Methods and systems for orchestrating physical and virtual switches to enforce security boundaries

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9973472
  • Patent Number
    9,973,472
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, April 2, 2015
    11 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, May 15, 2018
    8 years ago
Abstract
Some embodiments include methods comprising: writing entries in a forwarding table of a switch through an application programming interface (API) of the switch, such that first data packets from a first host and directed to a second host are forwarded by the switch to an enforcement point; receiving the first data packets; forwarding the first data packets to the enforcement point using the forwarding table; determining whether the first data packets violate a high-level security policy using a low-level rule set; configuring the forwarding table through the API such that second data packets are forwarded by the switch to the second host, in response to determining the first data packets do not violate the security policy; configuring the forwarding table through the API such that the second data packets are dropped or forwarded to a security function by the switch, in response to the determining.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present technology is generally directed to computer security, and more specifically, but not by way of limitation, to computer network security.


SUMMARY

Some embodiments include methods comprising: writing, by a policy engine, entries in a forwarding table of a switch through an application programming interface (API) of the switch, such that first data packets from a first host and directed to a second host are forwarded by the switch to an enforcement point; receiving, by the switch, the first data packets; forwarding, by the switch, the first data packets to the enforcement point using the forwarding table; determining, by the enforcement point, whether the first data packets violate a high-level security policy using a low-level rule set; configuring, by the enforcement point, the forwarding table through the API such that second data packets are forwarded by the switch to the second host, in response to determining the first data packets do not violate the security policy; configuring, by the enforcement point, the forwarding table through the API such that the second data packets are dropped or forwarded to a security function by the switch, in response to determining the first data packets violate the security policy; receiving, by the switch, second data packets; and selectively dropping or forwarding the second data packets, by the switch, in accordance with the configuration.


Various embodiments include systems comprising: a data network; a plurality of hosts communicatively coupled to the data network; a switch communicatively coupled to the data network, including a forwarding table and an application programming interface (API); an enforcement point communicatively coupled to the data network; and a policy engine communicatively coupled to the data network, wherein the system performs a method comprising: writing, by the policy engine, entries in the forwarding table of the switch through the application programming interface (API), such that first data packets from a first host and directed to a second host are forwarded by the switch to the enforcement point; receiving, by the switch, the first data packets; forwarding, by the switch, the first data packets to the enforcement point using the forwarding table; determining, by the enforcement point, whether the first data packets violate a high-level security policy using a low-level rule set; configuring, by the enforcement point, the forwarding table through the API such that second data packets are forwarded by the switch to the second host, in response to determining the first data packets do not violate the security policy; configuring, by the enforcement point, the forwarding table through the API such that the second data packets are dropped or forwarded to a security function by the switch, in response to determining the first data packets violate the security policy; receiving, by the switch, second data packets; and selectively dropping or forwarding the second data packets, by the switch, in accordance with the configuration.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a simplified block diagram illustrating a system according to some embodiments.



FIG. 2 is a simplified block diagram illustrating another system in accordance with some embodiments.



FIG. 3 is a simplified flowchart of an example method of the present technology according to various embodiments.



FIG. 4 illustrates an example computer system in accordance with various embodiments.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

An exemplary system according to the present technology operates when new connections are being made, by pushing the decision regarding the connection to a higher level for inspection, and evaluating the new connections for allowance. These new connections are implemented by the switch in each server/rack. A switch has a forwarding table, which implements a rule. In an exemplary system, all initial traffic between nodes that have not communicated before is to not communicate without first forwarding to distributed security processor. This is the default rule and provides the basic level of security, since the distributed security processor has to approve all connections.


An exemplary system may use an enforcement point (EP) operating in the switch or associated with the switch, which sends communications to the distributed security processor. This communication may be via a tunneling system, for example, a Virtual Extensible Local Area Network (VXLAN). The distributed security processor checks the policy, validates expected protocol behavior, and after approving the communication, forwards the first several packets to the intended recipient node. Next, the distributed security processor programs the switch to allow future communications from the first port to the second port (also referred to or alternatively may be: a node, a communication node, a virtual machine, a container, and a host). Additionally, the sender and recipient in this and all other examples may be on the same server controlled by the same switch, different servers controlled by the same switch, or may be on different servers controlled by different switches.


