Embodiments of the present invention relate generally to malware detection. More particularly, embodiments of the invention relate to page replacement code injection to enable efficient detection and neutralization of malware.
Malicious software, or malware for short, may include any program or file that is harmful by design to a computer. Malware includes computer viruses, worms, Trojan horses, adware, spyware, and any programming that gathers information about a computer or its user or otherwise operates without permission. The owners of the computers are often unaware that these programs have been added to their computers and are often similarly unaware of their function.
Malicious network content is a type of malware distributed over a network via websites, e.g., servers operating on a network according to a hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) standard or other well-known standard. Malicious network content distributed in this manner may be actively downloaded and installed on a computer, without the approval or knowledge of its user, simply by the computer accessing the web site hosting the malicious network content (the “malicious web site”). Malicious network content may be embedded within objects associated with web pages hosted by the malicious web site. Malicious network content may also enter a computer on receipt or opening of email. For example, email may contain an attachment, such as a PDF document, with embedded malicious executable programs. Furthermore, malicious content may exist in files contained in a computer memory or storage device, having infected those files through any of a variety of attack vectors.
Various processes and devices have been employed to prevent the problems associated with malicious content. For example, computers often run antivirus scanning software that scans a particular computer for viruses and other forms of malware. The scanning typically involves automatic detection of a match between content stored on the computer (or attached media) and a library or database of signatures of known malware. The scanning may be initiated manually or based on a schedule specified by a user or system administrator associated with the particular computer. Unfortunately, by the time malware is detected by the scanning software, some damage on the computer or loss of privacy may have already occurred, and the malware may have propagated from the infected computer to other computers. Additionally, it may take days or weeks for new signatures to be manually created, the scanning signature library updated and received for use by the scanning software, and the new signatures employed in new scans.
Moreover, anti-virus scanning utilities may have limited effectiveness to protect against all exploits by polymorphic malware. Polymorphic malware has the capability to mutate to defeat the signature match process while keeping its original malicious capabilities intact. Signatures generated to identify one form of a polymorphic virus may not match against a mutated form. Thus polymorphic malware is often referred to as a family of virus rather than a single virus, and improved anti-virus techniques to identify such malware families is desirable.
Another type of malware detection solution employs virtual environments to process content within a sandbox established by virtual machines (VMs). Such solutions monitor the behavior of content during execution to detect anomalies that may signal the presence of malware. One such system offered by FireEye, Inc., the assignee of the present patent application, employs a two-phase malware detection approach to detect malware contained in network traffic monitored in real-time. In a first or “static” phase, a heuristic is applied to network traffic to identify and filter packets that appear suspicious in that they exhibit characteristics associated with malware. In a second or “dynamic” phase, the suspicious packets (and typically only the suspicious packets) are executed or otherwise processed within one or more virtual machines.
A sandbox installation (e.g., a virtual disk or image that may include the malware detection program, the host operating system, and the host virtual machine) traditionally relies upon replacement of entire sandbox installation at a client location to update any portion of the environment (e.g., a behavior monitor or target program). To update the entire sandbox install can require re-sending the entire sandbox installation via a network connection, which may create unnecessary delays and require network resources.
Unfortunately, malware may be able to detect malware detection mechanisms within virtual environments. In some cases, malware may be able to determine whether it is actively being monitored within a sandbox environment. Improvements towards efficient updating of sandbox installations as well as mechanisms for effectively thwarting malware detection of monitoring systems are needed.
Embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example and not limitation in the figures of the accompanying drawings in which like references indicate similar elements.
Various embodiments and aspects of the inventions will be described with reference to details discussed below, and the accompanying drawings will illustrate the various embodiments. The following description and drawings are illustrative of the invention and are not to be construed as limiting the invention. Numerous specific details are described to provide a thorough understanding of various embodiments of the present invention. However, in certain instances, well-known or conventional details are not described in order to provide a concise discussion of embodiments of the present inventions.
Reference in the specification to “one embodiment” or “an embodiment” means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in conjunction with the embodiment can be included in at least one embodiment of the invention. The appearances of the phrase “in one embodiment” in various places in the specification do not necessarily all refer to the same embodiment.
Techniques for page replacement code injection are described herein. According to one embodiment, a virtual disk image in a malicious content detection environment may be updated on the fly without having to replace the entire virtual disk. The virtual disk image may be updated by injecting code into a target program initialized in the virtual disk image. The target program may be any type of program to take advantage of code injection as described herein. In an illustrated example, the target program may be a Behavior Monitoring Module (BMM) or an empty shell program containing at least the ability to read data units from VM memory (e.g., capable of reading memory pages and swapping out subroutines). The target program can trigger dynamic code injection from a controller hosting the virtual machine. In one embodiment, a code injection module within the controller replaces a memory address corresponding to an original memory location with a target memory address corresponding to the target memory location (injected code). Advantageously, in response to code injection, the target program (and the virtual disk) can receive additional, new, or updated features or functionality without having to replace the entire virtual disk. Additionally, because the code injection may occur after target program initialization, or at a specified time, the injected code may be obscured from detection by malware in the malicious content detection environment.
In the following description, certain terminology is used to describe features of the invention. For example, in certain situations, terms “module,” “logic,” and “engine” are representative of hardware, firmware and/or software that is configured to perform one or more functions. As hardware, module (logic, or engine) may include hardware circuitry having data processing or storage functionality. Examples of such circuitry may include, but is not limited or restricted to a microprocessor, one or more processor cores, a programmable gate array, a microcontroller, an application specific integrated circuit, a digital signal processor, semiconductor memory, combinatorial logic, or the like.
