Network security is becoming increasingly important as the information age continues to unfold. Network threats may take a variety of forms (e.g., unauthorized requests or data transfers, viruses, malware, large volumes of network traffic designed to overwhelm network resources, and the like). Many organizations subscribe to network-threat services that periodically provide information associated with network threats, for example, reports that include listings of network-threat indicators (e.g., network addresses, uniform resources identifiers (URIs), and the like). The information provided by such services may be utilized by organizations to identify network threats. For example, logs generated by the organization's network devices may be reviewed for data corresponding to the network-threat indicators provided by such services. But because the logs are generated based on the traffic processed by the network devices without regard to the network-threat indicators, this process is often tedious and time consuming and is exacerbated by the continuously evolving nature of potential threats. Accordingly, there is a need for rule-based network-threat detection.
The following presents a simplified summary in order to provide a basic understanding of some aspects of the disclosure. It is intended neither to identify key or critical elements of the disclosure nor to delineate the scope of the disclosure. The following summary merely presents some concepts of the disclosure in a simplified form as a prelude to the description below.
Aspects of this disclosure relate to rule-based network-threat detection. In accordance with embodiments of the disclosure, a packet-filtering device may receive packet-filtering rules configured to cause the packet-filtering device to identify packets corresponding to network-threat indicators. The packet-filtering device may receive packets and, for each packet, may determine that the packet corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule. The criteria may correspond to one or more of the network-threat indicators. The packet-filtering device may apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule. The operator may be configured to cause the packet-filtering device to either prevent the packet from continuing toward its destination or allow the packet to continue toward its destination. The packet-filtering device may generate a log entry comprising information from the packet-filtering rule that identifies the one or more network-threat indicators and indicating whether the packet-filtering device prevented the packet from continuing toward its destination or allowed the packet to continue toward its destination.
In some embodiments, the packet-filtering device may generate and communicate to a user device data indicating whether the packet-filtering device prevented the packet from continuing toward its destination or allowed the packet to continue toward its destination. The user device may receive the data and indicate in an interface displayed by the user device whether the packet-filtering device prevented the packet from continuing toward its destination or allowed the packet to continue toward its destination. The interface may comprise an element that when invoked by a user of the user device causes the user device to instruct the packet-filtering device to reconfigure the operator to prevent future packets corresponding to the criteria from continuing toward their respective destinations.
The present disclosure is pointed out with particularity in the appended claims. Features of the disclosure will become more apparent upon a review of this disclosure in its entirety, including the drawing figures provided herewith.
Some features herein are illustrated by way of example, and not by way of limitation, in the figures of the accompanying drawings, in which like reference numerals refer to similar elements, and wherein:
In the following description of various illustrative embodiments, reference is made to the accompanying drawings, which form a part hereof, and in which is shown, by way of illustration, various embodiments in which aspects of the disclosure may be practiced. It is to be understood that other embodiments may be utilized, and structural and functional modifications may be made, without departing from the scope of the disclosure.
Various connections between elements are discussed in the following description. These connections are general and, unless specified otherwise, may be direct or indirect, wired or wireless. In this respect, the specification is not intended to be limiting.
Environment 100 may also include one or more hosts, such as computing or network devices (e.g., servers, desktop computers, laptop computers, tablet computers, mobile devices, smartphones, routers, gateways, switches, access points, or the like). For example, network 102 may include hosts 110, 112, and 114, network 104 may include hosts 116, 118, and 120, network 106 may include hosts 122, 124, and 126, and network 108 may interface networks 102, 104, and 106 with one or more hosts associated with rule provider 128 or network-threat-intelligence providers 130, 132, and 134, threat hosts 136, 138, and 140, and benign host 142. Network-threat-intelligence providers 130, 132, and 134 may be associated with services that monitor network threats (e.g., threats associated with threat hosts 136, 138, and 140) and disseminate (e.g., to subscribers) network-threat-intelligence reports that include network-threat indicators (e.g., network addresses, ports, fully qualified domain names (FQDNs), uniform resource locators (URLs), uniform resource identifiers (URIs), or the like) associated with the network threats, as well as other information associated with the network threats, for example, the type of threat (e.g., phishing malware, botnet malware, or the like), geographic information (e.g., International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) country, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) country, or the like), anonymous proxies (e.g., Tor network, or the like), actors (e.g., the Russian Business Network (RBN), or the like).