In an exemplary system according to the present technology, the initial forwarding table includes a default routing rule to first send all communications to the distributed security processor, which is later rewritten to allow communications directly controlled by the switch without intervention by the distributed security processor. Certain information in a packet header will prompt a re-forwarding to the distributed security processor. For example, if a Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) header includes information relating to setting up and/or tearing down a connection, then the distributed security processor is consulted to review the communication, and distributed security processor approval is required. For example, a TCP header including SYN, FIN, and/or RST, relating to the setting up or tearing down of connections, might require the distributed security processor approval. Actions of the distributed security processor may be logged to allow review and enforcement, as well as policy revision.



FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating system 100 according to an example embodiment. System 100 may be a cloud server environment, which may be a public cloud, private cloud, an intranet, or any other appropriate network. System 100 includes a policy engine 190, which may enable an Information Technology (IT) or security administrator to implement security policies in system 100. These policies may include, for example, prohibitions against high value assets from communicating with high risk assets, or production machines from communicating with test/development machines. These policies may also include failover policies, or any other appropriate prohibition, limitation or policy.


Policy engine 190 may communicate bilaterally with distributed security processor 180, which may operate to implement the policies. Additionally, policy engine 190 may communicate bilaterally with switch 125 via Application Programming Interface (API) 135 associated with switch 125 to implement the policies. API 135 includes a set of routines, protocols, and/or tools for building software applications for switch 125. API 135 may express a software component in terms of its operations, inputs, outputs, and underlying types. Alternatively or additionally, API 135 may be a software development kit (SDK or “devkit”), which includes a set of software development tools that allows the creation of applications for switch 125. Distributed security processor 180 may communicate computer executable instructions to API 135. System 100 may include many assets 140-145, with a similar or different structure from each other. Each of assets 140-145 may be coupled to some or all of the other of assets 140-145 in system 100 via network 110. At least some of assets 140-145 may also be coupled via network 110 to the internet, an intranet, or any other appropriate network.


In some embodiments, assets 140-145 are at least one of a virtual machine (VM), physical host, workload, server, cloud-based virtual machine, client, enforcement target, and the like. Each of assets 140-145 is communicatively coupled with switch 125, which may operate to control communications into and out of assets 140-145, and between assets 140-145. For example, one or more of assets 140-145 include a VM (e.g. asset 143 may is referenced as VM 143). The virtual machines may operate as part of a hypervisor. Alternatively, different virtual machine systems may be used, for example, containers.


In operation, policy engine 190 communicates with API 135, to program forwarding table 160 of switch 125. The initial programming is the default programming, and indicates to forward any communication which has not previously been approved by distributed security processor 180 (which is all communications in the initial default situation) to distributed security processor 180. Next, asset 140 may attempt to communicate, by communication 150, to virtual machine (VM) 143. Switch 125 checks forwarding table 160 prior to allowing the communication, and since no approval indication exists there, switch 125 forwards the packets to distributed security processor 180 via tunnel 170. Tunnel 170 may be through a fabric of the data center of system 100, and may be a VXLAN communication path.


In some embodiments, policy engine 190 communicates with API 135, to program forwarding table 160 of switch 125. The initial programming is the default programming, and indicates to forward communication requiring processing by distributed security processor 180 (which is all communications in the initial default situation) to distributed security processor 180. Next, asset 140 may attempt to communicate, by communication 150, to virtual machine (VM) 143 using a protocol defined within the security policy applied to switch 125. Switch 125 checks forwarding table 160 prior to allowing the communication, and since no approval indication exists there, switch 125 forwards the packets to distributed security processor 180 via tunnel 170. Tunnel 170 may be through a fabric of the data center of system 100, and may be a VXLAN communication path. In this manner, it is possible for an administrator to ‘tune’ the traffic types requiring security processing within the network.


In various embodiments, the next step is for distributed security processor 180 to perform security checks on the communication and the sender and recipient nodes against policy provided by policy engine 190. The following step is, if the connection is approved, to forward the communication to VM 143, and to program a forwarding entry in forwarding table 160 of switch 125 for communications between asset 140 and asset 143. In this manner, subsequent communications between asset 140 and asset 143 may be handled by switch 125 without the assistance of distributed security processor 180, thereby optimizing communication and reducing resource load. However, some trigger events will cause the forwarding table to revert to a default position for a particular routing instruction, or for all routing instructions. The trigger event is also referred to herein as a condition, and may relate to a packet header, and/or changing of a connection between nodes.


