The present invention relates generally to security in connection with token based access to a multi-user processing environment defined by a server and, more particularly, to a method and system for providing verification of a location factor associated with the token by the server.
As computer systems and associated networks become more ubiquitous and complex, as the sensitivity of the content of the systems and network increases, and as the conventional user access paradigms changes for organizations of all types and sizes, from main offices or workplaces having dedicated IT systems to decentralized networks of IT servers and the like, system security rapidly becomes a major concern. Where secure access is required for individuals in a multi-user environment, security and identity verification and management become more important in maintaining system and network security and data integrity.
In view of these concerns, conventional computer systems and associated networks include a server that acts as a certificate authority for authenticating users. Particularly, the server issues certificates to the users after successful performance of an authentication process, which involves the user presenting a token, such as universal serial bus (USB) tokens, smartcards or the like, to the server via a client device such as a host computer. The token is generally accepted as an integral part of a two-factor security paradigm in which possession of the token is the first factor and authentication of the holder of the token is the second factor. The token includes a key that is used by the token to generate a digital signature, which is presented to the server. The server acting as the certificate authority issues a certificate to the token if the digital signature is valid.
Problems can arise when, for example, a user of a token inadvertently or even intentionally reveals the token's key to a third party such as a process running in the multi-user processing environment including unauthorized or malicious processes. These processes can than generate a digital signature based upon the key obtained from the token, thereby deceiving the server acting as the certificate authority into improperly issuing a certificate. Accordingly, the certificate authority may not be able to obtain a level of trust needed to issue higher levels of privileges to a particular token because the certificate authority is unable to verify that the digital signature was generated by the token rather than by an unauthorized or malicious process that has gained access to the key.
Therefore it would be desirable for a solution to facilitate a server to verify that a digital signature was actually generated at a specific token rather than by an unauthorized or malicious process in order to give higher levels of privileges to the specific token. In addition, factors such as scalability, standards compliance, regulatory compliance, security administration and the like must also be taken into consideration.
While a general background including problems in the art are described hereinabove, with occasional reference to related art or general concepts associated with the present invention, the above description is not intended to be limiting since the primary features of the present invention will be set forth in the description which follows. Some aspects of the present invention not specifically described herein may become obvious after a review of the attendant description, or may be learned by practice of the invention. Accordingly, it is to be understood that both the foregoing general description and the following detailed description are exemplary and explanatory only in nature and are not restrictive of the scope or applicability of the present invention.
The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate various exemplary embodiments of the invention and together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention. In the figures:
Accordingly, one or more embodiments relate generally to a computer system, server, token, method and/or computer-readable medium for verifying a location factor associated with the token. The token receives an encrypted challenge from a server. The encrypted challenge is encrypted by a key commonly shared by the server and the token. The token then decrypts the encrypted challenge by the commonly shared key and manipulates the challenge by a predetermined elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) procedure to obtain a manipulated challenge. The token returns a signed manipulated challenge and an ECC public key to the server as a reply to the challenge. The server receives the signed manipulated challenge and verifies that the signed manipulated challenge was actually generated at the token based upon the ECC public key.
Other embodiments also provide a server that includes a processor configured to receive the signed manipulated challenge and ECC public key from the token. The processor verifies that the signed manipulated challenge was generated at the token based upon the ECC public key.
Other embodiments also provide a token, and/or computer-readable medium for facilitating verification of a location factor associated with the token by the server. The token includes a processor configured to manipulate the challenge by the predetermined ECC procedure to obtain a manipulated challenge and returns the manipulated challenge to the server as a reply to the challenge for verification at the server.
In overview, the present disclosure concerns secure computer systems such as may be operated in connection with certifying and/or authenticating identifiers associated with users and/or computers and/or tokens. Such secure systems may be utilized in connection with other services such as communications, secured access, and/or telecommunications. Such secure systems can include computer systems which support the use of tokens to access independent data objects representing certificates, keys, identifiers, and related data, for example by providing end-user interfaces, managing keys, and providing authentication. More particularly, various inventive concepts and principles are embodied in systems, devices, and methods therein for verifying a location factor of a token.
