electronic document attached, is sent. In one preferred embodiment, the email is sent to an email server, which would then handle the email according to the addressing information and instructions. In alternate embodiments the email server may have already performed the necessary sending operation and the process 400 is an after-sending check to prevent unauthorized or unwanted transmission of metadata. In another alternative embodiment, the process 400 may be performed by the email server, and step 409 may include the process of sending the email performed by the email server.
At step 410 cleansed version of the attached electronic document may be saved, either on a server, in attached or networked storage, or on the end-user's electronic device.
Alternate embodiments of the present invention may alert the end user that the attached electronic document has been cleansed prior to transmitting a cleansed version. Additionally, alerts may be sent to an admin, or a log of an attempted sending of an un-cleansed document may be stored and/or reported. Still other embodiments may include seeking confirmation from a person (the sender, an administrator, or another) before cleaning and replacing the attached document, or before sending a cleansed version of the attached document.
While process 300 and 400 were described in the context of a single attachment of an email, multiple attachments, either of the same document type or of multiple document types, may be analyzed and cleansed prior to sending an email.
The invention has been described with reference to particular embodiments. However, it will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art that it is possible to embody the invention in specific forms other than those of the preferred embodiments described above. This may be done without departing from the spirit of the invention.
Thus, the preferred embodiment is merely illustrative and should not be considered restrictive in any way. The scope of the invention is given by the appended claims, rather than the preceding description, and all variations and equivalents which fall within the range of the claims are intended to be embraced therein.
This patent application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 11/699,750, filed Jan. 29, 2007, the disclosure of which is expressly incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3920895 | Vieri et al. | Nov 1975 | A |
3920896 | Bishop et al. | Nov 1975 | A |
5008853 | Bly et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
5129082 | Tirfing et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5146552 | Cassorla et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5204947 | Bernstein et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5321505 | Leddy | Jun 1994 | A |
5341469 | Rossberg et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5515491 | Bates et al. | May 1996 | A |
5539871 | Gibson | Jul 1996 | A |
5596700 | Darnell et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5596705 | Reimer et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5659676 | Redpath | Aug 1997 | A |
5664208 | Pavley et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5669005 | Curbow et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5671428 | Muranaga et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5694544 | Tanigawa et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5706452 | Ivanov | Jan 1998 | A |
5706502 | Foley et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5708826 | Ikeda et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5708845 | Wistendahl et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5740444 | Frid-Nielsen | Apr 1998 | A |
5752055 | Redpath et al. | May 1998 | A |
5758313 | Shah et al. | May 1998 | A |
5761419 | Schwartz et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5761499 | Sonderegger | Jun 1998 | A |
5781732 | Adams | Jul 1998 | A |
5781901 | Kuzma | Jul 1998 | A |
5787175 | Carter | Jul 1998 | A |
5799191 | Moriyasu et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5801702 | Dolan et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809512 | Kato | Sep 1998 | A |
5860073 | Ferrel et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864870 | Guck | Jan 1999 | A |
5870754 | Dimitrova et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5878421 | Ferrel et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5890177 | Moody et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5893126 | Drews et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5911776 | Guck | Jun 1999 | A |
5931906 | Fidelibus, Jr. et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5937066 | Gennaro et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5938724 | Pommier et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5944785 | Pommier et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5949413 | Lerissa et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5950214 | Rivette et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956736 | Hanson et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5958006 | Eggleston et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5978836 | Ouchi | Nov 1999 | A |
5987469 | Lewis et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6009462 | Birrell et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6014135 | Fernandes | Jan 2000 | A |
6029171 | Smiga et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6064751 | Smithies et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067551 | Brown et al. | May 2000 | A |
6088709 | Watanabe | Jul 2000 | A |
6119147 | Toomey et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6158903 | Schaeffer et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6178431 | Douglas | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6182080 | Clements | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6212534 | Lo et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6243722 | Day et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6289460 | Hajmiragha | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6317777 | Skarbo et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6334141 | Varma et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6336134 | Varma | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6343313 | Salesky et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6360236 | Khan et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363352 | Dailey et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6411989 | Anupam et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6560637 | Dunlap et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6590584 | Yamaura et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6643663 | Dabney et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6681371 | Devanbu | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6687878 | Eintracht et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6708172 | Wong et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
7251680 | DeVos | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7424513 | Winjum et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7895276 | Massand | Feb 2011 | B2 |
20010037367 | Iyer | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020049786 | Bibliowicz et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020059342 | Gupta et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020059343 | Kurishima et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020065848 | Walker et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020078088 | Kuruoglu et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020085030 | Ghani | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020107886 | Gentner et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020143691 | Ramaley et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030112273 | Hadfield et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030158855 | Farnham et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030197730 | Kakuta et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040085354 | Massand | May 2004 | A1 |
20040205653 | Hadfield et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050060375 | Ernest et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20060069733 | Antonoff et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060089931 | Giacobbe et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060167879 | Umeki et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060253482 | Zellweger et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070016613 | Foresti et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070143425 | Kieselbach et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070186157 | Walker et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20080183824 | Chen et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110125863 A1 | May 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11699750 | Jan 2007 | US |
Child | 13018509 | US |