1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to security systems for data and, more particularly, to security systems that protect data in an inter/intra enterprise environment.
2. Description of Related Art
The Internet is the fastest growing telecommunications medium in history. This growth and the easy access it affords have significantly enhanced the opportunity to use advanced information technology for both the public and private sectors. It provides unprecedented opportunities for interaction and data sharing among businesses and individuals. However, the advantages provided by the Internet come with a significantly greater element of risk to the confidentiality and integrity of information. The Internet is an open, public and international network of interconnected computers and electronic devices. Without proper security measures, an unauthorized person or machine may intercept any information traveling across the Internet, and may even get access to proprietary information stored in computers that interconnect to the Internet but are otherwise generally inaccessible by the public.
There are many efforts in progress aimed at protecting proprietary information traveling across the Internet and controlling access to computers carrying the proprietary information. Cryptography allows people to carry over the confidence found in the physical world to the electronic world, thus allowing people to do business electronically without worries of deceit and deception. Every day hundreds of thousands of people interact electronically, whether it is through e-mail, e-commerce (business conducted over the Internet), ATM machines or cellular phones. The perpetual increase of information transmitted electronically has lead to an increased reliance on cryptography.
One of the ongoing efforts in protecting the proprietary information traveling across the Internet is to use one or more cryptographic techniques to secure a private communication session between two communicating computers on the Internet. Cryptographic techniques provide a way to transmit information across an unsecure communication channel without disclosing the contents of the information to anyone eavesdropping on the communication channel. An encryption process is a cryptographic technique whereby one party can protect the contents of data in transit from access by an unauthorized third party, yet the intended party can read the data using a corresponding decryption process.
Conventionally, network browsers (e.g., Internet or Windows browsers) are utilized to access content remotely located on the World Wide Web. In other words, with a network browser, a user can request a resource that is remotely located on a remote server coupled to the Internet. Alternatively, a network browser can be used to transmit a file to a remote server coupled to the Internet. Hence, network browsers are effective at allowing communications between network browsers and remote servers. Although network browsers greatly facilitate access to data, when network browsers are used on computing systems that utilize file security systems, network browsers present a security problem. More specifically, a network browser presents a security risk because it can transmit any of the files it accesses to a remote server (remote site). Hence, the security provided on secured files can be lost if unsecured versions of secured files are made available to network browsers. However, when the network browser merely desires access to the files for display or other non-transmission purposes, then the network browser does not present a security risk. Accordingly, if the network browser does intend to transmit a file to an unsecured remote server, then the security for the file as provided by the file security system is compromised.
Thus, there is an need for improved techniques to enable file security systems to permit the use of network browsers yet preserve the security on secured files.
The invention relates to improved approaches for protecting secured files when being used by an application (e.g., network browser) that is capable of transmitting the files over a network to unknown external locations.
One aspect of the invention pertains to restricting access to secured files so that unsecured versions of the secured files are not able to be transmitted over a network (e.g., the Internet) to unauthorized destinations. In one embodiment, in opening a file for use by a network browser, the network browser receives a secured (e.g., encrypted) version of the secured file when the destination location (e.g., destination address) for the network browser is not trusted, but receives an unsecured (e.g., unencrypted) version of the secured file when the destination location for the network browser is trusted. Another aspect of the invention pertains to monitoring processes operating on a computer system to determine destination locations, if any, of said processes, and then using such destination locations to determine whether to permit the processes to open files in a secure or unsecured manner.
The invention can be implemented in numerous ways, including as a method, system, device, and computer readable medium. Several embodiments of the invention are discussed below.
As a method for limiting access to a file stored in and secured by a file security system, one embodiment of the invention includes at least the acts of: receiving a request for access to a secured file, the request being initiated by a requester and being associated with a process associated with a computer system; determining whether the process is trusted by the file security system; determining whether the requestor is permitted to access an unsecured version of the secured file; and unsecuring the secured file to produce an unsecured file, thereby permitting access to the unsecured file only when the process is determined to be trusted and the requestor is determined to be permitted to access an unsecured version of the unsecured file.
As a method for limiting access to a file secured by a file security system, another embodiment of the invention includes at least the acts of: receiving a file open request to open a secured file, the request being initiated by a requester and being associated with a process associated with a computer system; determining whether the process is trusted by the file security system; determining whether the requestor has sufficient access privileges to open an unsecured version of the secured file; permitting the secured file to be opened for limited use by the requestor when the process is determined not to be trusted; and permitting the unsecured version of the secured file to be opened for use by the requestor when the process is trusted and the requestor has sufficient access privileges.