If distributed security processor 180 performs a security check on the initial communication and the sender and recipient nodes against policy, and determines that the communication is prohibited or suspect in any manner, distributed security processor 180 may redirect the communication to a honeypot, redirect the communication to a tarpit, drop the packets, and may forward the packets without writing to forwarding table 160, so that future packets are also routed to distributed security processor 180, thereby providing inspection, logging, and security information to an IT administrator or security expert.


In an exemplary embodiment illustrated in FIG. 2, a physical programmable switch—for example, a merchant silicon (or custom ASIC) networking switch—for low-level packet forwarding, may be utilized. In this exemplary embodiment, the forwarding table is initially blank, and as in the previously described exemplary embodiment illustrated in FIG. 1, the nodes do not need to be on the same switch.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating system 200 according to an example embodiment. System 200 may be a cloud server environment, which may be a public cloud, private cloud, an intranet, or any other appropriate network. System 200 includes policy engine 190, which may enable an IT or security administrator to implement security policies in system 200. Policy engine 190 may communicate bilaterally with distributed security processor 180, which may operate to implement the policies. Additionally, policy engine 190 may communicate bilaterally with a switch 225.


Distributed security processor 180 may communicate computer executable instructions to API 235. System 200 may include assets 240-245, with a similar or different structure from each other. At least some of assets 240-245 may be coupled to some or all of the other of assets 240-245 in system 200 via network 110. At least some of assets 240-245 may also be coupled via network 110 to the internet, an intranet, or any other appropriate network.


Each of assets 240-245 is communicatively coupled to switch 225, which may operate to control communications into and out of assets 240-245, and between assets 240-245. At least some of assets 240-245 may include one or more virtual machines. The virtual machines may operate as part of a hypervisor. Alternatively, different virtual machine systems may be used, for example containers. Additionally, at least one of assets 240-245 may include honeypot and/or tarpit virtual machines. A honeypot and a tarpit may operate as described above and herein.


Switch 225 may include Application Programming Interface (API) 235 to implement the policies by programming forwarding table 260. API 235 includes a set of routines, protocols, and/or tools for building software applications for switch 225. API 235 may express a software component in terms of its operations, inputs, outputs, and underlying types. Alternatively or additionally, API 235 may be a software development kit (SDK or “devkit”), which includes a set of software development tools that allows the creation of applications for switch 225. Switch 225 may also include enforcement point 280, which communicates bilaterally through the fabric of system 200 with distributed security processor 180.


In operation, policy engine 190 communicates to switch 225, to program forwarding table 260 of switch 225. The initial programming is the default programming, and indicates to forward any communication which has not previously been approved by distributed security processor 180 (which is all communications in the initial default situation) to distributed security processor 180. Next, asset 240 may attempt to communicate, by communication 150, to asset 243. Switch 225 checks forwarding table 260 prior to allowing the communication, and since no approval indication exists there, switch 225 forwards the packets to enforcement point 280 via a tunnel 270. Enforcement point 280 also exists virtually on switch 225.


In various embodiments, the next step is for enforcement point 280 to perform first security checks on the communication and the sender and recipient nodes against policy provided by distributed security processor 180 and policy engine 190. The following step is, if the connection is approved, to forward the communication to asset 243, and program via API 235 a forwarding entry in forwarding table 260 of switch 225 for communications between asset 243 and asset 243. In this manner, subsequent communications between asset 240 and asset 243 may be handled by switch 225 without the assistance of enforcement point 280, thereby optimizing communication and reducing resource load. However, some trigger events will cause the forwarding table to revert to a default position for a particular routing instruction, or for all routing instructions. The trigger event is also referred to herein as a condition, and may relate to a packet header, and/or changing of a connection between nodes.


If enforcement point 280 performs security checks on the initial communication and the sender and recipient nodes against policy and determines that the communication is prohibited or suspect in any manner, or even if the decision requires additional resources or a second level of security, enforcement point 280 may redirect the communication to distributed security processor 180 over the tunnel 270 for a further determination on the acceptability of the communication between asset 240 and asset 243.


Distributed security processor 180 performs these second, higher level security checks on the communication and the sender and recipient nodes against policy provided by policy engine 190. Additionally, distributed security processor 180 may check the communication to ensure that protocol sessions are set up according to documented standards. This advantageously reduces the aperture for protocol attacks and ensures protocol relationships (e.g., above TCP such as between OSI layers 5-7) are established correctly. If distributed security processor 180 performs security checks on the initial communication and the sender and recipient nodes against policy and determines if the communication is prohibited or suspect in any manner, then distributed security processor 180 may redirect the communication to a honeypot, redirect the communication to a tarpit, may drop the packets, may forward the packets without writing to forwarding table 260, so that future packets are also routed to distributed security processor 180, thereby providing inspection, logging, and security information to an IT administrator or security expert.


