Software programs, as designed and implemented by their authors, will access operating system resources and other applications to add, create, modify, and execute them. Periodically, there are changes made to the program's runtime environment, usually but not limited to the operating system or another application, configuration, or a combination of these. These changes affect the software program's environment.
Changes to a program's environment can affect not only the program, but other programs as well. Thus, it may be desirable to ensure that controls are in place to avoid influencing the operation of a first application when changes are made by a second application. To accomplish this goal, administrators may use, for example, one of the following methods 1) contain the software to a dedicated machine 2) contain the software to an OS through a virtual machine, 3) sandbox the application. Approaches 1) and 2) require additional resources. Approach 3) overly restricts the application.
Virtualizing a software application does not work particularly well for many types of software applications, including by way of example but not limitation productivity applications. DLLs, fonts, the registry itself are typically intended to be viewed by many or all applications running on a machine. For example, with respect to Microsoft Word® and Adobe Acrobat®, Acrobat may include code to put a toolbar in Word. If Word is completely virtualized, then Acrobat cannot add the toolbar.
These and other issues are addressed, resolved, and/or reduced using techniques described herein. The foregoing examples of the related art and limitations related therewith are intended to be illustrative and not exclusive. Other limitations of the related art will become apparent to those of skill in the relevant art upon a reading of the specification and a study of the drawings.
The following embodiments and aspects thereof are described and illustrated in conjunction with systems, tools, and methods that are meant to be exemplary and illustrative, not limiting in scope. In various embodiments, one or more of the above-described problems have been reduced or eliminated, while other embodiments are directed to other improvements.
A software container that manages access to protected resources using rules to intelligently manage them includes an environment having a set of software and configurations that are to be managed. A rule engine, which executes the rules, may be called reactively when software accesses protected resources. The engine may use a combination of embedded and configurable rules which can include, but are not limited to, file, user and process access control lists (ACLs), software handlers, and file and resource overlays. The container, if necessary, can create virtual images of resources to manage separate views of the container resources.
It may be desirable to assign and manage rules per process, per resource (e.g. file, registry, etc.), and per user. In a non-limiting embodiment, a main process and child processes of a software application may be assigned the same set of rules, which allow these processes full access to the application resources. Alternatively, processes, especially those executing outside the application's process tree, can be individually assigned rules that allow, restrict, or deny access to individual resources of the application. Same or different users may or may not be allowed to have same or different sets of rules for the same or different applications at the same or different times of usage. These sets of rules should be communicated securely to the user's machine using encryption.
Access rules may be altitude-specific.
Embodiments of the present invention are illustrated in the figures. However, the embodiments and figures are illustrative rather than limiting; they provide examples of the invention.
In the following description, for the purposes of explanation, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the present invention. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the relevant art that the present invention may be practiced without one or more of these specific details or in combination with other components or process steps. In other instances, well-known structures and devices are shown in block diagram form in order to avoid unnecessarily obscuring the present invention.
A technique for application access management involves running an application inside a container. The container may virtualize the application. Advantageously, the container can also partially virtualize an application or applications by “poking holes in the container” to allow other applications to access resources located in the container. Alternatively, the container may allow the application to run as if it was not inside a container (“non-virtualized”) by giving full access to all files within the container. Using techniques described herein, an administrator could decide on how much virtualization to allow for a particular application, which could range from complete virtualization to complete non-virtualization.
As a specific implementation, OpenOffice needs to be able to tell other applications where, for example, OpenOffice Writer files are located to enable the applications to access the Writer files. If OpenOffice is fully virtualized, then the Writer files may be hidden from other applications. If OpenOffice is not virtualized at all, then various applications that change the system environment could adversely impact OpenOffice, or vice versa. However, if OpenOffice is partially virtualized, in that the system knows where certain files are located, the system can set up a “DMZ” in which, for example, file requests from outside applications can be serviced for selected files. Partial virtualization can grant the benefits of both virtualization, and non-virtualization.
For the purposes of this application, it is assumed that a container serves to virtualize an application, and the container can have holes poked into it such that specific files can be accessed by applications outside of the container. Thus, a container is capable of virtualizing an application (if no holes are poked through the container), partially virtualizing the application (if some holes are poked through the container), or allowing the application to run without any virtualization (if holes are poked through the container to every resource in the container).
For the purposes of this application, a DMZ is a virtual area in which resource requests of resources kept in or associated with a container are honored or refused. The resource requests may succeed if virtualization associated with a relevant container does not include the requested resource (e.g., the resource is not virtualized at all), or if the requestor is allowed to pierce the container (e.g., the requestor is allowed access to the resource through a hole poked in the container). It should be noted that in some cases in this application, for the purpose of example, it is assumed that a requestor requests a resource that exists, and that the rule-based determination as to whether to honor the request is made at the DMZ. The rule-based determination can be affirmative or negative depending upon the requestor.