Environment 100 may further include packet-filtering devices 144, 146, and 148. Packet-filtering device 144 may be located at boundary 150 between networks 102 and 108. Similarly, packet-filtering device 146 may be located at boundary 152 between networks 104 and 108, and packet-filtering device 148 may be located at boundary 154 between networks 106 and 108.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
For example, referring to
Returning to
Referring to
At step 17, three packets may be communicated by host 112 to threat host 136, and packet-filtering device 144 may receive each of the three packets, apply one or more of packet-filtering rules 218 to the three packets, determine that each of the three packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule of packet-filtering rules 404 (e.g., Rule: TI003), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., an ALLOW operator) to each of the three packets, allow each of the three packets to continue toward its respective destination (e.g., toward threat host 136), and generate log data for each of the three packets (as designated by the triangles over the line extending downward from packet-filtering device 144).
At step 18, packet-filtering device 144 may begin processing the log data generated in step 17. For example, referring to
Returning to
At step 20, packet-filtering device 144 may continue processing the log data generated in step 17 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 19. In some embodiments, packet-filtering device 144 may be configured in accordance with work-conserving scheduling in order to minimize latency (e.g., the time between when a packet corresponding to a network threat crosses boundary 150 and the time when an administrator associated with network 102 is presented with an interface indicating that the packet corresponding to the network threat has crossed boundary 150). For example, referring to
Returning to
Interface 600 may also include listing 606, which may comprise entries corresponding to network threats and, for each threat, associated information derived by packet-filtering device 144 from flow log 504 (e.g., a description of the threat, information derived from the consolidated information stored in flow log 504, the time of the last associated packet hit, a count of associated packet hits, a count of associated packets allowed by packet-filtering device 144 to continue toward their respective destinations, a count of associated packets prevented by packet-filtering device 144 from continuing toward their respective destinations) and a status of the operator included in the rule associated with the threat.
Packet-filtering device 144 may be configured to determine an ordering of the network threats, and listing 606 may be displayed in accordance with the ordering determined by packet-filtering device 144. In some embodiments, packet-filtering device 144 may be configured to determine a score for each of the network threats and the ordering may be determined based on the scores. In such embodiments, the scores may be determined based on a number of associated packet hits, times associated with the packet hits (e.g., time of day, time since last hit, or the like), whether the packet was destined for a network address associated with a host in network 102 or a host in network 108, one or more network-threat-intelligence providers that provided the network-threat indicators associated with the threat, the number of network-threat intelligence providers that provided the network-threat indicators associated with the threat, other information associated with the network threat (e.g., type of network threat, geographic information, anonymous proxies, actors, or the like).
For example, as illustrated in
Returning to
At step 23, packet-filtering device 144 may continue processing the log data generated in step 19 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 22. For example, referring to
Returning to
Interface 600 may include one or more block options that when invoked by a user of host 110 (e.g., the administrator of network 102) cause host 110 to instruct packet-filtering device 144 to reconfigure an operator of a packet-filtering rule included in packet-filtering rules 404 to prevent packets corresponding to the criteria specified by the packet-filtering rule from continuing toward their respective destinations. In some embodiments, listing 606 may include such a block option alongside each entry, and, when invoked, the block option may cause host 110 to instruct packet-filtering device 144 to reconfigure an operator of packet-filtering rules 404 that corresponds to the network threat associated with the entry. For example, interface 600 may include block option 608, which, when invoked, may cause host 110 to instruct packet-filtering device 144 to reconfigure an operator associated with Rule: TI003 (e.g., to reconfigure the operator to cause packet-filtering device 144 to prevent packets corresponding to the one or more criteria specified by Rule: TI003 (e.g., packets corresponding to the network-threat-indicators associated with Threat ID: Threat_3) from continuing toward their respective destinations).
Additionally or alternatively, when invoked, such a block option may cause host 110 to display another interface (e.g., an overlay, pop-up interface, or the like) associated with packet-filtering device 144. For example, referring to
Interface 610 may also include rule-preview listing 624, which may display a listing of rules that will be implemented by packet-filtering device 144 in response to the user invoking modify option 620. Rule-preview listing 624 may include one or more entries corresponding to each of specific block options 612, 614, 616, and 618. For example, entry 626 may correspond to, and display a rule configured to implement, specific block option 612 (e.g., Rule: TI003 with its operator reconfigured to BLOCK). Similarly, entries 628, 630, and 632 may correspond to, and display rules configured to implement, specific block options 614, 616, and 618 (e.g., one or more new rules generated by packet-filtering device 144 based on data derived from flow log 504 (e.g., a network address associated with host 112)). Responsive to a user invoking one or more of specific block options 612, 614, 616, or 618, the interface may select the corresponding rules, and responsive to a user invoking modify option 620, host 110 may instruct packet-filtering device 144 to implement the selected rules. Responsive to a user invoking cancel option 620, host 110 may redisplay interface 600.
Returning to
At step 27, three packets destined for threat host 136 may be communicated by host 112, and packet-filtering device 144 may receive each of the three packets, apply one or more of packet-filtering rules 218 to the three packets, determine that each of the three packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule of packet-filtering rules 404 (e.g., Rule: TI003), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., the BLOCK operator) to each of the three packets, prevent each of the three packets from continuing toward its respective destination (e.g., toward threat host 136), and generate log data for each of the three packets.