Module (logic, or engine) may be in the form of one or more software modules, such as executable code in the form of an executable application, an application programming interface (API), a subroutine, a function, a procedure, an applet, a servlet, a routine, source code, object code, a shared library/dynamic load library, or one or more instructions. These software modules may be stored in any type of a suitable non-transitory storage medium, or transitory storage medium (e.g., electrical, optical, acoustical or other form of propagated signals such as carrier waves, infrared signals, or digital signals). Examples of non-transitory storage medium may include, but are not limited or restricted to a programmable circuit; a semiconductor memory; non-persistent storage such as volatile memory (e.g., any type of random access memory “RAM”); persistent storage such as non-volatile memory (e.g., read-only memory “ROM”, power-backed RAM, flash memory, phase-change memory, etc.), a solid-state drive, hard disk drive, an optical disc drive, or a portable memory device. As firmware, the executable code is stored in persistent storage.
The term “content specimen” may include one or more types of data such as text, software, images, audio, metadata and/or other digital data. One example of content may include web content, or any data traffic that may be transmitted using a Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) protocol, or may be transmitted in a manner suitable for display on a Web browser software application. Content may also refer to information transmitted as one or more messages, where each message may be in the form of a packet, a frame, an Asynchronous Transfer Mode “ATM” cell, or any other series of bits having a prescribed format. The content may be received as a data flow, namely a group of related messages, within ingress network traffic.
Another example of content includes electronic mail (email), which may be transmitted using an email protocol such as Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), Post Office Protocol version 3 (POP3), or Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP4). A further example of content includes an Instant Message, which may be transmitted using Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) or Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) for example. Yet another example of content includes one or more files that are transferred using a data transfer protocol such as File Transfer Protocol (FTP) for subsequent storage on a file share, or one or more files that are stored on a file share, storage server, storage device, or the like (“data at rest”).
The term “malware” is directed to software that produces an undesired behavior upon execution, where the behavior is deemed to be “undesired” based on customer-specific rules, manufacturer-based rules, and any other type of rules formulated by public opinion or a particular governmental or commercial entity. This undesired behavior may include a communication-based anomaly or an execution-based anomaly that would (1) alter the functionality of an electronic device executing an application software in a malicious manner; (2) alter the functionality of an electronic device executing that application software without any malicious intent; and/or (3) provide an unwanted functionality which is generally acceptable in other context.
In general, a “virtual machine” (VM) is a simulation of an electronic device (abstract or real) that is usually different from the electronic device conducting the simulation. A VM may include one or more VM processes where each VM process is based on specifications of a hypothetical electronic component (e.g., processor, network interface card “NIC”; storage device, etc.) so as to collectively emulate the architecture and functions of a real electronic device. For simplicity, a “virtual device” may be a virtualization of an electronic device or an electronic component.
“VM instrumentation” refers to a software module configured for execution on a virtual machine (VM), where the software module controls and/or monitors virtualized operations conducted on an object associated with network traffic. These virtualized operations, which are representative of operations conducted by the virtual device, produce or lead to information from which behaviors may be determined. The detection of anomalous behaviors represent that the object is suspicious and may include malware. An assigned level of suspiciousness may be used to identify the likelihood that the object includes malware.
The virtual disk may be a compressed disk in a production environment. To update the virtual disk in a production environment without code injection, a new virtual disk replaces the entire virtual disk with appropriate code changes in place before the disk swap occurs. An advantage of code injection as described herein, is to allow a production environment to benefit from live updates (e.g., without shutting down the VM and swapping out an entirely new image) of the compressed virtual disk even when the VM is running or is in-between states, such as a partially booted state. In one embodiment, injected code can provide on the fly updates to the virtual disk and sandboxed environment in response to a new malware threat recently detected (e.g., not previously covered in a current sandbox installation).
Content specimen 110 may be pre-installed into a sandbox or may be received at some time during or after sandbox initialization. In some embodiments, BMM may be initialized before, after, or at the same time content specimen 110 is received in the sandbox. For example, BMM (e.g., BMM 120) may be running within VM 130, which may be scheduled and launched by scheduler 138 from VM pool 145. In some embodiments, scheduler 138 may initiate receipt of the content specimen (e.g., from a network connection or from a device) at a designated moment in time.
In one embodiment, BMM 120 (e.g., target program) is a software program initialized within the sandbox to receive new, additional, or updated code to provide one or more functions or features (e.g., behavior monitoring features). For example, new or additional behavior monitoring code may be injected into the BMM to provide new or additional monitoring capabilities. In one embodiment, BMM initializes as an empty or reduced functionality shell program (e.g., a program with at least the capability of reading a memory page or other data unit from memory). Initialization as an empty shell program obscures behavior monitoring capability from advanced malware able to detect behavior monitoring. Malware may be unable to determine detection, monitor, or analysis code or functions executing within a target program (e.g., empty shell program) because no behavior monitoring code is initialized in the target program. Therefore, while the target program is initialized within the sandboxed environment and waiting for code injection, advanced malware may not be able to determine any ultimate purpose or function of the target program. In one embodiment, the controller can immediately remove code injected into the BMM to further obscure injected code from malware. In other embodiments, the sandbox can prevent malware (e.g., a content specimen) from being read or executed until injected code has fully executed and is removed from memory. For example, the controller can execute code injection threads while pausing other threads. Because the controller may intercept all system calls, the controller can control which threads are executed and at what time.
In some embodiments, the target program may be a flexible and configurable platform for injecting a variety of types of code and functions into the sandbox, beyond what is described above. For example, the target program may receive code to revise software profiles (e.g., inserting a modified, new, or additional plugin into the sandbox to process specific content). In another example, the target program may receive code to change an initial or resumed application state in the sandbox. In yet another example, the target program may receive code to change a monitoring function running outside sandbox, for example, in the controller 140, in order to monitor operations initiated within the sandbox.
In one embodiment, code injected into the BMM may invoke a memory dump (e.g., memory dump module 123) to capture various information associated with content specimen 110. For example, the memory dump can capture information related to a program used in processing or reading a content specimen 110 such as a word processing program to read a document or a PDF reader to read a PDF document. If the content specimen is an executable file, the injected code may perform a memory dump of the content specimen. The code injected into the BMM can invoke memory dump module by launching memory dump module 123 and passing a process identifier (ID) of content specimen 110 or program associated with the content specimen 110 as a parameter to memory dump module 123.