For the purposes of this application, a requestor can be a user and/or a process. In an embodiment, the requestor is a user. In another embodiment, the requestor is a process. In another embodiment, the requestor is a user/process (e.g., rule-based decisions to grant or deny access to a resource consider both the requesting user and the requesting process).
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
If it is determined that rule-based access is granted (112—Y), then the flowchart 100 continues to module 114 where the resource is provided, then the flowchart 100 continues to module 106 where execution of the application continues. If, on the other hand, it is determined that rule-based access is not granted (112—N), then the flowchart 100 continues to module 116 where access to the resource is restricted and to decision point 118 where it is determined whether the application ends. Whether the application ends at this point may depend upon how the application reacts to having access to a resource restricted. For example, the application may end if it does not receive a requested resource and could even “crash” if implementation is not robust. In this case, it would be determined at decision point 118 that the application ends (118—Y) and the flowchart 100 ends. As another example, the application may be able to recover from having access to a resource restricted by requesting an alternative resource, attempting to “rephrase” the resource request with a different request (e.g., after asking a software or human agent to perform an act), or proceeding without the requested resource. In this case, it would be determined at decision point 118 that the application does not end (118—N) and the flowchart 100 continues to module 106 where execution of the application continues.
In the example of
In an embodiment, the rule engine 304 is called reactively when software accesses resources from outside or within the container. The rule engine 304 may use, for example, a combination of embedded and configurable rules which can include by way of example but not limitation, file, user, and process access control lists (ACLs), software handlers, and file and resource overlays. Rules may be assigned and managed, for example, per process, per resource (e.g. file, registry, etc.), and per user. In a non-limiting embodiment, a main process and child processes of a software application may be assigned the same set of rules, which allow these processes full access to the application resources. Alternatively, processes, especially those executing outside the application's process tree, can be individually assigned rules that allow, restrict, or deny access to individual resources of the application. Same or different users may or may not be allowed to have same or different sets of rules for the same or different applications at the same or different times of usage. These sets of rules may be communicated securely to the user's machine using encryption.
The rule engine 304 may be local or remote with respect to one or more of the software containers 302 (or portions thereof) and/or the process 306. Alternatively, the software containers 302 may include the rule engine 304, either distributively, redundantly, or by having relative global access.
For illustrative purposes, the process 306 is outside of a software container. It may be noted that the process 306 could be local or remote with respect to one or more of the software containers 302 (or portions thereof). It should be noted that, in an embodiment, all local processes are located inside one or more of the software containers 302.
In the example of
In the example of
In operation, the process 306 provides data to the rule engine 304 (e.g., in the form of a request for resources 308), which in turn informs the software container 302-1 that one or more of the resources 308 should be made available to the process 306. This description may be considered a basic generalization for other implementations.
In an example of an implementation, the communications between the rule engine 304 and the process 306 could be interception-based. In such an embodiment, the rule engine 304 may use a file system hook to intercept a request for resources 308 from the process 306. (One example of an implementation of a file system hook is a filter driver.) In this embodiment, the uni-directional arrow from the process 306 to the rule engine 304 represents the interception of a request for the resources 308 from the process 306. Another example of an interception based technique may incorporate a virtual drive, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,453,334, issued on Sep. 17, 2002, to Vinson et al., which is incorporated herein by reference. Any known or convenient interception-based technique could potentially be used.
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
The flowchart 400 continues to module 412 where a second software application is run to completion. In an embodiment, the second software application is run in a second runtime environment that is nearly identical (initially) to the first runtime environment. However, the second software application is unable to make changes to the first runtime environment (unless exceptions are made) for the first software application because the first software application is maintained within a software container. Accordingly, when the second software application ends, the first software application resumes execution in the first runtime environment. It may be noted that in an alternative embodiment the second software application could instead run concurrently with the first software application, but in a second runtime environment.
The flowchart 400 continues to module 414 where execution of the first software application is resumed. The flowchart 400 continues to module 416 where the timer is reset, then the flowchart 400 continues to module 406, as described previously. Using this technique, a computer executing a first application could begin executing a second application periodically (at a frequency that is dependent upon the length of the timer).
In the example of
A system can freeze an application by telling the Operating System to lock up and pause the application. It may be difficult to freeze very low level (e.g., disk driver) applications. If it becomes necessary to freeze low level applications, the applications can be “virtually” frozen within a software container. Some applications depend upon a system clock, which, if frozen, could cause them to crash. So it may be desirable to maintain an internal clock within a software container that serves as a system clock for internal processes, which can be frozen. Some applications are specially designed for excellent performance. This is relatively common with games, so game designers often use shortcuts and programming techniques on an as-needed basis. These shortcuts make freezing the game even more problematic. Moreover, some games have code that try to prevent interjecting other items into the game, which could make it even worse. Therefore, in particular contexts, it may be desirable to fix quirks that occur frequently (or even infrequently) in programs to make freezing the application work better.