If distributed security processor 180 performs these second, higher level security checks on the communication and the sender and recipient nodes and approves the connection, then distributed security processor 180 may forward the communication to asset 243, either directly, or by instructing enforcement point 280 to forward the communication to asset 243. Additionally, distributed security processor 180 may direct enforcement point 280 to program, via API 235, the forwarding entry in forwarding table 260 of switch 225 for communications between asset 240 and asset 243. In this manner, subsequent communications between asset 240 and asset 243 may be handled by switch 225 without the assistance of enforcement point 280, thereby optimizing communication and reducing resource load. In still another alternative, distributed security processor 180 may authorize enforcement point 280 to handle communications of this type for new, future connections, or even to not program forwarding table 260 for this connection, so that new, future communications are monitored at an intermediate level of security.


As discussed previously, some trigger events will cause the forwarding table to revert to a default position for a particular routing instruction, or for all routing instructions. The trigger event is also referred to herein as a condition, and may relate to a packet header, and/or changing of a connection between nodes.


In exemplary embodiments of the present technology, the initiation of communications between nodes is an event requiring higher scrutiny, and this policy is implemented by having the default forwarding table include no entry. The communication is forwarded to an EP directly, to an EPI directly, or to an EP via an EPI, across a tunnel or a fabric of a network. The EP and/or EPI checks policy, and may determine to allow the communication, in which case an EPI may be programmed, and the forwarding table is updated to enable the communication between the nodes. This policy is applied to future communications, unless a trigger condition is met. A distinction between the model of system 100 (FIG. 1) and the model of system 200 (FIG. 2) is that small changes, for example, flag changes, may be handled by an EPI without involving the EP, thus improving efficiency. In all cases, logging may be sent across the fabric to the EP and/or the policy engine, and/or another user interface or reporting module.


The switches described above, including switch 125 and switch 225, may be in the physical environment. In alternative exemplary embodiments, the switch may be a virtual switch.


Various exemplary embodiments of the present invention may enable the management of table resources on a switch for optimization. For example, if a switch is running out of free space, then connections can be aggregated in the forwarding table, or connections may be pushed to other resources for confirmation.


In some embodiments, switch 225 is a hardware switch and at least one of assets 240-245 is a physical host. In various embodiments, switch 225 is a virtual switch and at least one of assets 240-245 is a virtual machine.



FIG. 3 is a flowchart of an example method 300 for enforcing security policies for communicating between nodes of a switched network. Optional steps are shown with dashed lines. The method 300 of FIG. 3 includes optional operation 305, which indicates to receive packets being communicated from a first node of the switched network to a second node of the switched network. From optional operation 305, the method proceeds to operation 310, which indicates to evaluate a policy to determine a forwarding decision for packets being communicated from the first node to the second node. From operation 310, the method proceeds to operation 315, which indicates to program a rewritable forwarding table of a switch based on the forwarding decision. From operation 315, the method proceeds to optional operation 320, which indicates to forward the packets from the first node to the second node. This step is optional since the prior non-optional steps 310 and 315 may be initiated at a start-up or other appropriate time, for instance a policy update, without the communication of packets. From optional operation 320, the method proceeds to operation 325, which indicates to enable future packets being communicated from the first node to the second node to be forwarded to the second node without the evaluating of the policy to determine the forwarding decision. In still further variations of the method, the policy may prohibit the communication being sought between the first and second nodes, in which case the communication may be dropped, logged, honey-potted, tarpitted, or all of the above.



FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary computer system 400 that may be used to implement some embodiments of the present disclosure. The computer system 400 of FIG. 4 may be implemented in the contexts of the likes of computing systems, networks, servers, or combinations thereof. The computer system 400 of FIG. 4 includes one or more processor unit(s) 410 and main memory 420. Main memory 420 stores, in part, instructions and data for execution by processor unit(s) 410. Main memory 420 stores the executable code when in operation, in this example. The computer system 400 of FIG. 4 further includes a mass data storage 430, portable storage device 440, output devices 450, user input devices 460, a graphics display system 470, and peripheral devices 480.