As a method for identifying a destination address being accessed by a window for a process operating on a computer system, one embodiment of the invention includes at least the acts of: determining a foreground window for the process, and examining a resource within the foreground window to determine a destination address that is being or is to be accessed by the process.
As a computer readable medium including at least computer program code for limiting access to a file secured by a file security system, one embodiment of the invention includes at least: computer program code for receiving a request for access to a secured file, the request being initiated by a requestor and being associated with a process associated with a computer system; computer program code for determining whether the process is trusted by the file security system; computer program code for determining whether the requestor is permitted to access an unsecured version of the secured file; and computer program code for unsecuring the secured file to produce an unsecured file, thereby permitting access to the unsecured file only when the process is determined to be trusted and the requestor is determined to be permitted to access an unsecured version of the unsecured file.
As a computer system providing file security, one embodiment of the invention includes at least an access control system that limits access to stored files based on at least access rules and trusted criteria, a process operating on the computer system, and a destination monitor that monitors an external destination of the process. The access control system permits access to the stored, secured files only when the access rules are satisfied and the process as well as the external destination satisfy the trusted criteria.
Other objects, features, and advantages of the present invention will become apparent upon examining the following detailed description of an embodiment thereof, taken in conjunction with the attached drawings.
The present invention will be readily understood by the following detailed description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein like reference numerals designate like structural elements, and in which:
The present invention relates to improved approaches for protecting secured files when being used by an application (e.g., network browser) that is capable of transmitting the files over a network to unknown external locations.
One aspect of the invention pertains to restricting access to secured files so that unsecured versions of the secured files are not able to be transmitted over a network (e.g., the Internet) to unauthorized destinations. In one embodiment, in opening a file for use by a network browser, the network browser receives a secured (e.g., encrypted) version of the secured file when the destination location (e.g., destination address) for the network browser is not trusted, but receives an unsecured (e.g., unencrypted) version of the secured file when the destination location for the network browser is trusted.
Another aspect of the invention pertains to monitoring processes operating on a computer system to determine destination locations, if any, of said processes, and then using such destination locations to determine whether to permit the processes to open files in a secure or unsecured manner.
Using the invention, a file security system can enforce the policy that a network browser never sends unsecured versions of secured files (e.g., decrypted files) to web-based email sites which are external destination locations that are unapproved (e.g., untrusted). On the other hand, the file security system is still able to send unsecured versions of the secured files to approved document management sites.
Secured files are files that require one or more keys, passwords, access privileges, etc. to gain access to their content. The security is often provided through encryption and access rules. The files, for example, can pertain to documents, multimedia files, data, executable code, images and text. In general, a secured file can only be accessed by authenticated users with appropriate access rights or privileges as compared to the access rules for the secured file. In one embodiment, each secured file is provided with a header portion and a data portion, where the header portion contains, or points to, security information. The security information is used to determine whether access to associated data portions of secured files is permitted.
As used herein, a user may mean a person, a software agent, a group of users, a member of the group, a device and/or application. Besides a person who needs to access a secured document, a software application or agent sometimes needs to access secured files in order to proceed. Accordingly, unless specifically stated, the “user” as used herein does not necessarily pertain to a human being.
In the following description, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the present invention. However, it will become obvious to those skilled in the art that the present invention may be practiced without these specific details. The description and representation herein may rely on the common meanings used by those experienced or skilled in the art to most effectively convey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. In other instances, well-known methods, procedures, components, and circuitry have not been described in detail to avoid unnecessarily obscuring aspects of the present invention.
Reference herein to “one embodiment” or “an embodiment” means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection 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 are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment, nor are separate or alternative embodiments mutually exclusive of other embodiments. Further, the order of blocks in process flowcharts or diagrams representing one or more embodiments of the invention do not inherently indicate any particular order nor imply any limitations in the invention.
Embodiments of the present invention are discussed herein with reference to
The file security system 100 can operate on a computing system. The computing system is typically a client machine, though it could also be coupled to and use resources of a server machine. An operating system of the computing device hosting at least a portion of the file security system 100 includes the access control system 102 and the local file storage 104 or an interface thereto in an operating system layer. The computing device also operates to execute one or more applications in an application layer. These applications execute one or more processes. As shown in
The browser process 110 and the non-browser process 112 can access secured files via the operating system. These secured files can be stored locally in the local file storage 104 or stored remotely in the remote file storage 106. As such, the access control system 102 needs to limit access to the secured files such that a process operating in the application layer is not able to transmit unsecured versions of the secured files to unauthorized external locations.