Streaming software applications normally pause when they are being streamed (to wait for download of a required block), so freezing software applications is a relatively straight-forward the techniques described herein. For example, a stream-enabled client shell may capture a runtime environment. So the client shell could be told to hold a block associated with a first stream-enabled software application until a second software application has been executed.
It may be noted that blocks may be provided to the streaming client 510 without being requested. For example, the streaming server 530 could predictively stream a stream-enabled application to the streaming client 510, such as is described by way of example but not limitation in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/988,014, filed Nov. 11, 2004, by DeVries, which is incorporated by reference.
It may be noted that the streaming server 530 could instead be a media device from which blocks are streamed, such as is described by way of example but not limitation in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/273,862, filed Jun. 8, 2006, by DeVries et al., which is incorporated by reference. As such, the network 502 could be considered optional, or in the alternative, a known or convenient means for coupling the streaming client 510 to the streaming server 530 could be used.
In the example of
In an embodiment, the client shell 512 provides a virtual environment in which stream-enabled applications can run even if they are not entirely downloaded. Stream-enabled applications may be maintained within the streaming software containers 514. This may mean that the virtual environment of the client shell 512, which may include registry overlays, file system overlays, spoofed registries, spoofed directories, spoofed environment variables, and/or other components that serve to virtualize the environment, may be different from the runtime environment associated with one or more of the streaming software containers 514. However, the client shell 512 may not include a virtual environment at all if the virtual environment typically needed for streaming software is contained within each of the streaming software containers 514. Indeed, the client shell 512 could be partially or entirely subsumed by the streaming software containers 514. This is an implementation decision.
In the example of
It may be desirable to pause the first application. In the example of
In operation, if the client shell 512 detects an event that is in the trigger database 516, execution of the first application may be suspended. Since the first application is maintained in a software container, the runtime environment of the first application can be substantially maintained. A first block of the second application can then be requested, using the same mechanisms described previously. At the streaming server 530, the block server 532 accesses the requested block from the second stream-enabled application blocks 536 and returns the requested block. The requested block can then be added to the subset of second stream-enabled application blocks 520 of the streaming software container 514-2. It should be noted that one or more of the blocks associated with the second application could be pre-stored in the subset of second stream-enabled application blocks 520. This could occur well in advance (e.g., the blocks could be downloaded at the same time the blocks associated with the first application are downloaded), or on the fly (e.g., a trigger could force a download of blocks associated with the second application, but the first application could be paused later, after a sufficient number of blocks associated with the second application have been downloaded). Moreover, the first application or the second application need not even be stream-enabled. Alternatively, the first application could be a stream-enabled application, but the second application could be streaming media. (Note: Streaming media is actually not a stream-enabled application since the streaming media is not executable). Assuming the second application is maintained in a streaming software container, as depicted in
The flowchart 600 continues to decision point 604 where it is determined whether a sufficient number of blocks are available to execute the stream-enabled application. In an embodiment, the first block alone is sufficient. In other embodiments, two or more blocks must be downloaded before the stream-enabled application is executable. It may be noted that a stream-enabled application may be executable after a certain number of blocks have been downloaded in one implementation, but that in another implementation the number of blocks may be more or less. This may be, for example, due to performance issues (it may be desirable to wait for more blocks because if the application is executed early it will run slowly) or due to locally available resources that need not be downloaded.
If it is determined that a sufficient number of blocks have not been downloaded (604—N), then the flowchart 600 continues to module 602, and repeats until a sufficient number of blocks have been downloaded. When it is determined that a sufficient number of blocks have been downloaded (604—Y), the flowchart 600 continues to module 606 where the stream-enabled application is executed. Then the flowchart 600 continues to decision point 608 where it is determined whether a trigger event occurs.
If it is determined that a trigger event occurs (608—Y), then the flowchart 600 continues to module 610 where the stream-enabled application is paused, to module 612 where an alternative is played, and to decision point 614 where it is determined whether the alternative ends. If it is determined that the alternative does not end (614—N), then the flowchart 600 continues to module 612 where the alternative continues to play until it ends. When it is determined that the alternative ends (614—Y), the flowchart continues to module 616 where execution of the stream-enabled application resumes.
If it is determined that a trigger event does not occur (608—N), or if the flowchart 600 continues from module 616, the flowchart 600 continues to decision point 618 where it is determined whether more blocks are needed to run the stream-enabled application. If it is determined that additional blocks are not needed (618—N), the flowchart 600 continues to decision point 620 where it is determined whether the stream-enabled application ends. The flowchart 600 ends if the stream-enabled application ends (608—Y), and returns to decision point 608 if the stream-enabled application does not end (608—N). If it is determined that additional blocks are needed (618—Y), then the flowchart 600 continues to module 622 where additional blocks are downloaded, to module 624 where execution of the stream-enabled application continues, and to decision point 608, as described previously.