The components shown in FIG. 4 are depicted as being connected via a single bus 490. The components may be connected through one or more data transport means. Processor unit(s) 410 and main memory 420 are connected via a local microprocessor bus, and the mass data storage 430, peripheral devices 480, portable storage device 440, and graphics display system 470 are connected via one or more input/output (I/O) buses.


Mass data storage 430, which can be implemented with a magnetic disk drive, solid state drive, or an optical disk drive, is a non-volatile storage device for storing data and instructions for use by processor unit(s) 410. Mass data storage 430 stores the system software for implementing embodiments of the present disclosure for purposes of loading that software into main memory 420.


Portable storage device 440 operates in conjunction with a portable non-volatile storage medium, such as a flash drive, floppy disk, compact disk, digital video disc, or Universal Serial Bus (USB) storage device, to input and output data and code to and from the computer system 400 of FIG. 4. The system software for implementing embodiments of the present disclosure is stored on such a portable medium and input to the computer system 400 via the portable storage device 440.


User input devices 460 can provide a portion of a user interface. User input devices 460 may include one or more microphones, an alphanumeric keypad, such as a keyboard, for inputting alphanumeric and other information, or a pointing device, such as a mouse, a trackball, stylus, or cursor direction keys. User input devices 460 can also include a touchscreen. Additionally, the computer system 400 as shown in FIG. 4 includes output devices 450. Suitable output devices 450 include speakers, printers, network interfaces, and monitors.


Graphics display system 470 includes a liquid crystal display (LCD) or other suitable display device. Graphics display system 470 is configurable to receive textual and graphical information and processes the information for output to the display device.


Peripheral devices 480 may include any type of computer support device that adds additional functionality to the computer system 400.


The components provided in the computer system 400 of FIG. 4 are those typically found in computer systems that may be suitable for use with embodiments of the present disclosure and are intended to represent a broad category of such computer components that are well known in the art. Thus, the computer system 400 of FIG. 4 can be a personal computer (PC), hand held computer system, telephone, mobile computer system, workstation, tablet, phablet, mobile phone, server, minicomputer, mainframe computer, wearable, or any other computer system. The computer may also include different bus configurations, networked platforms, multi-processor platforms, and the like. Various operating systems may be used including UNIX, LINUX, WINDOWS, MAC OS, PALM OS, QNX ANDROID, IOS, CHROME, TIZEN, and other suitable operating systems.


The processing for various embodiments may be implemented in software that is cloud-based. In some embodiments, the computer system 400 is implemented as a cloud-based computing environment, such as a virtual machine operating within a computing cloud. In other embodiments, the computer system 400 may itself include a cloud-based computing environment, where the functionalities of the computer system 400 are executed in a distributed fashion. Thus, the computer system 400, when configured as a computing cloud, may include pluralities of computing devices in various forms, as will be described in greater detail below.


In general, a cloud-based computing environment is a resource that typically combines the computational power of a large grouping of processors (such as within web servers) and/or that combines the storage capacity of a large grouping of computer memories or storage devices. Systems that provide cloud-based resources may be utilized exclusively by their owners or such systems may be accessible to outside users who deploy applications within the computing infrastructure to obtain the benefit of large computational or storage resources.


The cloud may be formed, for example, by a network of web servers that include a plurality of computing devices, such as the computer system 400, with each server (or at least a plurality thereof) providing processor and/or storage resources. These servers may manage workloads provided by multiple users (e.g., cloud resource customers or other users). Typically, each user places workload demands upon the cloud that vary in real-time, sometimes dramatically. The nature and extent of these variations typically depends on the type of business associated with the user.


The present technology is described above with reference to example embodiments. Therefore, other variations upon the example embodiments are intended to be covered by the present disclosure.