The file security system 100 includes an address identifier monitor 122. In general, an address identifier identifies a destination address and may, for example, be a Universal Resource Identifier (URI) or Universal Resource Locator (URL). To facilitate the description of the invention, the address identifier monitor 122 is also referred to herein as a URL monitor 122. The URL monitor 122 monitors each of the processes resident in the application layer, namely, in this example, the processes 110 and 112. The URL monitor 122 determines, for each process, a destination URL (i.e., an external destination) for the foreground window. For example, the URL monitor 122 would determine a destination URL for the browser window A 114 and would determine a destination URL for the window A 118. However, since the window A 118 is produced by the non-browser process 112, the URL monitoring performed by the URL monitor 122 would normally not identify a URL associated with the window A 118 because it is not associated with a network browser and thus would not be accessing a destination URL.
The access control system 102 can then determine whether or not to permit access to secured files by the processes operating on the application layer. For example, if the browser process 110 were to seek access to a secured file, the access control system 102 would determine not only whether the browser process 110 is permitted to gain access but also whether the URL associated with the browser window A 114 is a permissible destination. In one embodiment, the access control system 102 determines whether the browser process and its URL are both trusted. In one implementation, the access control system 102 can maintain a list or table of trusted processes and/or URLs. Then, the access control system 102 can compare the browser process 110 and the URL associated with the browser window A 114, as determined by the URL monitor 122, to determine whether the browser process 110 is trusted at this time for access to the secured files. Thus, access control to secured files being requested by a process can be dependent on the URL (i.e., destination URL) associated with the process.
Accordingly, a network browser is able to send files to many different external sites. The file security system 100 operates to enforce whether or not these external sites are given an encrypted version of the file or a decrypted version of the file. The file security system 100 has the ability to detect whether the requestor is sending the file requested to a network browser, and if so, limiting the extent to which decrypted versions of the files are made available to the network browser.
As previously noted, the URL monitor 122 monitors each of the processes resident in the application layer to determine a destination URL, if any, for each process. Such monitoring can be performed in an active or passive manner. In the case of active monitoring, the URL monitor can periodically locate windows provided by an operating system and search through such windows for certain heuristics or attributes that would specify a URL associated with the window. For example, in the case of a network browser window (e.g., Internet Explorer), an address bar would typically appear towards the top portion of the content being displayed in the window.
In the case of passive monitoring, in one embodiment, a browser helper object (BHO) can be registered with the browser application, such as Internet Explorer from Microsoft Corporation. The browser helper object would then notify the URL monitor 122 each time the browser application goes to a new URL.
According to one embodiment, the access control system 102 can associate a given network browser process identifier (ID) with the URL that is currently being browsed by the process by determining which window is currently in the foreground, and if it is a browser window, which URL is being displayed. Such determination of the URL being browsed can be done with Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) provided in an operating system (e.g., Microsoft Windows XP) or through an active monitoring and evaluation technique.
The file access processing 200 monitors 202 URL access by processes. The URL specifies a network address for an external server. For example, if a process associated with a network browser is browsing a URL, the monitoring operates to identify the URL. Next, a decision 204 determines whether a file access request has been received. When the decision 204 determines that a file access request has not been received, the file access processing 200 awaits such a request and may continue to monitor URL access by the processes such that the monitoring remains current.
When the decision 204 determines that a file access request has been received, a decision 206 determines whether the requesting process and its URL (obtained via monitoring) are authorized to access the requested file. When the decision 206 determines that the requesting process and its URL are authorized, then a decision 208 determines whether the requested file can be accessed given the access privileges of the requestor. According to one embodiment, the secured file is in a form including embedded access rules that control restrictive access to the secured file. Accordingly, in such an embodiment, the access rules are evaluated against the access privileges of the user. When the decision 208 determines that access rules have been satisfied, then access to an unsecured version of the secured file is permitted 210.
On the other hand, when the decision 206 determines that the requesting process and its URL are not authorized, or when the decision 208 determines that the access rules are not satisfied, then access to an unsecured version of the secured file is denied 212. Following the operations 210 and 212, the file access processing 200 is complete and ends.