The instant disclosure is provided to further explain in an enabling fashion the best modes of performing one or more embodiments of the present invention. The disclosure is further offered to enhance an understanding and appreciation for the inventive principles and advantages thereof, rather than to limit in any manner the invention. The invention is defined solely by the appended claims including any amendments made during the pendency of this application and all equivalents of those claims as issued.
It is further understood that the use of relational terms such as first and second, and the like, if any, are used solely to distinguish one from another entity, item, or action without necessarily requiring or implying any actual such relationship or order between such entities, items or actions. It is noted that some embodiments may include a plurality of processes or steps, which can be performed in any order, unless expressly and necessarily limited to a particular order; i.e., processes or steps that are not so limited may be performed in any order.
Much of the inventive functionality and many of the inventive principles when implemented, are best supported with or in software or integrated circuits (ICs), such as a digital signal processor and software therefore, and/or application specific ICs. It is expected that one of ordinary skill, notwithstanding possibly significant effort and many design choices motivated by, for example, available time, current technology, and economic considerations, when guided by the concepts and principles disclosed herein will be readily capable of generating such software instructions or ICs with minimal experimentation. Therefore, in the interest of brevity and minimization of any risk of obscuring the principles and concepts according to the present invention, further discussion of such software and ICs, if any, will be limited to the essentials with respect to the principles and concepts used by the exemplary embodiments.
As further discussed herein below, various inventive principles and combinations thereof are advantageously employed to verify a location factor of a token.
Further in accordance with exemplary embodiments, a server acting as a certificate authority, can verify that a digital signature was actually generated at a token before issuing a certificate for the token.
The phrase “data objects” as used herein refers to information representing certificates, private and public keys, and related data. This information is conventionally stored somewhere on the token and the server.
Reference will now be made in detail to the accompanying drawings. Wherever possible, the same reference numbers will be used throughout the drawings to refer to the same or like parts.
Referring now to
It will also be appreciated that in some instances, the server 107 and client 101 can exist within the same computer and therefore can be connected with a data bus or high speed serial connection or the like. The server 107 has access to information stored locally, and also can access information stored remotely in various external data systems (not shown) provided a proper interface exists to the external data systems. It will be appreciated that the server 107 may be a general purpose computer or dedicated computing platform configured to execute secure and/or unsecure (or open) applications through a multiple user operating system (not shown). While many operations are performed in connection with the client 101, the server 107 can operate independently for certain procedures. The server 107 may be implemented with general purpose server platforms as known to those skilled in the art from Intel, Advanced Micro Devices, Hewlett-Packard, and/or others or can be implemented with other custom configured server architectures.
The client 101 can include a general purpose computer or dedicated computing platform configured to execute secure and/or open applications through the multi-user operating system of the server 107 or can operate through an independent operating system or independent version of the operating system of server 107. The client 101 can include a personal computer, a workstation, a thin client, a thick client, or other similar computing platform. It will be appreciated that thin client means a computer or client in a client-server architecture having little or no application logic and therefore having a small boot image. A thin client depends primarily on the central server, such as server 107, for processing activities. Therefore client 101, when operating as a thin client has no more software than is required to connect to server 107, and generally facilitate interaction between the token 103 and the server 107.
Referring to
The client 101 can also include a connection 210 for connecting to a server such as server 107 described in
Referring to
Generally, the processor 303 will execute instructions defined by processes stored in, for example, the memory 305, such as the authentication process discussed later. Particularly, the processor 303 is configured to decrypt an encrypted challenge received from the server 107 that was encrypted by a key commonly shared by the server 107 and the token 103. Accordingly, the token 103 includes one or more commonly shared keys in the memory 205. The token 103 uses the one or more commonly shared keys to decrypt the encrypted challenge received from the server 107. The processor 303 is further configured to manipulate a decrypted challenge by a predetermined ECC procedure to obtain a manipulated challenge, and to return the manipulated challenge to the server 107 as a reply to the challenge for verification at the server 107.