Claims
  • 1. A method comprising: writing, by a policy engine, entries in a forwarding table of a switch through an application programming interface (API) of the switch, such that first data packets from a first host and directed to a second host are forwarded by the switch to an enforcement point;receiving, by the switch, the first data packets;forwarding, by the switch, the first data packets to the enforcement point using the forwarding table;determining, by the enforcement point, whether the first data packets violate a high-level security policy using a low-level rule set;configuring, by the enforcement point, the forwarding table through the API such that second data packets are forwarded by the switch to the second host, in response to determining the first data packets do not violate the security policy;configuring, by the enforcement point, the forwarding table through the API such that the second data packets are dropped or forwarded to a security function by the switch, in response to determining the first data packets violate the security policy;receiving, by the switch, the second data packets; andselectively dropping or forwarding the second data packets, by the switch, in accordance with the configuration.
  • 2. The method of claim 1 further comprising: receiving, by the enforcement point, a re-compiled rule set from a distributed security processor;receiving, by the enforcement point, a third data packet;identifying, by the enforcement point, a trigger in the third data packet, the trigger being at least one of a: received Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) header, flag, and timer-based trigger; andwriting, by the enforcement point, entries in the forwarding table through the API, such that fourth data packets from the first host and directed to the second host are forwarded by the switch to the enforcement point, in response to identifying the trigger.
  • 3. The method of claim 2 further comprising: receiving, by the switch, the fourth data packets;forwarding, by the switch, the fourth data packets to the enforcement point using the forwarding table; anddetermining, by the enforcement point, whether the fourth data packets violate the re-compiled rule set or pre-configured protocol behavior requirements.
  • 4. The method of claim 1 wherein at least one of the writing and the configuring of the forwarding table is performed using a software development kit (SDK).
  • 5. The method of claim 1 wherein the security function is at least one of a: honeypot, tarpit, and intrusion detection system.
  • 6. The method of claim 1 wherein at least one of the first host and the second host are a physical host and the switch is a physical switch.
  • 7. The method of claim 1 wherein at least one of the first host and the second host are a virtual machine and the switch is a virtual switch.
US Referenced Citations (221)
Number Name Date Kind
6253321 Nikander et al. Jun 2001 B1
6484261 Wiegel Nov 2002 B1
6578076 Putzolu Jun 2003 B1
6765864 Natarajan et al. Jul 2004 B1
6970459 Meier Nov 2005 B1
6983325 Watson et al. Jan 2006 B1
6992985 Das Jan 2006 B1
7028179 Anderson et al. Apr 2006 B2
7058712 Vasko et al. Jun 2006 B1
7062566 Amara et al. Jun 2006 B2
7068598 Bryson et al. Jun 2006 B1
7373524 Motsinger et al. May 2008 B2
7397794 Lacroute et al. Jul 2008 B1
7464407 Nakae et al. Dec 2008 B2
7519062 Kloth et al. Apr 2009 B1
7542455 Grayson et al. Jun 2009 B2
7620986 Jagannathan et al. Nov 2009 B1
7694181 Noller et al. Apr 2010 B2
7742414 Iannaccone et al. Jun 2010 B1
7774837 McAlister Aug 2010 B2
7849495 Huang et al. Dec 2010 B1
7900240 Terzis et al. Mar 2011 B2
7904454 Raab Mar 2011 B2
7949677 Croft et al. May 2011 B2
7954150 Croft et al. May 2011 B2
7986938 Meenan et al. Jul 2011 B1
7996255 Shenoy et al. Aug 2011 B1
8051460 Lum et al. Nov 2011 B2
8112304 Scates Feb 2012 B2
8259571 Raphel et al. Sep 2012 B1
8274912 Wray et al. Sep 2012 B2
8296459 Brandwine et al. Oct 2012 B1
8307422 Varadhan et al. Nov 2012 B2
8321862 Swamy et al. Nov 2012 B2
8353021 Satish et al. Jan 2013 B1
8369333 Hao et al. Feb 2013 B2
8396986 Kanada et al. Mar 2013 B2
8490153 Bassett et al. Jul 2013 B2
8494000 Nadkarni et al. Jul 2013 B1
8565118 Shukla et al. Oct 2013 B2
8612744 Shieh Dec 2013 B2
8661434 Liang et al. Feb 2014 B1
8688491 Shenoy et al. Apr 2014 B1
8726343 Borzycki et al. May 2014 B1
8798055 An Aug 2014 B1
8813169 Shieh et al. Aug 2014 B2
8813236 Saha et al. Aug 2014 B1
8935457 Feng et al. Jan 2015 B2
8938782 Sawhney et al. Jan 2015 B2
8955093 Shieh et al. Feb 2015 B2
8984114 Shieh et al. Mar 2015 B2
8990371 Kalyanaraman et al. Mar 2015 B2
9361089 Bradfield et al. Jun 2016 B2
9380027 Lian et al. Jun 2016 B1
9521115 Woolward Dec 2016 B1
9609083 Shieh Mar 2017 B2
9621595 Lian et al. Apr 2017 B2
9680852 Wager et al. Jun 2017 B1
20020031103 Wiedeman et al. Mar 2002 A1
20030014665 Anderson et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030055950 Cranor et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030123481 Neale et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030135625 Fontes et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030177389 Albert et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030236985 Ruuth Dec 2003 A1
20040062204 Bearden et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040093513 Cantrell et al. May 2004 A1
20040095897 Vafaei May 2004 A1
20040172618 Marvin Sep 2004 A1
20040214576 Myers et al. Oct 2004 A1
20050021943 Ikudome et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050033989 Poletto et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050060573 D'Souza Mar 2005 A1