The file open processing 300 begins with a decision 302 that determines whether a file open request has been received. The file open request is provided or initiated by a requestor. The requester can be a user. When the decision 302 determines that a file open request has not yet been received, the file open processing 300 awaits such a request.
Once the decision 302 determines that a file open request has been received, then a decision 304 determines whether the file is secured. Typically, the file is secured through access rules as well as encryption of some or all of the file. When the file to be accessed is not secured, then the file open is permitted 306 and the file open processing 300 is completed. In this case, the file open is permitted without restriction because the file to be opened is not secured.
On the other hand, when the decision 304 determines that the file to be accessed is secured, then a decision 308 determines whether the process requesting the file is trusted. A process can be deemed trusted if the process itself is deemed trusted and/or if an external destination (e.g., URL) of the process is trusted. When the decision 308 determines that the process requesting the file is not trusted, then the file open is permitted 310 but only with secured data. In other words, the file open is processed but the file is the secured file and thus the data remains secured (e.g., encrypted). After the file open has been permitted 310 with the secured data, the file open processing 300 is complete and ends.
Alternatively, when the decision 308 determines that the process requesting the file is trusted, then a decision 312 determines whether the requestor is permitted access to an unsecured version of the file. When the requester is permitted access to an unsecured version of the file, such as by satisfying access rules, an unsecured version of the file is produced 314. For example, when the file has been previously secured through encryption, the unsecured version of the file can be obtained by decryption of the file. Then, the file open is permitted 316 with the requestor receiving the unsecured version of the file. Following the operation 316, the file open processing 300 is complete and ends. On the other hand, when the decision 312 determines that the requestor is not permitted to access an unsecured version of the file, the file open is denied 318 and the file open processing 300 is complete and ends.
In the above embodiment, a file open request is either denied, permitted with secured data, or permitted with unsecured data. However, to receive the unsecured data, the process requesting the file must be trusted and the requestor must satisfy the access rules. Consequently, processes that are not trusted are not able to open files to gain access to unsecured data in the files.
In general, trusted evaluation processing determines whether a process requesting a secured file is trusted. The trusted evaluation processing can maintain a list of process identifiers (IDs) with current URLs. When one of these processes attempts to open a secured file (e.g., an encrypted file), the trusted evaluation processing makes a decision whether or not the process and/or its current URL are trusted. Based on the trust determination, the secured file is made available to the process in its secured form if untrusted and in its unsecured form if trusted.
The trusted evaluation processing 400 initially obtains 402 a process identifier for the process that is requesting access to a secured file. Then, using the process identifier, a process name and a current URL can be identified 404 for the process. In one embodiment, the process identifier is used to retrieve the associated process names and the current URL associated with the process, where the current URL was previously obtained by monitoring the process. A list of trusted processes and/or URLs can also be retrieved 406. The list of trusted processes and/or URLs can be predetermined, or determined in advance, of the operation 406. In one embodiment, a system administrator could have previously identified those processes and/or URLs that are considered to be trusted. For example, a system administrator can configure a list of trusted processes and URLs that are to be deemed trusted.
A decision 408 then determines whether the process name is trusted. Here, the process name of the process requesting access to the secured file can be checked against the trusted processes within the list of trusted processes and/or URLs. When the decision 408 determines that the process name is trusted, then a decision 410 can determine whether the URL is trusted. In performing the decision 410, the current URL associated with the process can be compared to the URLs within the list of trusted processes and/or URLs. When the decision 410 determines that the URL is trusted, then the process is deemed 412 trusted for the URL. Alternatively, when the decision 408 determines that the process name is not trusted or when the decision 410 determines that the URL is not trusted, then the process is deemed 414 untrusted for the URL. Following the operations 412 and 414, the trusted evaluation processing 400 is complete and ends.
Note that, in this embodiment, a process is trusted if its process name can be trusted and if specific URLs can be trusted. Hence, with respect to a particular access request, a process may or may not be deemed trusted depending upon the URL associated with the process. In other words, in order to be trusted, both the process and the specific URLs must be trusted.
Further, the list of trusted processes and/or URLs can be organized or arranged in a variety of different ways such that those processes and/or URLs to be trusted are designated in a positive or negative sense. For example, the list of trusted processes and/or URLs can contain those processes that are trusted or those processes that are untrusted. Likewise, the list can include those specific URLs that are untrusted or those specific URLs that are trusted.