The following description of
The web server 704 is typically at least one computer system which operates as a server computer system and is configured to operate with the protocols of the world wide web and is coupled to the Internet. The web server system 704 can be a conventional server computer system. Optionally, the web server 704 can be part of an ISP which provides access to the Internet for client systems. The web server 704 is shown coupled to the server computer system 706 which itself is coupled to web content 708, which can be considered a form of a media database. While two computer systems 704 and 706 are shown in
Access to the network 702 is typically provided by Internet service providers (ISPs), such as the ISPs 710 and 716. Users on client systems, such as client computer systems 712, 718, 722, and 726 obtain access to the Internet through the ISPs 710 and 716. Access to the Internet allows users of the client computer systems to exchange information, receive and send e-mails, and view documents, such as documents which have been prepared in the HTML format. These documents are often provided by web servers, such as web server 704, which are referred to as being “on” the Internet. Often these web servers are provided by the ISPs, such as ISP 710, although a computer system can be set up and connected to the Internet without that system also being an ISP.
Client computer systems 712, 718, 722, and 726 can each, with the appropriate web browsing software, view HTML pages provided by the web server 704. The ISP 710 provides Internet connectivity to the client computer system 712 through the modem interface 714, which can be considered part of the client computer system 712. The client computer system can be a personal computer system, a network computer, a web TV system, or other computer system. While
Similar to the ISP 714, the ISP 716 provides Internet connectivity for client systems 718, 722, and 726, although as shown in
Client computer systems 722 and 726 are coupled to the LAN 730 through network interfaces 724 and 728, which can be Ethernet network or other network interfaces. The LAN 730 is also coupled to a gateway computer system 732 which can provide firewall and other Internet-related services for the local area network. This gateway computer system 732 is coupled to the ISP 716 to provide Internet connectivity to the client computer systems 722 and 726. The gateway computer system 732 can be a conventional server computer system.
Alternatively, a server computer system 734 can be directly coupled to the LAN 730 through a network interface 736 to provide files 738 and other services to the clients 722 and 726, without the need to connect to the Internet through the gateway system 732.
In the example of
The computer 742 interfaces to external systems through the communications interface 750, which may include a modem or network interface. It will be appreciated that the communications interface 750 can be considered to be part of the computer system 740 or a part of the computer 742. The communications interface can be an analog modem, isdn modem, cable modem, token ring interface, satellite transmission interface (e.g. “direct PC”), or other interfaces for coupling a computer system to other computer systems.
The processor 748 may be, for example, a conventional microprocessor such as an Intel Pentium microprocessor or Motorola power PC microprocessor. The memory 752 is coupled to the processor 748 by a bus 760. The memory 752 can be dynamic random access memory (DRAM) and can also include static ram (SRAM). The bus 760 couples the processor 748 to the memory 752, also to the non-volatile storage 756, to the display controller 754, and to the I/O controller 758.
The I/O devices 744 can include a keyboard, disk drives, printers, a scanner, and other input and output devices, including a mouse or other pointing device. The display controller 754 may control in the conventional manner a display on the display device 746, which can be, for example, a cathode ray tube (CRT) or liquid crystal display (LCD). The display controller 754 and the I/O controller 758 can be implemented with conventional well known technology.
The non-volatile storage 756 is often a magnetic hard disk, an optical disk, or another form of storage for large amounts of data. Some of this data is often written, by a direct memory access process, into memory 752 during execution of software in the computer 742. One of skill in the art will immediately recognize that the terms “machine-readable medium” or “computer-readable medium” includes any type of storage device that is accessible by the processor 748 and also encompasses a carrier wave that encodes a data signal.
Objects, methods, inline caches, cache states and other object-oriented components may be stored in the non-volatile storage 756, or written into memory 752 during execution of, for example, an object-oriented software program.
The computer system 740 is one example of many possible computer systems which have different architectures. For example, personal computers based on an Intel microprocessor often have multiple buses, one of which can be an I/O bus for the peripherals and one that directly connects the processor 748 and the memory 752 (often referred to as a memory bus). The buses are connected together through bridge components that perform any necessary translation due to differing bus protocols.
Network computers are another type of computer system that can be used. Network computers do not usually include a hard disk or other mass storage, and the executable programs are loaded from a network connection into the memory 752 for execution by the processor 748. A Web TV system, which is known in the art, is also considered to be a computer system according to the present invention, but it may lack some of the features shown in
In addition, the computer system 740 is controlled by operating system software which includes a file management system, such as a disk operating system, which is part of the operating system software. One example of an operating system software with its associated file management system software is the family of operating systems known as Windows® from Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, Wash., and their associated file management systems. Another example of operating system software with its associated file management system software is the Linux operating system and its associated file management system. The file management system is typically stored in the non-volatile storage 756 and causes the processor 748 to execute the various acts required by the operating system to input and output data and to store data in memory, including storing files on the non-volatile storage 756.