The predetermined ECC procedure can include manipulating a challenge with an ECC public key to obtain a manipulated challenge and signing the manipulated challenge with an ECC private key. The ECC public and private key can be obtained generally at ECC key generation or retrieval 315 by, for example, first selecting an elliptic curve defined by an equation of the form y2=x3+ax+b and a point P=(x,y) referred to as a generating point. A random integer d on the elliptic curve will be selected as a private ECC key. A value dP, which is another point on the elliptic curve, will be computed. The value dP can become the ECC public key, which will be communicated to the server 107. If an unintended party obtains the ECC public key, which is the value dP, due to the characteristic of elliptic curves, the party will still have great difficulty determining the private ECC key d. The ECC public and private keys are generally stored at the token 103 in the memory 305. The ECC public and private keys may be determined and stored in the memory 305 at time of manufacture. Alternatively, they may be generated by the processor 303 upon initial operation of the token 103 by performing an initialization process. Further, they processor 303 may dynamically generated a new public and private key after the authentication process is run by the processor 303 a predetermined number of times in order to lower the probability of the ECC private key being obtained by an unintended party. The computer programs and processes discussed above may possibly be stored in a memory source remote from the token 103 and be accessibly via a connection.
As discussed above, the token 103 can include an ECC public key and an ECC private key stored in the memory 305. The challenge can be manipulated (challenge manipulation 317) by the ECC public key by any logical operation. Examples of possible logical operations include concatenating the challenge with the ECC public key or performing an EXCLUSIVE-OR operation on the challenge and the ECC public key. Further, the challenged can be manipulated by performing a Message Authentication Code (MAC) operation on the challenge in which the challenge and the ECC public key are input into a MAC algorithm and a MAC is output. The MAC algorithm may be constructed from other cryptographic primitives, such as keyed-hash message authentication code (HMAC). Any iterative cryptographic hash function, such as MD5 or SHA-1, may be used in the calculation of the HMAC.
As discussed above, the processor 303 is configured to return the manipulated challenge to the server 107 as a reply to the challenge for verification at the server 107. Here, the processor 303 will sign the manipulated challenge with the ECC private key (digital signature 319). The processor 303 will return the signed manipulated challenge and the ECC public key as the reply to the server 107.
Referring to
The processor 403 is configured to perform an authentication process in which a challenge such as, for example, a random string is generated. The processor 403 encrypts the challenge by a key commonly shared by the server 107 and the token 103 and transmits the encrypted challenge to the token 103 via the connection 105. The processor 403 is further configured to receive a reply from the token 103 that includes the signed manipulated challenge and the ECC public key, and to verify that the signed manipulated challenge was generated at the token 103 based upon the ECC public key (reply verification). In order to verify that the signed manipulated challenge was generated at the token 103, the processor 403 is further configured to perform the predetermined ECC procedure to obtain the manipulated challenge. Particularly, based upon the ECC public key received in the reply, the processor 403 performs the predetermined ECC procedure that was performed at the token 103 to obtain the manipulated challenge at the server 107. As discussed above, the predetermined ECC procedure includes manipulating the challenge by the ECC public key to obtain the manipulated challenge by, for example, concatenating the challenge with the ECC public key, performing a logical operation such as an EXCLUSIVE OR operation on the challenge and the ECC public key, or performing a Message Authentication Code operation on the challenge based upon the ECC public key.
Thereby, the processor 403 can verify if the signed manipulated challenge was actually generated at the token by comparing the signed manipulated challenge received from the token 103 with the manipulated challenge obtained at the server 107. The processor 403 generates a certificate (certificate generation 417) for the token 107 if the signed manipulate challenge is verified to be generated at the token.