In one embodiment, the processes being determined to be trusted or untrusted are network browsers. Note that the trusted evaluation processing 400 assumes (for security sake) that a network browser (or other process) is opening a file with the intent to transmit it to the site at the given URL; however, opening a file by a network browser does not necessitate its transmission to a remote site.
Secured files may be stored in either one of the devices 501, 502, 504 and 506. It is assumed that the client machine 501 corresponds to a file security system 100 of
The security information 626 can vary depending upon implementation. However, as shown in
The invention is preferably implemented by software or a combination of hardware and software, but can also be implemented in hardware. The invention can also be embodied as computer readable code on a computer readable medium. The computer readable medium is any data storage device that can store data which can thereafter be read by a computer system. Examples of the computer readable medium include read-only memory, random-access memory, CD-ROMs, DVDs, magnetic tape, and optical data storage devices. The computer readable medium can also be distributed over network-coupled computer systems so that the computer readable code is stored and executed in a distributed fashion.
The various embodiments, implementations and features of the invention noted above can be combined in various ways or used separately. Those skilled in the art will understand from the description that the invention can be equally applied to or used in other various different settings with respect to various combinations, embodiments, implementations or features provided in the description herein.
The advantages of the invention are numerous. Different embodiments or implementations may yield one or more of the following advantages. One advantage of the invention is that file security systems are able to protect secured files (e.g., documents) even when network browsers seek access to secured files. Another advantage of the invention is that a file security system can enforce the policy that a network browser never sends unsecured versions of secured files (e.g., decrypted files) to unapproved sites. For example, the policy could prevent a network browser from sending unsecured versions of secured files to web-based email sites which are external destination locations that are unapproved (e.g., untrusted), yet the file security system would still be able to send unsecured versions of the secured files to approved sites that are permitted to access the secured files. The approved sites may, for example, be used by those temporary consultants or tele-commuters for an enterprise.
The foregoing description of embodiments is illustrative of various aspects/embodiments of the present invention. Various modifications to the present invention can be made to the preferred embodiments by those skilled in the art without departing from the true spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. Accordingly, the scope of the present invention is defined by the appended claims rather than the foregoing description of embodiments.
This application is a divisional of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/242,185 filed Sep. 11, 2002, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,512,810, issued Mar. 31, 2009, which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. U.S. application Ser. No. 10/242,185 is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/075,194, filed Feb. 12, 2002, and entitled “System And Method For Providing Multi-Location Access Management To Secured Items,” which is hereby incorporated by reference for all purposes.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4203166 | Ehrsam et al. | May 1980 | A |
4734568 | Watanabe | Mar 1988 | A |
4757533 | Allen et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4796220 | Wolfe | Jan 1989 | A |
4799258 | Davies | Jan 1989 | A |
4827508 | Shear | May 1989 | A |
4888800 | Marshall et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
4972472 | Brown et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
5032979 | Hecht et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5052040 | Preston et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5058164 | Elmer et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5144660 | Rose | Sep 1992 | A |
5204897 | Wyman | Apr 1993 | A |
5220657 | Bly et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5235641 | Nozawa et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5247575 | Sprague et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5301247 | Rasmussen et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5319705 | Halter et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5369702 | Shanton | Nov 1994 | A |
5375169 | Seheidt et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5404404 | Novorita | Apr 1995 | A |
5406628 | Beller et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5414852 | Kramer et al. | May 1995 | A |
5495533 | Linehan et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5499297 | Boebert | Mar 1996 | A |
5502766 | Boebert et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5535375 | Eshel et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5557765 | Lipner et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5570108 | McLaughlin et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5584023 | Hsu | Dec 1996 | A |
5600722 | Yamaguchi et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5606663 | Kadooka | Feb 1997 | A |
5655119 | Davy | Aug 1997 | A |
5661806 | Nevoux et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5671412 | Christiano | Sep 1997 | A |
5673316 | Auerbach et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5677953 | Dolphin | Oct 1997 | A |
5680452 | Shanton | Oct 1997 | A |
5684987 | Mamiya et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5689718 | Sakurai et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5699428 | McDonnal et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5708709 | Rose | Jan 1998 | A |
5715403 | Stefik | Feb 1998 | A |
5717755 | Shanton | Feb 1998 | A |
5720033 | Deo | Feb 1998 | A |
5729734 | Parker et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5732265 | Dewitt et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5745573 | Lipner et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5748736 | Mittra | May 1998 | A |
5751287 | Hahn et al. | May 1998 | A |
5757920 | Misra et al. | May 1998 | A |
5765152 | Erickson | Jun 1998 | A |
5778065 | Hauser et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787169 | Eldridge et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787173 | Seheidt et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787175 | Carter | Jul 1998 | A |
5790789 | Suarez | Aug 1998 | A |
5790790 | Smith et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5813009 | Johnson et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5821933 | Keller et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5825876 | Peterson | Oct 1998 | A |
5835592 | Chang et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835601 | Shimbo et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5857189 | Riddle | Jan 1999 | A |
5862325 | Reed et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5870468 | Harrison | Feb 1999 | A |
5870477 | Sasaki et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5881287 | Mast | Mar 1999 | A |
5892900 | Ginter et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5893084 | Morgan et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5898781 | Shanton | Apr 1999 | A |
5922073 | Shimada | Jul 1999 | A |
5923754 | Angelo et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5933498 | Schneck et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5944794 | Okamoto et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5953419 | Lohstroh et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5968177 | Batten-Carew et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5970502 | Salkewicz et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5987440 | O'Neil et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991879 | Still | Nov 1999 | A |
5999907 | Donner | Dec 1999 | A |
6014730 | Ohtsu | Jan 2000 | A |
6023506 | Ote et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6032216 | Schmuck et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6038322 | Harkins | Mar 2000 | A |