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
If it is determined that the altitude is 0 (1004—Y), then the flowchart 1000 continues to module 1006 where files are written to the system, to module 1008 where the registry is changed appropriately, and to module 1010 where the environment is updated. Updating the environment typically involves setting environment variables, and may include other known or convenient processes or settings. Having installed or virtually installed a program, the flowchart 1000 ends.
If, on the other hand, it is determined that the altitude is not 0 (1004—N), then the flowchart 100 continues to module 1012 where selective hooks are set up for files. Advantageously, the hooks are selective depending upon the altitude, resource, and requestor. For example, a requestor may have access to a resource at a given altitude, but not at some other altitude. Or a resource may only allow certain types of access at a given altitude, regardless of requestor ID.
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
Advantageously, the method of
In the example of
If, on the other hand, it is determined that the altitude is not 0 (1104—N), the flowchart 1100 continues to module 1108 where a process ID and resource ID is looked up in a requestor-specific access control table for the altitude. In an embodiment, each altitude has an associated selective hook table that may include the requestor-specific access control table. The process ID should uniquely identify a process running on or through a local machine. The resource ID should uniquely identify a resource in a known or convenient manner. The process ID, resource ID, and altitude, considered together, are associated with an access control for the resource.
In the example of
If, on the other hand, it is determined that the access control associated with the request is not “accept” (1110—N), the flowchart 1100 continues to decision point 1116 where it is determined whether the access control is “pause.” If it is determined that the access control is “pause” (1116—Y), the flowchart 1100 continues to module 1118 where an altitude-specific procedure is executed. Advantageously, this may enable the insertion of ads, intermissions, or other interruptions in a running program. If, on the other hand, it is determined that the access control is not “pause” (1116—N), the flowchart 1100 continues to decision point 1120 where it is determined whether the access control is “pass through.”
If it is determined that the access control is “pass through” (1120—Y), the flowchart 1100 continues to module 1122 where the altitude is decremented, then the flowchart 1100 continues to decision point 1104 as described previously. In this way, access control may be checked at a lower altitude. Since lower altitudes are increasingly more public, this may eventually result in a granting of access, as described previously. In the example of
During runtime, the runtime function 1206 builds the runtime table 1204 from the published table 1202 and, typically, other data. In the example of
In an embodiment, the access control rules 1212 and the access control rules 1218 are the same if the process ID 1220 is associated with an applicable application. However, if the process ID is not associated with an applicable application, the access control rules may be set to “pass through” or some other default access control rule.
In a system that includes altitudes, the various altitudes may represent any of a number of different security levels. For example, in a two-altitude system, altitude 0 may represent the physical layer and altitude 1 may represent a virtualization layer. In a three-altitude system, altitude 0 may represent the physical layer, altitude 1 a public layer (partially sandboxed), and altitude 2 a private layer (fully sandboxed). In this implementation, the public altitude may be referred to as an “integrated” layer, and the private altitude may be referred to as an “isolated” layer. Other implementations may include an ad altitude, an emulation altitude, or some other altitude.
Advantageously, an ad altitude may capture requests as they pass from a higher altitude toward a lower altitude, and pause the request long enough to play an ad. An emulation layer may capture requests associated with, for example, a Mac (on a PC) and dispose of the request on the emulation layer. It should be noted that these layers can be integrated into the system as a whole, right down to the physical layer.
Some portions of the detailed description are presented in terms of algorithms and symbolic representations of operations on data bits within a computer memory. These algorithmic descriptions and representations are the means 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. Usually, though not necessarily, these quantities take the form of electrical or magnetic signals capable of being stored, transferred, combined, compared, and otherwise manipulated. It has proven convenient at times, principally for reasons of common usage, to refer to these signals as bits, values, elements, symbols, characters, terms, numbers, or the like.
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 following discussion, it is appreciated that throughout the description, discussions utilizing terms such as “processing” or “computing” or “calculating” or “determining” or “displaying” or the like, 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.
Techniques described herein may relate to apparatus for performing the operations. This apparatus may be specially constructed for the required purposes, or it may comprise a general purpose computer selectively activated or reconfigured by a computer program stored in the computer. Such a computer program may be stored in a computer readable storage medium, such as, but is not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical disks, read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs), EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions, and each coupled to a computer system bus.
The algorithms and displays presented herein are not inherently related to any particular computer or other apparatus. Various general purpose systems may be used with programs in accordance with the teachings herein, or it may prove convenient to construct more specialized apparatus to perform the methods of some embodiments. The required structure for a variety of these systems will appear from the description below. In addition, the techniques are not described with reference to any particular programming language, and various embodiments may thus be implemented using a variety of programming languages.