Referring to
At 502, the server 107 generates a challenge (C), which, as mentioned above, may be a random string. At 504, the server 107 encrypts the challenge by a key K commonly shared by the server 107 and the token 103 to obtain an encrypted challenge K(C). The key K may be, for example, a symmetric key. At 506, the server 107 transmits the encrypted challenge to the token 103. Particularly, here the server 107 sends a KeyGeneration request to the token 103 with the encrypted challenge K(C).
At 508, the token 103 receives the KeyGeneration request with the encrypted challenge K(C) from the server 107. At 510, the token 103 decrypts the encrypted challenge by the commonly shared key K to obtain the challenge C. It should be noted that the manner of encrypting and decrypting the challenge is not limited to the process described above. For example, the server 107 and the token 103 can communicate the challenge by, for example, a Diffie-Hellman exchange.
At 512, the token 103 generates the elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) public key Eu and the ECC private Key Ev. As discussed above, these keys may be stored in the memory 305 at the time of token manufacture or they may be generated dynamically.
At 514, the token 103 manipulates the challenge by a predetermined ECC procedure to obtain a manipulated challenge. Particularly, here the token 103 manipulates the challenge by the ECC public key Eu to obtain the manipulated challenge. As discussed above, manipulating the challenge may include concatenating the challenge with the ECC public key, performing an EXCLUSIVE OR operation on the challenge and the ECC public key or performing a Message Authentication Code operation on the challenge based upon the ECC public key, or any general logical operation. For example, as shown here, a logical AND operation was performed on the ECC public key Eu and the challenge to obtain Eu+C. Further, the manipulated challenge is signed with the ECC private Key Ev to obtain a digital signature SEv(Eu+C), which will be referred to as a signed manipulated challenge.
At 516, the token 103 returns the manipulated challenge to the server 107 as a reply to the challenge for verification at the server 107. Particularly, the token 103 returns the ECC public key Eu and the signed manipulated challenge SEv(Eu+C) to the server 107 as a reply.
At 518, the server 107 receives the signed manipulated challenge SEv(Eu+C) and the ECC public key Eu from the token 103. At 520, the server 107 also performs the predetermined ECC procedure on the ECC public key Eu to obtain the manipulated challenge Eu+C. Particularly, here the server 107 manipulates the challenge C by the ECC public key Eu to obtain the manipulated challenge Eu+C by the same operation performed by the token 103. That is, the server 107 also calculates Eu+C. As discussed above, manipulating of the challenge by the ECC public key can include one of: concatenating the challenge with the ECC public key; performing an exclusive or operation on the challenge and the ECC public key; and performing a Message Authentication Code operation on the challenge based upon the public key.
At 522, the server 107 verifies that the signed manipulated challenge SEv(Eu+C) was generated at the token (or is valid) based upon the ECC public key Eu. Particularly, here the server 107 can compare the signed manipulated challenge (digital signature) SEv(EU+C) received from the token 103 and the manipulated challenge calculated at the server 107.
At 524, if the comparison performed at 522 results in a determination that the digital signature SEv(Eu+C) of the token 103 does not match the manipulated challenge obtained at the server 107 (NO at 524), that is the signed manipulated challenge (digital signature) SEv(Eu+C) is not verified, then the process ends. However, if, the comparison performed at 522 results in a determination that the signed manipulated challenge (digital signature) SEv(Eu+C) of the token 103 does match the manipulated challenge obtained at the server 107 (YES at 524), then at 526 the server 107 generates a certificate for the token 103. Upon receiving the certificate, the token 103 is able to access recourses of the computer system 100.
Therefore, by comparing the digital signature (signed manipulated challenge) received from the token 103 with a calculation performed by the server 103 with the public ECC key, the server 103 can verify that the digital signature, as a location factor, was actually generated at the token 103.