6044155 | Thomlinson et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6055314 | Spies et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6058424 | Dixon et al. | May 2000 | A |
6061790 | Bodnar | May 2000 | A |
6069957 | Richards | May 2000 | A |
6085323 | Shimizu et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6088717 | Reed et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6088805 | Davis et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6098056 | Rusnak et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6101507 | Cane et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6105131 | Carroll | Aug 2000 | A |
6122630 | Strickler et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6134327 | Van Oorschot | Oct 2000 | A |
6134658 | Multerer et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6134660 | Boneh et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6134664 | Walker | Oct 2000 | A |
6141754 | Choy | Oct 2000 | A |
6145084 | Zuili | Nov 2000 | A |
6158010 | Moriconi et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6161139 | Win et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6182142 | Win et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6185684 | Pravetz et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6205549 | Pravetz et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212561 | Sitaraman et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6223285 | Komuro et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6226618 | Downs et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6226745 | Wiederhold et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6240188 | Dondeti et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6249873 | Richard et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6253193 | Ginter et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6260040 | Kauffman et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6260141 | Park | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6263348 | Kathrow et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272631 | Thomlinson et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6272632 | Carman et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282649 | Lambert et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6289450 | Pensak et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6292895 | Baltzley | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6292899 | McBride | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6295361 | Kadansky et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6301614 | Najork et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6308256 | Folmsbee | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6308273 | Goertzel et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314409 | Schneck et al. | Nov 2001 | B2 |
6317777 | Skarbo et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6332025 | Takahashi et al. | Dec 2001 | B2 |
6336114 | Garrison | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6339423 | Sampson et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6339825 | Pensak et al. | Jan 2002 | B2 |
6341164 | Dilkie et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6343316 | Sakata | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6347374 | Drake et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6349337 | Parsons et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6351813 | Mooney et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6356903 | Baxter et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6356941 | Cohen | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6357010 | Viets et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363480 | Perlman | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6366298 | Haitsuka et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6370249 | Van Oorschot | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381698 | Devanbu et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6389433 | Bolosky et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6389538 | Gruse et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6393420 | Peters | May 2002 | B1 |
6405315 | Burns et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6421714 | Rai et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6442688 | Moses et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6442695 | Dutcher et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6446090 | Hart | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6449721 | Pensak et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6453353 | Win et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6466932 | Dennis et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6477544 | Bolosky et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6490680 | Scheidt et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6505300 | Chan et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6510349 | Schneck et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6529956 | Smith et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6530020 | Aoki | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6530024 | Proctor | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6542608 | Scheidt et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6549623 | Scheidt et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6550011 | Sims | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6557039 | Leong et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6567914 | Just et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6571291 | Chow | May 2003 | B1 |
6584466 | Serbinis et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6587878 | Merriam | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6587946 | Jakobsson | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6588673 | Chan et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6594662 | Sieffert et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6598161 | Kluttz et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6603857 | Batten-Carew et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6608636 | Roseman | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6611599 | Natarajan | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6615349 | Hair | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6615350 | Schell et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6625650 | Stelliga | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6629140 | Fertell et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6629243 | Kleinman et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6633311 | Douvikas et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6640307 | Viets et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6646515 | Jun et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6647388 | Numao et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6658571 | O'Brien et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6678835 | Shah et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6687822 | Jakobsson | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6711683 | Laczko et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6718361 | Basani et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6735701 | Jacobson | May 2004 | B1 |
6738908 | Bonn et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6775779 | England et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6782403 | Kino et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6801999 | Venkatesan et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6807534 | Erickson | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6807636 | Hartman et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6810389 | Meyer | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6810479 | Barlow et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6816871 | Lee | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6826698 | Minkin et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6834333 | Yoshino et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6834341 | Bahl et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6845452 | Roddy et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6851050 | Singhal et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6865555 | Novak | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6874139 | Krueger et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6877136 | Bess et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6889210 | Vainstein | May 2005 | B1 |