Memory dumps (e.g., memory dump file 125) may be stored within the associated VM disk file 180 on storage device 160. Memory dumps may include the code image of the content specimen, content of a memory region that has been allocated by the content specimen (e.g., heaps, threads, context), data accessed by the content specimen, embedded content extracted or downloaded during the execution such as a file or another executable binary, as well as information identifying certain activities performed by the content specimen. Memory dumps can be analyzed (e.g., by the controller 140, within VM 130, or sent to a remote server) to determine whether the content specimen is malicious, verify a previous classification of maliciousness, and/or gather additional analytical information about the malware. Unexpected or anomalous behavior can be used in classifying the specimen as malware, and together with the context and state can be used to generate an identifier for the malware. The identifier, or parts thereof, can be used as a malware signature in blocking other malware-containing content.
In one embodiment, code injection module 150 can determine BMM status and inject code based on the determined status. For example, in response to BMM finding behavior of an input content specimen matching behavior of a first type of malware, a corresponding first code section (e.g., directed towards the first type of malware exploit) may be injected. Alternatively, if BMM determines the input content specimen has behavior indicating a second type of malware, the code injection module 150 can inject a corresponding second code section instead. In other embodiments, a variety of malware monitoring functions or features may be performed, each having different injected of code. Advantageously, code injection enables the system to gather additional analytical information about the behavior of the malware, for use in forensics and signature generation, for example.
In one embodiment, BMM may wait for a command from code injection module 150 or controller 140, indicating whether module 120 can continue from an idle or wait state. For example, in response to being initialized (e.g., loaded into the sandbox) BMM may suspend further execution of new or additional code (e.g., injected code) and wait for a command from code injection module 150 or controller 140, indicating whether module 120 can continue. For example, BMM may suspend its operations and periodically or aperiodically check whether a command has been received from controller 140 or code injection 150. When module 120 has been suspended, code injection module 150 may inject the new code in the execution pipeline of the module 120. Once the code has been injected, code injection module 150 or controller 140 may inform BMM that the execution of the BMM may continue. For example, BMM may wait for a value of a predetermined variable or memory location to change from a first state to a second state. Once the code has been injected, code injection module 150 or controller 140 may modify the predetermined variable or memory location from the first state to the second state, such that BMM can continue. In one embodiment, in response to a predetermined event (e.g., file creation, registry access, DLL loading, process execution, power management such as sleep) triggered by content specimen 110, BMM can send a message describing the event(s) via a communication channel to controller 140.
Controller 140 may implement a VM monitor or manager (VMM), also referred to as a hypervisor for monitoring or managing VMs, which may be hosted by a host operating system (OS). VM 130 support execution of a guest OS. The host OS and the guest OS may be the same type of operating systems or different types of operating systems (e.g., Windows™, Linux™, Unix™, Mac OS™, iOS™, etc.) or different versions thereof. In one embodiment, controller 140 has access to identification properties of BMM. For example, controller 140 can determine the process name, state, and memory mapping associated with BMM. Controller 140 also has knowledge of the guest OS of virtual machine 130 and can use knowledge of BMM and the guest OS to find a process identifier associated with the BMM running inside virtual machine 130. In one embodiment, controller 140 tracks one or more states of the BMM to determine when to perform the code injection. Controller 140 can include a code injection module 150 to use memory mapping from the virtual memory associated with VM 130 to the physical memory to inject code for the BMM. For example, controller 140 can replace an original physical memory address corresponding to the memory location of an original virtual memory page with a different physical memory address corresponding to the same virtual memory page, such that a different code section is executed instead of an original code section.
Some malware may be able to detect certain behavior monitoring functions or features within the sandbox. Therefore, to obscure the behavior monitoring from detection by malware, some embodiments may monitor content behavior from outside of the sandboxed environment (e.g., from the controller, VMM, or hypervisor). For example, some or all of the monitoring functionality may be executed by controller 140 instead of or in addition to within virtual machine 130. For example, one or more functions or features of the BMM as described herein may be integrated directly into controller 140. When one or more monitoring features are available outside of the sandbox, a target program (e.g., BMM) may still accept code injection (e.g., a narrowly focused code injection such as a memory dump initialization) to add additional or different monitoring functionality directly into the sandbox.
In one embodiment, in response to a predetermined event (e.g., file creation, registry access, DLL loading, process execution, power management such as sleep) triggered by content specimen 110, BMM can send a message describing the event(s) and provides additional contextual information via a communication channel to controller 140. Because the code injection module 150 can follow the status of the target program (e.g., tracking when the target program initializes to a waiting state until a specific object variable is filled), injection can begin in response to loading the target program into virtual memory. Controller 140 may also have access to one or more target program identifiers (e.g., target program process identifier) or hooks to find the target program process within the sandbox.
At block 220, the processing logic determines the memory location of the first memory page. The processing logic (e.g., code injection module 150, or other VMM process) can read from a configuration file to determine the location of a first memory address of the first memory page. In one embodiment, the memory location is an address reserved in response to creating an executable of the target program.
At block 230, the processing logic injects a second code section into the target program by replacing the first code section with a second code section loaded in a second memory page. The VMM can replace a first memory address corresponding to the memory location of the first memory page with a second memory page, such that the second code section is executed instead of the first code section. Code injection module 150 may use predetermined code and data stored in persistent memory and ready for injection into the virtual machine (e.g., BMM at the predetermined memory location). Alternatively, code injection module 150 can create code and data for insertion on the fly based on a current status or property of BMM. For example, BMM may run a number of distinct monitoring tests, each test yielding different results (e.g., positive confirmation of malware, negative confirmation of malware, or other variation). In response to the different test results, the code injection module 150 can dynamically adjust what code and data will be injected, and iteratively inject different code functionality into the BMM.