Any of the above described methods and procedures can be embodied as instructions stored on a computer readable medium, which includes storage devices and signals, in compressed or uncompressed form. Exemplary computer readable storage devices include conventional computer system RAM (random access memory), ROM (read-only memory), EPROM (erasable, programmable ROM), EEPROM (electrically erasable, programmable ROM), and magnetic or optical disks or tapes. Exemplary computer readable signals, whether modulated using a carrier or not, are signals that a computer system can be configured to access, including signals downloaded through the Internet or other networks. Concrete examples of the foregoing include distribution of executable software program(s) of the computer program on a CD-ROM or via Internet download. In a sense, the Internet itself as an abstract entity, is a computer readable medium. The same is true of computer networks in general.
It should also be understood that although various logical groupings of functional blocks were described above, different realizations may omit one or more of these logical groupings. Likewise, in various realizations, functional blocks may be grouped differently, combined, or augmented. Furthermore, one or more functional blocks including those identified herein as optional can be omitted from various realizations. For example, the present description may describe or suggest a collection of data and information. One or more embodiments can provide that the collection of data and information can be distributed, combined, or augmented, or provided locally and/or remotely.
Other embodiments of the invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art from consideration of the specification and practice of the invention disclosed herein. It is intended that the specification and examples be considered as exemplary only, with a true scope and spirit of the invention being indicated by the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4108367 | Hannan | Aug 1978 | A |
4849614 | Watanabe et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4924330 | Seamons et al. | May 1990 | A |
5247163 | Ohno et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5355414 | Hale et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5499371 | Henninger et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5594227 | Deo | Jan 1997 | A |
5631961 | Mills et al. | May 1997 | A |
5666415 | Kaufman | Sep 1997 | A |
5721781 | Deo et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5745576 | Abraham et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745678 | Herzberg et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5768373 | Lohstroh et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5862310 | Crawford et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5923884 | Peyret et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5937066 | Gennaro et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5943423 | Muftic | Aug 1999 | A |
5991411 | Kaufman et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991882 | O'Connell | Nov 1999 | A |
6005942 | Chan et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6005945 | Whitehouse | Dec 1999 | A |
6011847 | Follendore, III | Jan 2000 | A |
6016476 | Maes et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6044155 | Thomlinson et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6072876 | Obata et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6141420 | Vanstone et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6178507 | Vanstone | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6179205 | Sloan | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6226744 | Murphy et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6377825 | Kennedy et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6490680 | Scheidt et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6502108 | Day et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6539093 | Asad et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6636975 | Khidekel et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6643701 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6687190 | Momich et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6691137 | Kishi | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6698654 | Zuppicich | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6734886 | Hagan et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6760752 | Liu et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6804687 | Sampson | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6819766 | Weidong | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6826686 | Peyravian | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6829712 | Madoukh | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6880037 | Boyer | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6880084 | Brittenham et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6898605 | Constantino | May 2005 | B2 |
6898714 | Nadalin et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6931133 | Andrews et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6941326 | Kadyk et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6970970 | Jung et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6978933 | Yap et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6986040 | Kramer et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7007105 | Sullivan et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7010600 | Prasad et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7050589 | Kwan | May 2006 | B2 |
7051213 | Kobayashi et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7085386 | Audebert et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7114028 | Green et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7156302 | Yap et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7159763 | Yap et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7185018 | Archbold et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7251728 | Toh et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7278581 | Ong | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7299364 | Noble et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7302585 | Proudler et al. | Nov 2007 | B1 |
7356688 | Wang | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7374099 | de Jong | May 2008 | B2 |
7386705 | Low et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7437757 | Holdsworth | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7451921 | Dowling et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7475250 | Aull et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7475256 | Cook | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7480384 | Peyravian et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7502793 | Snible et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7571321 | Appenzeller et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7602910 | Johansson et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7702917 | Tevosyan et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7769996 | Randle et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7822209 | Fu et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7860243 | Zheng et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
20010008012 | Kausik | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20010036276 | Ober et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010054148 | Hoornaert et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020004816 | Vange et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020007351 | Hillegass et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020007359 | Nguyen | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020010679 | Felsher | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020029343 | Kurita | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020056044 | Andersson | May 2002 | A1 |