20050114288 Dettinger et al. May 2005 A1
20050114829 Robin et al. May 2005 A1
20050190758 Gai et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050201343 Sivalingham et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050246241 Irizarry, Jr. et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050283823 Okajo et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060050696 Shah et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060137009 Chesla Jun 2006 A1
20060150250 Lee et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060177063 Conway et al. Aug 2006 A1
20070016945 Bassett et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070019621 Perry et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070022090 Graham Jan 2007 A1
20070064617 Reves Mar 2007 A1
20070079308 Chiaramonte et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070168971 Royzen et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070192861 Varghese et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070192863 Kapoor et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070239987 Hoole et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070271612 Fang et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070277222 Pouliot Nov 2007 A1
20080016550 McAlister Jan 2008 A1
20080083011 McAlister et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080086772 Chesla Apr 2008 A1
20080155239 Chowdhury et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080163207 Reumann et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080222375 Kotsovinos et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080229382 Vitalos Sep 2008 A1
20080239961 Hilerio et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080301770 Kinder Dec 2008 A1
20080307110 Wainner et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090077621 Lang et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090083445 Ganga Mar 2009 A1
20090103524 Mantripragada et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090138316 Weller et al. May 2009 A1
20090165078 Samudrala et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090182835 Aviles et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090190585 Allen et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090228966 Parfene et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090249470 Litvin et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090260051 Igakura Oct 2009 A1
20090268667 Gandham et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090328187 Meisel Dec 2009 A1
20100043068 Varadhan et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100064341 Aldera Mar 2010 A1
20100071025 Devine et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100088738 Bimbach Apr 2010 A1
20100095367 Narayanaswamy Apr 2010 A1
20100100616 Bryson et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100104094 Takashima Apr 2010 A1
20100125900 Dennerline et al. May 2010 A1
20100132031 Zheng May 2010 A1
20100189110 Kambhampati et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100191863 Wing Jul 2010 A1
20100192225 Ma et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100199349 Ellis Aug 2010 A1
20100208699 Lee et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100228962 Simon Sep 2010 A1
20100235880 Chen et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100235902 Guo et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100274970 Treuhaft et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100281533 Mao et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100281539 Burns et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100333165 Basak et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110003580 Belrose et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110010515 Ranade Jan 2011 A1
20110013776 McAlister Jan 2011 A1
20110069710 Naven et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110072486 Hadar et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110075667 Li et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110113472 Fung et al. May 2011 A1
20110138384 Bozek et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110138441 Neystadt et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110184993 Chawla et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110225624 Sawhney et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110249679 Lin et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110261722 Awano Oct 2011 A1
20110263238 Riley et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110299533 Yu et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120017258 Suzuki Jan 2012 A1
20120036567 Senese et al. Feb 2012 A1
20120113989 Akiyoshi May 2012 A1
20120130936 Brown et al. May 2012 A1
20120131685 Broch et al. May 2012 A1
20120185913 Martinez et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120207174 Shieh Aug 2012 A1
20120216273 Rolette et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120254980 Takahashi Oct 2012 A1
20120287931 Kidambi et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120311144 Akelbein et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120311575 Song Dec 2012 A1
20120324567 Couto et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130019277 Chang et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130081142 McDougal et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130086383 Galvao de Andrade et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130086399 Tychon et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130097692 Cooper et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130111542 Shieh May 2013 A1