6891953 | DeMello et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6892201 | Brown et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6892306 | En-Seung et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6907034 | Begis | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6909708 | Krishnaswamy et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6915434 | Kuroda et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6920558 | Sames et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6931450 | Howard et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6931530 | Pham et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6931597 | Prakash | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6938042 | Aboulhosn et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6941355 | Donaghey et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6941456 | Wilson | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6941472 | Moriconi et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6944183 | Iyer et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6947556 | Matyas, Jr. et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6950818 | Dennis et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6950936 | Subramaniam et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6950941 | Lee et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6950943 | Bacha et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6952780 | Olsen et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6957261 | Lortz | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6959308 | Gramsamer et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6961849 | Davis et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6968060 | Pinkas | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6971018 | Witt et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6978376 | Giroux et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6978377 | Asano et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6988133 | Zavalkovsky et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
6988199 | Toh et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6990441 | Bolme et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
6993135 | Ishibashi | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6996718 | Henry et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7003117 | Kacker et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7003560 | Mullen et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7003661 | Beattie et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7013332 | Friedel et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7013485 | Brown et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7020645 | Bisbee et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7024427 | Bobbitt et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7035854 | Hsiao et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7035910 | Dutta et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7046807 | Hirano et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7051213 | Kobayashi et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7058696 | Phillips et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7058978 | Feuerstein et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7073063 | Peinado | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7073073 | Nonaka et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7076067 | Raike et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7076312 | Law et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7076469 | Schreiber et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7076633 | Tormasov et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7080077 | Ramamurthy et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7095853 | Morishita | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7096266 | Lewin et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7099926 | Ims et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7107269 | Arlein et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7120635 | Bhide et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7120757 | Tsuge | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7124164 | Chemtob | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7130964 | Ims et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7131071 | Gune et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7134041 | Murray et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7136903 | Phillips et al. | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7145898 | Elliott | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7146498 | Takechi et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7159036 | Hinchliffe et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7171557 | Kallahalla et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7174563 | Brownlie et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7177427 | Komuro et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7178033 | Garcia | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7181017 | Nagel et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7185364 | Knouse et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7187033 | Pendharkar | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7188181 | Squier et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7194764 | Martherus et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7200747 | Riedel et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7203317 | Kallahalla et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7203968 | Asano et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7219230 | Riedel et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7224795 | Takada et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7225256 | Villavicencio | May 2007 | B2 |
7227953 | Shida | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7233948 | Shamoon et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7237002 | Estrada et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7249044 | Kumar et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7260555 | Rossmann et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7265764 | Alben et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7266684 | Jancula | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7280658 | Amini et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7287055 | Smith et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7290148 | Tozawa et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7308702 | Thomsen et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7313824 | Bala et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7319752 | Asano et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7380120 | Garcia | May 2008 | B1 |
7383586 | Cross et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7386529 | Kiessig et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
20010011254 | Clark | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010021926 | Schneck et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20010032181 | Jakstadt et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010034839 | Karjoth et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010044903 | Yamamoto et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010056550 | Lee | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020016922 | Richards et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020031230 | Sweet et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020035624 | Kim | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020046350 | Lordemann et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020050098 | Chan | May 2002 | A1 |
20020056042 | Van Der Kaay et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020062240 | Morinville | May 2002 | A1 |