At block 240, the processing logic determines a behavior of an input content specimen using the injected second code section instead of the first code section. In one embodiment, the first code section is related to malware detection and the second code section is related to malware analysis. For example, the second code section can initiate a “memory dump” to include any information in a memory of the VM associated with the content specimen during the execution of the content specimen.
In one embodiment, when BMM is compiled, a compiler or linker reserves the virtual address range in the BMM's executable image file. For example a compiler can create a zero-filled code section in a BMM program or executable. In one embodiment, the reserved address range is stored in a configuration file, which is read by code injection module 150 at runtime. Code injection module 150 uses the memory address range of the BMM to inject new code (e.g., inject a new or updated code segment). For example, code injection module 150 may load a second code segment into the memory (e.g., different memory location or area) associated with VM 130. The first memory address (e.g., a first starting address in a range) of the first code segment is replaced by a second memory address (e.g., a second starting address in a range) of the second code segment, such that when the execution of the program, in this example BMM, continues, the second code segment will be executed instead of the first code segment. The second code section serves to control or direct monitoring of the run-time environment so as to detect the predetermined events described above.
In some embodiments, controller 140 (e.g., VMM or hypervisor) receives the code section from a remote facility (e.g., server 410 described below) over a network (e.g., network 430). Controller 140 may receive the code section after the target program (e.g., BMM or VM instrumentation) has been received by a data processing system (e.g., malicious content detection system 100) in which the host VM and the host VMM are executed. In other embodiments, new or updated code and data may be generated on the fly at controller 140 instead of being sent across a network connection. For example, to avoid network snooping by a malware program, direct code injection from controller 140 can negate any reliance on network communication to update the sandbox.
Referring to
The malware content detection (MCD) systems 4101-410N may represent any of the malicious content detection systems described above, such as, for example, detection system 100 of
In general, management system 420 is adapted to manage MCD systems 4101-410N. For instance, management system 420 may be adapted to cause malware identifiers generated as a result of malware detection of behavior monitoring by any of MCD systems 4101-410N to be shared with one or more of the other MCD systems 4101-410N including, for example, where such sharing is conducted on a subscription basis.
Herein, according to this embodiment of the invention, first MCD system 4101 is an electronic device that is adapted to (i) receive network traffic that is routed over a communication network 430 between at least one server device 440 and at least one client device 450 and (ii) monitor, in real-time, content within the network traffic. More specifically, first MCD system 4101 may be configured to inspect content received via communication network 430 and identify “suspicious” objects or content specimens. In other embodiments, the objects or specimens may be stored locally within the MCD system, or directly coupled to the MCD system (e.g., USB or removable media). An object or specimen is identified as “suspicious” when it is assessed by an optional preliminary analysis engine 470, with a certain level of likelihood, that at least one characteristic identified during inspection of the object indicates the presence of malware. When a preliminary analysis engine does not exist to provide an initial identification, the identification may be provided or pre-tagged by an external source, or alternatively the system may assume the object will be scheduled for monitoring, and/or analysis.
Thereafter, the “suspicious” object may be scheduled by scheduler 138 to be analyzed within an optional replay analysis engine 490. Replay analysis engine 490 provides a static analytical environment 491, and a dynamic analytical environment 492. “Replay” denotes execution or other processing of the object. In some embodiments, replay analysis engine 490 can contain one of a static or dynamic analytical environment or neither a static nor dynamic analytical environment.
The static analytical environment 491 comprises a first analysis engine 493 that is adapted to conduct static malware detection or behavior monitoring operations, such as comparisons between binary content from the network traffic and suspected malware identifiers (e.g., alphanumeric patterns associated with known or suspected malware, etc.) for example. In one embodiment, the preliminary analysis engine 470 and the static analytical engine 491 may be combined. The dynamic analytical environment 492 comprises a second analysis engine 494, which includes at least instrumentation control logic operating in concert with VM(s) as described herein. The second analysis engine 494 is adapted to detect whether the suspicious object may include malware by execution of one or more VMs that are configured to simulate the receipt and processing of the object under analysis (“analyzed object”) targeted for the client device 450. In some embodiments, the BMM as described above may be integrated into one or more of the analysis engines described above. The BMM may also be stored on data store 485 to be accessed by the VMM and code injection module 150.
The VM(s) analyzes or monitors (e.g., BMM) the behaviors resulting from processing the object, which behaviors may have occurred if the targeted client device 450 processed the object. These behaviors are provided as malware analysis results logic 489 within replay analysis engine 490. The behaviors may include expected behaviors as well as anomalous behaviors accompanying or resulting from the processing of the object. Examples of anomalous behavior may include, but are not limited or restricted to unusual network transmissions, unusual changes in performance, or the like.
In response to the malware analysis results, instrumentations of the VM may be altered transparent to the virtualized operating system of the VM so as to re-configure the VM to focus further analysis on a particular exploit or family of exploits that are more likely to be present within the network traffic based on the malware analysis results already provided.
Herein, first analysis engine 493 and the second analysis engine 494 may operate on the analyzed content concurrently or may operate on the analyzed content sequentially. For sequential operations, the first analysis engine normally performs static analysis on the analyzed content prior to the second analysis engine 494 performing dynamic analysis on that content.
According to this embodiment of communication system 400, first MCD system 4101 may be a web-based security appliance that is configured to inspect ingress data traffic, identify whether content associated with the data traffic may include malware, and if so, conduct a deeper analysis of the content. This deeper analysis is conducted in the replay analysis engine 490 to detect anomalous and undesired behaviors that would be present if the data traffic were actually processed by an electronic device such as client device 450.
The particulars of this analysis are described below.
The communication network 430 may include a public computer network such as the Internet, in which case an optional firewall 455 (represented by dashed lines) may be interposed between communication network 430 and client device 450. Alternatively, the communication network 430 may be a private computer network such as a wireless telecommunication network, wide area network, or local area network, or a combination of networks.