20130117836 Shieh May 2013 A1
20130151680 Salinas et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130152187 Strebe et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130166490 Elkins et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130166720 Takashima et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130219384 Srinivasan et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130223226 Narayanan et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130250956 Sun et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130254871 Sun et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130263245 Sun et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130275592 Xu et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130276092 Sun et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130291088 Shieh et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130318617 Chaturvedi et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130343396 Yamashita et al. Dec 2013 A1
20140007181 Sarin et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140022894 Oikawa et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140137240 Smith et al. May 2014 A1
20140153577 Janakiraman et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140157352 Paek et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140282027 Gao et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140282518 Banerjee Sep 2014 A1
20140283030 Moore et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140298469 Marion et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140310765 Stuntebeck et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140344435 Mortimore, Jr. et al. Nov 2014 A1
20150047046 Pavlyushchik Feb 2015 A1
20150124606 Alvarez et al. May 2015 A1
20150163088 Anschutz Jun 2015 A1
20150186296 Guidry Jul 2015 A1
20150229641 Sun et al. Aug 2015 A1
20150229656 Shieh Aug 2015 A1
20150249676 Koyanagi et al. Sep 2015 A1
20150269383 Lang et al. Sep 2015 A1
20160191545 Nanda et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160203331 Khan et al. Jul 2016 A1
20160269442 Shieh Sep 2016 A1
20160294875 Lian et al. Oct 2016 A1
20160323245 Shieh et al. Nov 2016 A1
20170063795 Lian et al. Mar 2017 A1
20170134422 Shieh et al. May 2017 A1
20170168864 Ross et al. Jun 2017 A1
20170180421 Shieh et al. Jun 2017 A1
20170195454 Shieh Jul 2017 A1
20170208100 Lian et al. Jul 2017 A1
20170223033 Wager et al. Aug 2017 A1
20170223038 Wager et al. Aug 2017 A1
20170374032 Woolward et al. Dec 2017 A1
20170374101 Woolward Dec 2017 A1
20180005296 Eades et al. Jan 2018 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (13)
Number Date Country
201642616 Dec 2016 TW
201642617 Dec 2016 TW
201642618 Dec 2016 TW
201703483 Jan 2017 TW
201703485 Jan 2017 TW
WO2002098100 Dec 2002 WO
WO2011012165 Feb 2011 WO
WO2016148865 Sep 2016 WO
WO2016160523 Oct 2016 WO
WO2016160533 Oct 2016 WO
WO2016160595 Oct 2016 WO
WO2016160599 Oct 2016 WO
WO2017100365 Jun 2017 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (20)
Entry
Non-Final Office Action, dated Jul. 1, 2015, U.S. Appl. No. 14/673,640, filed Mar. 30, 2015.
Non-Final Office Action, dated Jul. 7, 2015, U.S. Appl. No. 14/673,679, filed Mar. 30, 2015.
Non-Final Office Action, dated Jul. 31, 2015, U.S. Appl. No. 14/677,755, filed Apr. 2, 2015.
Specification, U.S. Appl. No. 14/673,679, filed Mar. 30, 2015.
Specification, U.S. Appl. No. 14/673,640, filed Mar. 30, 2015.
Specification, U.S. Appl. No. 14/657,282, filed Mar. 13, 2015.
Specification, U.S. Appl. No. 14/839,649, filed Aug. 28, 2015.
Specification, U.S. Appl. No. 14/839,699, filed Aug. 28, 2015.
Specification, U.S. Appl. No. 14/657,210, filed Mar. 13, 2015.
International Search Report dated May 3, 2016 in Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2016/024300, filed Mar. 25, 2016.
International Search Report dated May 3, 2016 in Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2016/024053 filed Mar. 24, 2016.
International Search Report dated May 6, 2016 in Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2016/019643 filed Feb. 25, 2016.
Dubrawsky, Ido, “Firewall Evolution—Deep Packet Inspection,” Symantec, Created Jul. 28, 2003; Updated Nov. 2, 2010, symantec.com/connect/articles/firewall-evolution-deep-packet-inspection.
International Search Report dated Jun. 20, 2016 in Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2016/024310 filed Mar. 25, 2016, pp. 1-9.
International Search Report dated May 3, 2016 in Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2016/024116 filed Mar. 24, 2016.
“Feature Handbook: NetBrain® Enterprise Edition 6.1” NetBrain Technologies, Inc., Feb. 25, 2016, 48 pages.
Arendt, Dustin L. et al., “Ocelot: User-Centered Design of a Decision Support Visualization for Network Quarantine”, IEEE Symposium on Visualization for Cyber Security (VIZSEC), Oct. 25, 2015, 8 pages.
“International Search Report” and “Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority,” Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2016/065451, dated Jan. 12, 2017, 20 pages.
Maniar, Neeta, “Centralized Tracking and Risk Analysis of 3rd Party Firewall Connections,” SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room, Mar. 11, 2005, 20 pages.
Hu, Hongxin et al., “Detecting and Resolving Firewall Policy Anomalies,” IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, vol. 9, No. 3, May/Jun. 2012, pp. 318-331.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20160294774 A1 Oct 2016 US