20020062245 | Niu et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020069077 | Brophy et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020069272 | Kim et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020069363 | Winburn | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020073320 | Rinkevich et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020077986 | Kobata et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020077988 | Sasaki et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087479 | Malcolm | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099947 | Evans | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020112048 | Gruyer et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020124180 | Hagman | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020129235 | Okamoto et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020133699 | Pueschel | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020138762 | Horne | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143710 | Liu | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020143906 | Tormasov et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020156726 | Kleckner et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020157016 | Russell et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020169963 | Seder et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020169965 | Hale et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020172367 | Mulder et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020174109 | Chandy et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020176572 | Ananth | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020178271 | Graham et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020194484 | Bolosky et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020198798 | Ludwig et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030009685 | Choo et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014391 | Evans et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023559 | Choi et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030028610 | Pearson | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030033528 | Ozog et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037133 | Owens | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037237 | Abgrall et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037253 | Blank et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030046238 | Nonaka et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030051039 | Brown et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030056139 | Murray et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030074580 | Knouse et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030078959 | Yeung et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030079175 | Limantsev | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030081784 | Kallahalla et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030081787 | Kallahalla et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030088517 | Medoff | May 2003 | A1 |
20030088783 | DiPierro | May 2003 | A1 |
20030110169 | Zuili | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030110266 | Rollins et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030110397 | Supramaniam | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030115146 | Lee et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030115570 | Bisceglia | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030120601 | Ouye | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030120684 | Zuili et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030126434 | Lim et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030154296 | Noguchi et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030154381 | Ouye | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030159066 | Staw et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030177070 | Viswanath et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177378 | Wittkotter | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030182579 | Leporini et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030196096 | Sutton | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030197729 | Denoue et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200202 | Hsiao et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030217264 | Martin et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030217281 | Ryan | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030217282 | Henry | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030217333 | Smith et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030226013 | Dutertre | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030233650 | Zaner et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040022390 | McDonald et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040025037 | Hair | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040039781 | LaVallee et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040064710 | Vainstein | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040068524 | Aboulhosn et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040068664 | Nachenberg et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040073718 | Johannessen et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040088548 | Smetters et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040098580 | DeTreville | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103202 | Hildebrand et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103280 | Balfanz et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040133544 | Kiessig et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040158586 | Tsai | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040193602 | Liu et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040193905 | Lirov et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040193912 | Li et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040199514 | Rosenblatt et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040215956 | Venkatachary et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040215962 | Douceur et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040243853 | Swander et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050021467 | Franzdonk | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050021629 | Cannata et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050028006 | Leser et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050039034 | Doyle et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050071275 | Vainstein et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050071657 | Ryan | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050071658 | Nath et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050081029 | Thornton et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050086531 | Kenrich | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091484 | Thornton et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050120199 | Carter | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050138371 | Supramaniam et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050138383 | Vainstein | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050177716 | Ginter et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050177858 | Ueda | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050198326 | Schlimmer et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050223242 | Nath | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050223414 | Kenrich et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050256909 | Aboulhosn et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050273600 | Seeman | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283610 | Serret-Avila et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288961 | Tabrizi | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060005021 | Torrubia-Saez | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060075465 | Ramanathan et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060093150 | Reddy et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060168147 | Inoue et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060230437 | Boyer et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070006214 | Dubal et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 672 991 | Sep 1995 | EP |
0 674 253 | Sep 1995 | EP |
0 809 170 | Nov 1997 | EP |
0 913 966 | May 1999 | EP |
0 913 967 | May 1999 | EP |
0 950 941 | Oct 1999 | EP |
0 950 941 | Oct 1999 | EP |
1 107 504 | Jun 2001 | EP |
1 130 492 | Sep 2001 | EP |
1 154 348 | Nov 2001 | EP |
1 324 565 | Jul 2003 | EP |
2 328 047 | Feb 1999 | GB |
2001-036517 | Feb 2001 | JP |
WO 9641288 | Dec 1996 | WO |
WO 0056028 | Sep 2000 | WO |
WO 0161438 | Aug 2001 | WO |
WO 0163387 | Aug 2001 | WO |
WO 0163387 | Aug 2001 | WO |
WO 0177783 | Oct 2001 | WO |
WO 0178285 | Oct 2001 | WO |
WO 0184271 | Nov 2001 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090150546 A1 | Jun 2009 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10242185 | Sep 2002 | US |
Child | 12389076 | US |