Terms and examples described above serve illustrative purposes only and are not intended to be limiting. As used herein, the term “embodiment” means an embodiment that serves to illustrate by way of example but not limitation.
It will be appreciated to those skilled in the art that the preceding examples and embodiments are exemplary and not limiting to the scope of the invention. It is intended that all permutations, enhancements, equivalents, and improvements thereto that are apparent to those skilled in the art upon a reading of the specification and a study of the drawings are included within the true spirit and scope of the invention. It is therefore intended that the following appended claims include all such modifications, permutations and equivalents as fall within the true spirit and scope of the present invention.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/150,874, filed May 10, 2016, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/712,339, filed May 14, 2015, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,380,063, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/324,571, filed Jul. 7, 2014, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,054,963, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/594,041, filed Aug. 24, 2012, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,782,778, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/977,187, filed Oct. 23, 2007, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,261,345, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/853,941, filed Oct. 23, 2006. Further, this application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/296,342, filed Jun. 4, 2014, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,054,962, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/594,546, filed Aug. 24, 2012, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,752,128, which is a division of U.S. Ser. No. 11/977,187, filed Oct. 23, 2007, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,261,345, which claims the benefit of U.S. Application No. 60/853,941, filed Oct. 23, 2006, all of which are incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4796220 | Wolfe | Jan 1989 | A |
5063500 | Shorter | Nov 1991 | A |
5109413 | Comerford et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5210850 | Kelly et al. | May 1993 | A |
5293556 | Hill et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5442791 | Wrabetz et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5495411 | Ananda | Feb 1996 | A |
5547202 | Tsumura | Aug 1996 | A |
5548645 | Ananda | Aug 1996 | A |
5652887 | Dewey et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5666293 | Metz et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5696965 | Dedrick | Dec 1997 | A |
5701427 | Lathrop | Dec 1997 | A |
5706440 | Compliment et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5715403 | Stefik | Feb 1998 | A |
5764906 | Edelstein et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5765152 | Erickson | Jun 1998 | A |
5768528 | Stumm | Jun 1998 | A |
5768539 | Metz et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5771354 | Crawford | Jun 1998 | A |
5778395 | Whiting et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790753 | Krishnamoorthy et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5805809 | Singh et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809144 | Sirbu et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812881 | Ku et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5818711 | Schwabe et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5822537 | Katseff et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5835722 | Bradshaw et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838910 | Domenikos et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5855020 | Kirsch | Dec 1998 | A |
5874986 | Gibbon et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5878425 | Redpath | Mar 1999 | A |
5881229 | Singh et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5881232 | Cheng et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5892915 | Duso et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5892953 | Bhagria et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5895454 | Harrington | Apr 1999 | A |
5895471 | King et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5901315 | Edwards et al. | May 1999 | A |
5903721 | Sixtus | May 1999 | A |
5903732 | Reed et al. | May 1999 | A |
5903892 | Hoffert et al. | May 1999 | A |
5905868 | Baghai et al. | May 1999 | A |
5905990 | Inglett | May 1999 | A |
5909545 | Frese et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5911043 | Duffy et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5918015 | Suzuki et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5923885 | Johnson | Jul 1999 | A |
5925126 | Hsieh et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5929849 | Kikinis | Jul 1999 | A |
5931907 | Davies et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5933603 | Vahalia et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5933822 | Braden-Harder et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5943424 | Berger et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5948062 | Tzelnic et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5948065 | Eilert et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5949877 | Traw et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5953506 | Kalra et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956717 | Kraay et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5960411 | Hartman et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5960439 | Hamner et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5961586 | Pedersen | Oct 1999 | A |
5961591 | Jones et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5963444 | Shidara et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5963944 | Adams | Oct 1999 | A |
5973696 | Agranat et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5987454 | Hobbs | Nov 1999 | A |
6003065 | Yan et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6003095 | Pekowski et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6014686 | Elnozahy et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6018619 | Allard et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6026166 | LeBourgeois | Feb 2000 | A |
6028925 | Van Berkum et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6038379 | Fletcher et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6038610 | Belfiore et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6047323 | Krause | Apr 2000 | A |
6049835 | Gagnon | Apr 2000 | A |
6061738 | Osaku et al. | May 2000 | A |
6065043 | Domenikos et al. | May 2000 | A |
6076104 | McCue | Jun 2000 | A |
6081842 | Shachar et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6085186 | Christianson et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6085193 | Malkin et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6088705 | Lightstone | Jul 2000 | A |
6092194 | Touboul | Jul 2000 | A |
6094649 | Bowen et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6099408 | Schneier et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6101482 | Diangelo et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6101491 | Woods | Aug 2000 | A |
6101537 | Edelstein et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108420 | Larose et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6115741 | Domenikos et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6138271 | Keeley | Oct 2000 | A |
6154878 | Saboff | Nov 2000 | A |