The first MCD system 4101 is shown as being coupled with the communication network 430 (behind the firewall 455) via a network interface 460. The network interface 460 operates as a data capturing device (sometimes referred to as a “tap” or “network tap”) that is configured to receive data traffic propagating to/from the client device 450 and provide content from the data traffic to the first MCD system 4101.
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the network interface 460 is configured to receive and copy content from the network traffic targeted for client device 450 normally without an appreciable decline in performance by the server device 440, the client device 450, or the communication network 430. The network interface 460 may copy any portion of the content, for example, any number of data packets. According to another embodiment of the disclosure, the network interface 460 is an in-line device that intercepts and routes the content, being some or all of the network traffic, to first MCD system 4101. Where the network traffic does not contain suspicious object, the network traffic is returned back to the network interface 460 for re-routing to the targeted destination (e.g., client device 450).
In some embodiments, the network interface 460 may capture metadata from network traffic intended for client device 450, where the metadata is used to determine the software profile and particular VM instrumentation(s) for the VM(s), if further malware analysis is needed. The metadata may be associated with the server device 440 and/or the client device 450. In other embodiments, preliminary analysis logic 470 (described herein) may obtain or generate the metadata associated with the network traffic.
It is contemplated that, for any embodiments where the first MCD system 4101 is implemented as an dedicated appliance or a dedicated electronic device, the network interface 460 may include an assembly integrated into the appliance or networking logic that includes network ports, network interface card or the like. The integrated assembly or networking logic provides coupling to the communication network 430 in order to non-disruptively “tap” network traffic propagating through firewall 455 and provide the network traffic (or a copy thereof) to the preliminary analysis logic 470. In other embodiments, the network interface 460 can be integrated into an intermediary device in the communication path (e.g. in firewall 455, router, switch or other network device) or can be a standalone component, such as an appropriate commercially available network tap. In virtual environments, a virtual tap (vTAP) can be used to duplicate traffic from virtual networks.
Referring still to
In general, the preliminary analysis engine 470 serves as a filter to permit subsequent malware analysis only on certain portions of the incoming content, which effectively conserves system resources and provides faster response time in determining the presence of malware within analyzed object(s). As an ancillary benefit, by analyzing only a portion of incoming content that may have “exploits” (e.g. one or more object(s) that may be exploited by malware), a greater number of VMs (and VM processes) may be supported to run concurrently with each other or for longer periods of time.
As illustrated in
For example, the preliminary analysis logic 470 may examine the attributes (and/or metadata) for content associated with an object in order to determine whether the object originated from a blacklisted, malicious server or originated from a region (or networking device) that is providing a high level of content having malware. Also, the preliminary analysis logic 470 may examine the content itself to determine whether such content includes objects that have a higher probability of including malware than other objects (e.g., attached files in email messages, embedded URLs, etc.). According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the preliminary analysis logic 470 flags “suspicious” objects.
Thereafter, according to one embodiment of the invention, the preliminary analysis logic 470 may be adapted to transmit at least a portion of the metadata or attributes associated with the suspicious object, which identifies attributes of the targeted client device 450, to scheduler 138. The metadata and/or attributes are used by the scheduler 138 to determine the software profile(s) for the VM(s) as well as the VM instrumentation(s) needed for processing the suspicious object in the sandboxed virtual environment.
More specifically, scheduler 138 comprises queues and logic for identifying the type of object targeted for replay (e.g. HTTP traffic, PDF files, Flash files, etc.), identifying the software profile and VM instrumentation needed for the VM, and determining when the object is ready for processing in the dynamic analytical (virtual) environment of the replay analysis engine 490. In another embodiment of the disclosure, the replay analysis engine 490 may be adapted to receive one or more messages (e.g. data packets) from the preliminary analysis logic 470 and analyze the message(s) to identify what VM(s) is(are) to be deployed. Replay analysis engine 490 would provide signaling to scheduler 138 to retrieve the VM(s) with particular VM instrumentation(s).
For instance, as an illustrative example, the suspicious content under analysis may include an email message that was generated, under control of Windows® 8 Operating System, using a certain version (ver. X) of Windows® Outlook. The email message further includes a Portable Document Format (PDF) attachment in accordance with a particular version (ver. Y) of Adobe® Acrobat®. Upon determining that the email message includes a suspicious object, preliminary analysis logic 470 provides software profile information to scheduler 138 to identify a particular type of VM instrumentation needed to conduct malware analysis of the suspicious object. According to this illustrative example, the software profile information would include the software noted above or, if not available to the system, the nearest appropriate software that are available.
During run-time, a VM provides malware analysis results to instrumentation control logic 250 of
The data store 485 is configured to store one or more VM disk files, where each VM disk file includes a code injection target program (e.g., BMM, or VM instrumentation). Capable of being pre-stored, uploaded and/or erased automatically via management system 420 or locally uploaded by an administrator, the VM instrumentations provide different functionality to increase the likelihood of detecting potential exploits. For example, a first VM disk file may include a first VM instrumentation directed to analysis of JavaScript® code in accordance with a first type of JavaScript® engine and a second VM disk file may include a second VM instrumentation directed to deeper-level analysis of JavaScript® code in accordance with a different type of JavaScript® engine.
The dynamic alteration of the VM instrumentation is directed to select a new VM instrumentation that may be directed to a recently detected exploit (or family of exploits) that commonly causes or is related to characteristics associated with anomalous behavior identified in the malware analysis results 489 (e.g., unusual network transmissions, unusual changes in performance, etc.). In fact, some VM instrumentations may be directed to detecting the same or related exploit types but feature different functionality (e.g. faster processing, specifically targeted processing, different software components, etc.).
The replay analysis engine 490 may flag a suspicious object as malware according to the observed anomalous behavior detected by the VM. The reporting module 495 may issue alerts indicating the presence of malware, and using pointers and other reference information, identify what portion of the “suspicious” object may contain malware. Additionally, the server device 440 may be added to a list of malicious network content providers, and future network transmissions originating from the server device 440 may be blocked from reaching their intended destinations, e.g., by firewall 455.