20020059144 | Meffert et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020064095 | Momich et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020080958 | Ober et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020099727 | Kadyk et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020112156 | Gien et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020120842 | Bragstad et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020133707 | Newcombe | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020171546 | Evans et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020184149 | Jones | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020188848 | Buttiker | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030005291 | Burn | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030012386 | Kim et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030028664 | Tan et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030035548 | Kwan | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030056099 | Asanoma et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030075610 | Ong | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030093695 | Dutta | May 2003 | A1 |
20030115455 | Aull et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030115466 | Aull et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030115467 | Aull et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030115468 | Aull et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030167399 | Audebert et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030172034 | Schneck et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20040042620 | Andrews et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040053642 | Sandberg et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040066274 | Bailey | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040088562 | Vassilev et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040096055 | Williams et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103324 | Band | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103325 | Priebatsch | May 2004 | A1 |
20040120525 | Miskimmin et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040144840 | Lee et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040146163 | Asokan et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040153451 | Phillips et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040162786 | Cross et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040230831 | Spelman et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050022123 | Costantino | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050033703 | Holdsworth | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050109841 | Ryan et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050114673 | Raikar et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050119978 | Ates | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050123142 | Freeman et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050138386 | Le Saint | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050138390 | Adams et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050144312 | Kadyk et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050184163 | de Jong | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050184164 | de Jong | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050184165 | de Jong | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050188360 | de Jong | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050216732 | Kipnis et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050262361 | Thibadeau | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050279827 | Mascavage et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050289652 | Sharma et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060005028 | Labaton | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060010325 | Liu et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060015933 | Ballinger et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060036868 | Cicchitto | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060043164 | Dowling et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060072747 | Wood et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060073812 | Punaganti Venkata et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060075133 | Kakivaya et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060075486 | Lin et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060101111 | Bouse et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060101506 | Gallo et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060173848 | Peterson et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060174104 | Crichton et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060206932 | Chong | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060208066 | Finn et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060226243 | Dariel | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060291664 | Suarez et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060294583 | Cowburn et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070014416 | Rivera et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070074034 | Adams et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070112721 | Archbold et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070113267 | Iwanski et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070113271 | Pleunis | May 2007 | A1 |
20070118891 | Buer | May 2007 | A1 |
20070162967 | de Jong et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070169084 | Frank et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070189534 | Wood et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070204333 | Lear et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070230706 | Youn | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070271601 | Pomerantz | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070277032 | Relyea | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070280483 | Fu | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070282881 | Relyea | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070283163 | Relyea | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070283427 | Gupta et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070288745 | Kwan | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070288747 | Kwan | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080005339 | Kwan | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080019526 | Fu | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080022086 | Ho | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080022088 | Fu et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080022121 | Fu et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080022122 | Parkinson et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080022128 | Proudler et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080034216 | Law | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080046982 | Parkinson | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080056496 | Parkinson | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080059790 | Parkinson | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080059793 | Lord et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080069341 | Relyea | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080072283 | Relyea | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080077794 | Arnold et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080077803 | Leach et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080133514 | Relyea | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080148047 | Appenzeller et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080189543 | Parkinson | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080209224 | Lord | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080209225 | Lord | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080229401 | Magne | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090003608 | Lee et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090133107 | Thoursie | May 2009 | A1 |
20100373027 | Taylor | Dec 2010 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
9724831 | Jul 1997 | WO |
0048064 | Aug 2000 | WO |
2007096590 | Aug 2007 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080069338 A1 | Mar 2008 | US |