6157948 | Inoue et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6173330 | Guo et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6185608 | Hon et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192398 | Hunt | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192408 | Vahalia et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195694 | Chen et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6212640 | Abdelnur et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6219693 | Napolitano et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6226665 | Deo et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6253234 | Hunt et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6275470 | Ricciulli | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6275496 | Burns et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278992 | Curtis et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282712 | Davis et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6298356 | Jawahar et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6301685 | Shigeta | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311221 | Raz et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6330561 | Cohen et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6343287 | Kumar et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6347398 | Parthasarathy et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6356946 | Clegg et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6369467 | Noro | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6370686 | Delo et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6374402 | Schmeidler et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6385596 | Wiser et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6385696 | Doweck et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6389467 | Eyal | May 2002 | B1 |
6418554 | Delo et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6418555 | Mohammed | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6418556 | Bennington et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6424991 | Gish | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6425017 | Dievendorff et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6449688 | Peters et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6453334 | Vinson et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6457076 | Cheng et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6508709 | Karmarkar | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6510458 | Berstis et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6510462 | Blumenau | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6510466 | Cox et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6524017 | Lecocq et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6574618 | Eylon et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6584507 | Bradley et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6587857 | Carothers et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6594682 | Peterson et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6598125 | Romm | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6601103 | Goldschmidt et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6605956 | Farnworth et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6609114 | Gressel et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6611812 | Hurtado et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6622137 | Ravid et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6622171 | Gupta et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6636961 | Braun et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6660110 | Gayda | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6687745 | Franco et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6694510 | Willems | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6697869 | Mallart et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6711619 | Chandramohan et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6732179 | Brown et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6735631 | Oehrke et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6757708 | Craig et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6757894 | Eylon et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6763370 | Schmeidler et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6772209 | Chernock et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6775779 | England et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6779179 | Romm et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785768 | Peters et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6785865 | Cote et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6801507 | Humpleman et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6810525 | Safadi et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6816909 | Chang et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6816950 | Nichols | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6832222 | Zimowski | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6836794 | Lucowsky et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6854009 | Hughes | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6891740 | Williams | May 2005 | B2 |
6918113 | Patel et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6925495 | Hedge et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6938096 | Greschler et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6959320 | Shah et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6970866 | Pravetz et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
7028305 | Schaefer et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7043524 | Shah et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7051315 | Artzi et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7062567 | Benitez et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7096253 | Vinson et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7112138 | Hedrick et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7191441 | Abbott et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7192352 | Walker et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7197516 | Hipp et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
8752128 | Hitomi et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
20010003828 | Peterson et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010014878 | Mitra et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010034736 | Eylon et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010037399 | Eylon et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010037400 | Raz et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010044850 | Raz et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010044851 | Rothman et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020015106 | Taylor, Jr. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020019864 | Mayer | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020042833 | Hendler et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020057893 | Wood et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020059402 | Belanger | May 2002 | A1 |