Of course, in lieu of or in addition to MCD systems 4101-410N, it is contemplated that cloud computing services 435 may be implemented with the replay analysis engine 490 to conduct VM-based dynamic analysis on one or more objects within the network traffic, and/or perform dynamic changes in VM instrumentation, as described herein.
Some portions of the preceding detailed descriptions have been presented in terms of algorithms and symbolic representations of operations on data bits within a computer memory. These algorithmic descriptions and representations are the ways used by those skilled in the data processing arts to most effectively convey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. An algorithm is here, and generally, conceived to be a self-consistent sequence of operations leading to a desired result. The operations are those requiring physical manipulations of physical quantities.
It should be borne in mind, however, that all of these and similar terms are to be associated with the appropriate physical quantities and are merely convenient labels applied to these quantities. Unless specifically stated otherwise as apparent from the above discussion, it is appreciated that throughout the description, discussions utilizing terms such as those set forth in the claims below, refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similar electronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms data represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system's registers and memories into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system memories or registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices.
The techniques shown in the figures can be implemented using code and data stored and executed on one or more electronic devices. Such electronic devices store and communicate (internally and/or with other electronic devices over a network) code and data using computer-readable media, such as non-transitory computer-readable storage media (e.g., magnetic disks; optical disks; random access memory; read only memory; flash memory devices; phase-change memory) and transitory computer-readable transmission media (e.g., electrical, optical, acoustical or other form of propagated signals—such as carrier waves, infrared signals, digital signals).
The processes or methods depicted in the preceding figures may be performed by processing logic that comprises hardware (e.g. circuitry, dedicated logic, etc.), firmware, software (e.g., embodied on a non-transitory computer readable medium), or a combination of both. Although the processes or methods are described above in terms of some sequential operations, it should be appreciated that some of the operations described may be performed in a different order. Moreover, some operations may be performed in parallel rather than sequentially.
In the foregoing specification, embodiments of the invention have been described with reference to specific exemplary embodiments thereof. It will be evident that various modifications may be made thereto without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the following claims. The specification and drawings are, accordingly, to be regarded in an illustrative sense rather than a restrictive sense.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4292580 | Ott et al. | Sep 1981 | A |
5175732 | Hendel et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5440723 | Arnold et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5657473 | Killean et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5842002 | Schnurer et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5978917 | Chi | Nov 1999 | A |
6088803 | Tso et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6094677 | Capek et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6269330 | Cidon et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6279113 | Vaidya | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6298445 | Shostack | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6357008 | Nachenberg | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6424627 | Sorhaug et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6484315 | Ziese | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487666 | Shanklin et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6493756 | O'Brien et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6550012 | Villa et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6775657 | Baker | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6832367 | Choi et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6895550 | Kanchirayappa et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6898632 | Gordy et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6907396 | Muttik et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6981279 | Arnold et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7007107 | Ivchenko et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7028179 | Anderson et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7043757 | Hoefelmeyer et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7069316 | Gryaznov | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7080408 | Pak et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7093239 | van der Made | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7100201 | Izatt | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7159149 | Spiegel et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7231667 | Jordan | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7240364 | Branscomb et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7240368 | Roesch et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7287278 | Liang | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7308716 | Danford et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7356736 | Natvig | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7386888 | Liang et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7392542 | Bucher | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7418729 | Szor | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7428300 | Drew et al. | Sep 2008 | B1 |
7441272 | Durham et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7448084 | Apap et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7458098 | Judge et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7464404 | Carpenter et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7464407 | Nakae et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7480773 | Reed | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7487543 | Arnold et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7496960 | Chen et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7496961 | Zimmer et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7519990 | Xie | Apr 2009 | B1 |
7523493 | Liang et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7530104 | Thrower et al. | May 2009 | B1 |
7540025 | Tzadikario | May 2009 | B2 |
7565550 | Liang et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7603715 | Costa et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7639714 | Stolfo et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7644441 | Schmid et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7676841 | Sobchuk et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7698548 | Shelest et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7707633 | Danford et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7779463 | Stolfo et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7784097 | Stolfo et al. | Aug 2010 | B1 |
7849506 | Dansey et al. | Dec 2010 | B1 |
7877803 | Enstone et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7904959 | Sidiroglou et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7908660 | Bahl | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7937761 | Benett | May 2011 | B1 |
7996556 | Raghavan et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
7996836 | McCorkendale et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
7996905 | Arnold et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8006305 | Aziz | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8010667 | Zhang et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8020206 | Hubbard et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8028338 | Schneider et al. | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8045094 | Teragawa | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8045458 | Alperovitch et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8069484 | McMillan et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8087086 | Lai et al. | Dec 2011 | B1 |
8171553 | Aziz et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8201246 | Wu et al. | Jun 2012 | B1 |
8204984 | Aziz et al. | Jun 2012 | B1 |
8220055 | Kennedy | Jul 2012 | B1 |
8233882 | Rogel | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8234709 | Viljoen et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8239944 | Nachenberg et al. | Aug 2012 | B1 |
8291499 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8307435 | Mann et al. | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8307443 | Wang et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8312545 | Tuvell et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8321936 | Green et al. | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8321941 | Tuvell et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8370938 | Daswani et al. | Feb 2013 | B1 |