20020065848 | Walker et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020078170 | Brewer et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020078203 | Greschler et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020083183 | Pujare et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020083187 | Sim et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087717 | Artzi et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020087883 | Wohlgemuth et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020087963 | Eylon et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020091763 | Shah et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020116476 | Eyal et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020133491 | Sim et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020138640 | Raz et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020156911 | Croman et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020157089 | Patel et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030004882 | Holler et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009538 | Shah et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014466 | Berger et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030056112 | Vinson et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030105816 | Goswami | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030140160 | Raz et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040036722 | Warren | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040128342 | Maes et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040133657 | Smith et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040199566 | Carlson et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040230784 | Cohen | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040230971 | Rachman et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040267813 | Rivers-Moore et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040268361 | Schaefer | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050010607 | Parker et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050010670 | Greschler et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050091534 | Nave et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050114472 | Tan | May 2005 | A1 |
20050193139 | Vinson et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060010074 | Zeitsiff et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060031165 | Nave et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031679 | Soltis, Jr. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060047716 | Keith Jr. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060048136 | Vries et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060106770 | Vries | May 2006 | A1 |
20060123185 | de Vries et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136389 | Cover et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060224590 | Boozer et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070038642 | Durgin et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070043550 | Tzruya | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070067435 | Landis et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070074223 | Lescouet et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070126749 | Tzruya et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070129146 | Tzruya et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070129990 | Tzruya et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070130292 | Tzruyz et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070168309 | Tzruya et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070283361 | Blanchet et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080052716 | Theurer | Feb 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0813325 | Dec 1997 | EP |
0658837 | Jun 2000 | EP |
1020824 | Jul 2000 | EP |
1143349 | Oct 2001 | EP |
9840993 | Sep 1998 | WO |
9850853 | Nov 1998 | WO |
9957863 | Nov 1999 | WO |
9960458 | Nov 1999 | WO |
0004681 | Jan 2000 | WO |
0031657 | Jun 2000 | WO |
0031672 | Jun 2000 | WO |
0056028 | Sep 2000 | WO |
0127805 | Apr 2001 | WO |
0146856 | Jun 2001 | WO |
0244840 | Jun 2002 | WO |
2006022745 | Mar 2006 | WO |
2006047133 | May 2006 | WO |
2006055445 | May 2006 | WO |
2006102532 | Sep 2006 | WO |
2006102621 | Sep 2006 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Bailey, Peter et al., “Chart of Darkness: Mapping a Large Intranet,” Dept. of Computer Science, FEIT, The Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200, Australia, pp. 1-23, Nov. 11, 1999 [retrieved online at http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/nickcr/pubs/bailey—tr00.pdf]. |
Boneh, Dan et al., “An Attack on RSA Given a Small Fraction of the Private Key Bits,” Advances in Cryptology—ASIACRYPT '98, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1514, pp. 25-34, Oct. 1998 [retrieved online at http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/450/chp%253A10.1007%252F3-540-49649-1—3.pdf? auth66=1394831295—318c7a44939193b5a2aff612b2a047ac&ext=.pdf]. |
Brin, Sergey et al., “The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine,” Proceedings of the Seventh International World Wide Web Conference, pp. 107-117, Apr. 1998 [retrieved online at http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/361/1/1998-8.pdf]. |
Chu, Yang-Hua et al., “REFEREE: Trust Management for Web Applications,” Proceedings of the Sixth International World Wide Web Conference, 1997, retrieved online on Jun. 15, 2006 at http://www.si.umich.edu/˜presnick/papers/Referee/www6-referee.html. |
Faupel, Matthew, “Status of Industry Work on Signed Mobile Code,” Joint European Networking Conference (JENC), May 1997, 313-1-313-8. |
Fiedler, David et al., “UNIX System V. Release 4 Administration,” Second Edition, 1991, 1-13, 37-116, 152-153, 175-200, 291-312, Hayden Books, Carmel, Indiana, USA. |
George, Binto et al., “Secure Transaction Processing in Firm Real-Time Database Systems,” SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data 1997, 462-473, V26, Issue 2, Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) Press, Tucson, Arizona, United States, May 13, 1997. |
Gralla, Preston, “How the Internet Works: Chapter 44—Shopping on the Internet,” IEEE Personal Communications, Aug. 1999, 260-67, QUE—A division of Macmillan Computer Publishing, Millennium Edition. |
Microsoft Corp., “Computer Dictionary,” 3rd edition, 1997, pp. 119 & 305, Microsoft Press. |
Microsoft Corp., “Understanding Universal Plug and Play,” pp. 1-39, Feb. 2000. |
Morrow, Brian et al., “Indexing Within—The Lost Gold Within the Enterprise” Endeavors Technology, Aug. 22, 2000, pp. 1-6. |
Mullender, Sape J. et al., “Amoeba:A Distributed Operating System for the 1990's,” Computer Magazine, May 1990, 44-53, 23(5). |
Nakayoshi et al., “A Secure Private File System with Minimal System Administration,” Communications, Computers and Signal Processing, 1997 IEEE Pacific Rim Conference, 251-255, vol. 1. |
O'Mahony, Donal, “Security Considerations in a Network Management Environment,” 1994, 12-17, vol. 8, IEEE, USA. |
Pyarali, Irfan et al., “Design and Performance of an Object-Oriented Framework for High-Speed Electronic Medical Imaging,” Fall 1996, Computing Systems Journal, 331-375, vol. 9, http://www.cs.wustl.edu/˜schmidt/PDF/COOTS-96.pdf. |
Rappaport, Avi, “Robots & Spiders & Crawlers: How Web and Intranet Search Engines Follow Links to Build Indexes,” Infoseek Software, pp. 1-38 (Oct. 1999). |
Reinhardt, Robert B., “An Architectural Overview of UNIX Network Security,” ARINC Research Corporation, Sep. 19, 1992, retrieved online on Jun. 15, 2006 at http://www.clusit.it/whitepapers/unixnet.pdf. |
Sirbu, Marvin et al., “Netbill: An Internet Commerce System Optimized for Network-Delivered Services,” IEEE Personal Communications, 2(4):34-39, Aug. 1995. |
Tardo, Joseph et al., “Mobile Agent Security and Telescript,” 4th International Conference of the IEEE Computer Society (IEEE CompCon1996), Feb. 1996. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20170111361 A1 | Apr 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60853941 | Oct 2006 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15150874 | May 2016 | US |
Child | 15390326 | US | |
Parent | 14712339 | May 2015 | US |
Child | 15150874 | US | |
Parent | 14324571 | Jul 2014 | US |
Child | 14712339 | US | |
Parent | 13594041 | Aug 2012 | US |
Child | 14324571 | US | |
Parent | 11977187 | Oct 2007 | US |
Child | 13594041 | US |