8370939 | Zaitsev et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8375444 | Aziz et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8516593 | Aziz | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8528086 | Aziz | Sep 2013 | B1 |
8539582 | Aziz et al. | Sep 2013 | B1 |
8549638 | Aziz | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8561177 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8566946 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8584094 | Dahdia et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8584239 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8635696 | Aziz | Jan 2014 | B1 |
20010005889 | Albrecht | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010047326 | Broadbent et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020018903 | Kokubo et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020038430 | Edwards et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020091819 | Melchione et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020144156 | Copeland, III | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162015 | Tang | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020166063 | Lachman et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020184528 | Shevenell et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020188887 | Largman et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020194490 | Halperin et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030074578 | Ford et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030084318 | Schertz | May 2003 | A1 |
20030115483 | Liang | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030188190 | Aaron et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200460 | Morota et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212902 | Van Der Made | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030237000 | Denton et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040003323 | Bennett et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040015712 | Szor | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040019832 | Arnold et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040047356 | Bauer | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040083408 | Spiegel et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040111531 | Staniford et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040165588 | Pandya | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040236963 | Danford et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040243349 | Greifeneder et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040249911 | Alkhatib et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040255161 | Cavanaugh | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040268147 | Wiederin et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050033960 | Vialen et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050033989 | Poletto et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050050148 | Mohammadioun et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050086523 | Zimmer et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091513 | Mitomo et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091533 | Omote et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050114663 | Cornell et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050125195 | Brendel | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050157662 | Bingham et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050183143 | Anderholm et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050201297 | Peikari | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050210533 | Copeland et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050238005 | Chen et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050265331 | Stolfo | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060010495 | Cohen et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060015715 | Anderson | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060021054 | Costa et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060031476 | Mathes et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060047665 | Neil | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060070130 | Costea et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060075496 | Carpenter et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060095968 | Portolani et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060101516 | Sudaharan et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060101517 | Banzhof et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060117385 | Mester et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060123477 | Raghavan et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060143709 | Brooks et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060150249 | Gassen et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060161983 | Cothrell et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060161987 | Levy-Yurista | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060161989 | Reshef et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060164199 | Gilde et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060173992 | Weber et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060179147 | Tran et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060184632 | Marino et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060191010 | Benjamin | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060221956 | Narayan et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060242709 | Seinfeld et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060251104 | Koga | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060288417 | Bookbinder et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070006288 | Mayfield et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070006313 | Porras et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070011174 | Takaragi et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070016951 | Piccard et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070033645 | Jones | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070038943 | FitzGerald et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070064689 | Shin et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070094730 | Bhikkaji et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070143827 | Nicodemus et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070156895 | Vuong | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070157306 | Elrod et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070171824 | Ruello et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070174915 | Gribble et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070192500 | Lum | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070192858 | Lum | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070198275 | Malden et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070240218 | Tuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070240219 | Tuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070240220 | Tuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070240222 | Tuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070250930 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070271446 | Nakamura | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080005782 | Aziz | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080072326 | Danford et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080080518 | Hoeflin et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080083030 | Durham et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080098476 | Syversen | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080120722 | Sima et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080134334 | Kim et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080141376 | Clausen et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080184373 | Traut et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080215742 | Goldszmidt et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080222729 | Chen et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080263665 | Ma et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080295172 | Bohacek | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080301676 | Alpern et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080301810 | Lehane et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080320594 | Jiang | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090007100 | Field et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090013408 | Schipka | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090031423 | Liu et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090044024 | Oberheide et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090044274 | Budko et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090083369 | Marmor | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090083855 | Apap et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090089879 | Wang et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090094697 | Provos et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090133125 | Choi et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090193293 | Stolfo et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090228233 | Anderson et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090241190 | Todd et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090271867 | Zhang | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090300761 | Park et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090328185 | Berg et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090328221 | Blumfield et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100017546 | Poo et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100043073 | Kuwamura | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100054278 | Stolfo et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100058474 | Hicks | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100077481 | Polyakov et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100083376 | Pereira et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100115621 | Staniford et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100192223 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100251104 | Massand | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100281102 | Chinta et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100281541 | Stolfo et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100281542 | Stolfo et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100287260 | Peterson et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110041179 | St Hlberg | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110047620 | Mahaffey et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110078794 | Manni et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110093951 | Aziz | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099633 | Aziz | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110113231 | Kaminsky | May 2011 | A1 |
20110247072 | Staniford et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110265182 | Peinado et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110307955 | Kaplan et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110314546 | Aziz et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120079596 | Thomas et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120084859 | Radinsky et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120117652 | Manni et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120174186 | Aziz et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120174218 | McCoy et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120210423 | Friedrichs et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120222121 | Staniford et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20130036472 | Aziz | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130227691 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130291109 | Staniford et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130318610 | Zaitsev | Nov 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2439806 | Jan 2008 | GB |
WO-0206928 | Jan 2002 | WO |
WO-0223805 | Mar 2002 | WO |
WO-2008041950 | Apr 2008 | WO |
WO-2012145066 | Oct 2012 | WO |
Entry |
---|
IEEE Xplore Digital Library Sear Results for “detection of unknown computer worms”. Http//ieeexplore.ieee.org/searchresult.jsp?SortField=Score&SortOrder=desc&ResultC . . . , (Accessed on Aug. 28, 2009). |
AltaVista Advanced Search Results. “Event Orchestrator”. Http://www.altavista.com/web/results?Itag=ody&pg=aq&aqmode=aqa=Event+Orchesrator . . . , (Accessed on Sep. 3, 2009). |
AltaVista Advanced Search Results. “attack vector identifier”. Http://www.altavista.com/web/results?Itag=ody&pg=aq&aqmode=aqa=Event+Orchestrator . . . , (Accessed on Sep. 15, 2009). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated May 10, 2012; International Application No. PCT/US 12/21916. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated May 25, 2012; International Application No. PCT/US 12/26402. |
Cisco, Configuring the Catalyst Switched Port Analyzer (SPAN) (“Cisco”), (1992-2003, Cisco Systems). |
Reiner Sailer, Enriquillo Valdez, Trent Jaeger, Roonald Perez, Leendert van Doorn, John Linwood Griffin, Stefan Berger., sHype: Secure Hypervisor Appraoch to Trusted Virtualized Systems (Feb. 2, 2005) (“Sailer”). |
Excerpt regarding First Printing Date for Merike Kaeo, Designing Network Security (“Kaeo”), (Copyright 2005). |
The Sniffers's Guide to Raw Traffic available at: yuba.stanford.edu/˜casado/pcap/section1.html, (Jan. 6, 2014). |
“Network Security: NetDetector—Network Intrusion Forensic System (NIFS) Whitepaper”, (“NetDetector Whitepaper”), (Copyright 2003). |
“Packet”, Microsoft Computer Dictionary, Microsoft Press, (Mar. 2002), 1 page. |
“When Virtual is Better Than Real”, IEEEXplore Digital Library, available at, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?reload=true&arnumber=990073, (Dec. 7, 2013). |
Adetoye, Adedayo , et al., “Network Intrusion Detection & Response System”, (“Adetoye”), (Sep. 2003). |
Baecher, “The Nepenthes Platform: An Efficient Approach to collect Malware”, Springer-verlag Berlin Heidelberg, (2006), pp. 165-184. |
Bayer, et al., “Dynamic Analysis of Malicious Code”, J Comput Virol, Springer-Verlag, France., (2006), pp. 67-77. |
Boubalos, Chris , “extracting syslog data out of raw pcap dumps, seclists.org, Honeypots mailing list archives”, available at http://seclists.org/honeypots/2003/q2/319 (“Boubalos”), (Jun. 5, 2003). |
Chaudet, C. , et al., “Optimal Positioning of Active and Passive Monitoring Devices”, International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Conference on Emerging Network Experiment and Technology, CoNEXT '05, Toulousse, France, (Oct. 2005), pp. 71-82. |
Cohen, M.I. , “PyFlag—An advanced network forensic framework”, Digital investigation 5, ELSEVIER, (2008), pp. S112-S120. |
Costa, M. , et al., “Vigilante: End-to-End Containment of Internet Worms”, SOSP '05, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., Brighton U.K., (Oct. 23-26, 2005). |
Crandall, J.R. , et al., “Minos:Control Data Attack Prevention Orthogonal to Memory Model”, 37th International Symposium on Microarchitecture, Portland, Oregon, (Dec. 2004). |
Distler, “Malware Analysis: An Introduction”, SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room, SANS Institute, (2007). |
Dunlap, George W. , et al., “ReVirt: Enabling Intrusion Analysis through Virtual-Machine Logging and Replay”, Proceeding of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX Association, (“Dunlap”), (Dec. 9, 2002). |
Hjelmvik, Erik , “Passive Network Security Analysis with NetworkMiner”, (IN)SECURE, Issue 18, (Oct. 2008), pp. 1-100. |
Kaeo, Merike , “Designing Network Security”, (“Kaeo”), (Nov. 2003). |
Kim, H. , et al., “Autograph: Toward Automated, Distributed Worm Signature Detection”, Proceedings of the 13th Usenix Security Symposium (Security 2004), San Diego, (Aug. 2004), pp. 271-286. |
King, Samuel T., et al., “Operating System Support for Virtual Machines”, (“King”). |
Krasnyansky, Max , et al., Universal TUN/TAP driver, available at https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/tuntap.txt (2002) (“Krasnyansky”). |
Kreibich, C. , et al., “Honeycomb-Creating Intrusion Detection Signatures Using Honeypots”, 2nd Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-11), Boston, USA, (2003). |
Kristoff, J. , “Botnets, Detection and Mitigation: DNS-Based Techniques”, NUSecurity Day, (2005), 23 pages. |
Liljenstam, Michael , et al., “Simulating Realistic Network Traffic for Worm Warning System Design and Testing”, Institute for Security Technology studies, Dartmouth College, (“Liljenstam”), (Oct. 27, 2003). |
Marchette, David J., “Computer Intrusion Detection and Network Monitoring: A Statistical Viewpoint”, (“Marchette”), (2001). |
Margolis, P.E. , “Random House Webster's ‘Computer & Internet Dictionary 3rd Edition’”, ISBN 0375703519, (Dec. 1998). |
Moore, D. , et al., “Internet Quarantine: Requirements for Containing Self-Propagating Code”, INFOCOM, vol. 3, (Mar. 30-Apr. 3, 2003), pp. 1901-1910. |
Natvig, Kurt , “SANDBOXII: Internet”, Virus Bulletin Conference, (“Natvig”), (Sep. 2002). |
Newsome, J. , et al., “Dynamic Taint Analysis for Automatic Detection, Analysis, and Signature Generation of Exploits on Commodity Software”, In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security, Symposium (NDSS '05), (Feb. 2005). |
Newsome, J. , et al., “Polygraph: Automatically Generating Signatures for Polymorphic Worms”, In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, (May 2005). |
Nojiri, D. , et al., “Cooperation Response Strategies for Large Scale Attack Mitigation”, DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition, vol. 1, (Apr. 22-24, 2003), pp. 293-302. |
Peter M. Chen, and Brian D. Noble , “When Virtual Is Better Than Real, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science”, University of Michigan (“Chen”). |
Silicon Defense, “Worm Containment in the Internal Network”, (Mar. 2003), pp. 1-25. |
Singh, S. , et al., “Automated Worm Fingerprinting”, Proceedings of the ACM/USENIX Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation, San Francisco, California, (Dec. 2004). |
Spitzner, Lance , “Honeypots: Tracking Hackers”, (“Spizner”), (Sep. 17, 2002). |
Thomas H. Ptacek, and Timothy N. Newsham , “Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection”, Secure Networks, (“Ptacek”), (Jan. 1998). |
Venezia, Paul , “NetDetector Captures Intrusions”, InfoWorld Issue 27, (“Venezia”), (Jul. 14, 2003). |
Whyte, et al., “DNS-Based Detection of Scanning Works in an Enterprise Network”, Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, (Feb. 2005), 15 pages. |
Williamson, Matthew M., “Throttling Viruses: Restricting Propagation to Defeat Malicious Mobile Code”, ACSAC Conference, Las Vegas, NV, USA, (Dec. 2002), pp. 1-9. |