At step 28, packet-filtering device 144 may continue processing the log data generated in step 22 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 27. For example, referring to
Returning to
Referring to
At step 32, three packets destined for host 118 may be communicated by threat host 140, and packet-filtering device 146 may receive each of the three packets, apply one or more of its packet-filtering rules to the three packets, determine that each of the three packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule (e.g., the rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., an ALLOW operator) to each of the three packets, allow each of the three packets to continue toward its respective destination (e.g., toward host 118), and generate log data for each of the three packets.
At step 33, packet-filtering device 146 may continue processing the log data generated in step 30 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 33. At step 34, packet-filtering device 146 may generate data comprising an update for an interface associated with packet-filtering device 146 and displayed by host 116 (e.g., an interface similar to interface 600) and may communicate the data comprising the update to host 116.
At step 35, three packets destined for host 120 may be communicated by threat host 140, and packet-filtering device 146 may receive each of the three packets, apply one or more of its packet-filtering rules to the three packets, determine that each of the three packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule (e.g., the rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., an ALLOW operator) to each of the three packets, allow each of the three packets to continue toward its respective destination (e.g., toward host 120), and generate log data for each of the three packets. At step 36, packet-filtering device 146 may continue processing the log data generated in step 32 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 35.
At step 37, packet-filtering device 146 may generate data comprising an update for the interface associated with packet-filtering device 146 and displayed by host 116 and may communicate the data comprising the update to host 116. At step 38, host 116 may communicate instructions to packet-filtering device 146 instructing packet-filtering device 146 to reconfigure one or more of its packet-filtering rules (e.g., to reconfigure the operator of the rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1 to BLOCK), and, at step 39, packet-filtering device 146 may reconfigure its packet-filtering rules accordingly.
At step 40, three packets destined for host 118 and three packets destined for host 120 may be communicated by threat host 140, and packet-filtering device 146 may receive each of the six packets, apply one or more of its packet-filtering rules to the six packets, determine that each of the six packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule (e.g., the rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., the BLOCK operator) to each of the six packets, prevent each of the six packets from continuing toward its respective destination, and generate log data for each of the six packets. At step 41, packet-filtering device 146 may continue processing the log data generated in step 35 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 40.
At step 42, packet-filtering device 146 may communicate data to rule provider 128 (e.g., data indicating that fifteen packets corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1 were received by packet-filtering device 146, packet-filtering device 146 allowed nine of the fifteen packets to continue toward hosts in network 104, and packet-filtering device 146 prevented six of the fifteen packets from continuing toward hosts in network 104).
Referring to
At step 44, three packets destined for host 126 may be communicated by threat host 140, and packet-filtering device 148 may receive each of the three packets, apply one or more of its packet-filtering rules to the three packets, determine that each of the three packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule (e.g., a rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., an ALLOW operator) to each of the three packets, allow each of the three packets to continue toward its respective destination (e.g., toward host 126), and generate log data for each of the three packets. At step 45, packet-filtering device 148 may begin processing the log data generated in step 44.
At step 46, three packets destined for host 126 may be communicated by threat host 140, and packet-filtering device 148 may receive each of the three packets, apply one or more of its packet-filtering rules to the three packets, determine that each of the three packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule (e.g., the rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., an ALLOW operator) to each of the three packets, allow each of the three packets to continue toward its respective destination (e.g., toward host 126), and generate log data for each of the three packets.
At step 47, packet-filtering device 148 may continue processing the log data generated in step 44 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 47. At step 48, packet-filtering device 148 may generate data comprising an update for an interface associated with packet-filtering device 148 and displayed by host 122 (e.g., an interface similar to interface 600) and may communicate the data comprising the update to host 122.
At step 49, two packets may be communicated between host 124 and threat host 138 (e.g., a packet originating from host 124 and destined for threat host 138 and a packet originating from threat host 138 and destined for host 124), and packet-filtering device 148 may receive each of the two packets, apply one or more of its packet-filtering rules to the two packets, determine that each of the two packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule (e.g., a rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_5), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., an ALLOW operator) to each of the two packets, allow each of the two packets to continue toward its respective destination, and generate log data for each of the two packets. At step 50, packet-filtering device 148 may continue processing the log data generated in step 46 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 49.
At step 51, packet-filtering device 148 may generate data comprising an update for the interface associated with packet-filtering device 148 and displayed by host 122 and may communicate the data comprising the update to host 122. At step 52, host 122 may communicate instructions to packet-filtering device 148 instructing packet-filtering device 148 to reconfigure one or more of its packet-filtering rules to block all packets corresponding to the network-threat indicators associated with Threat ID: Threat_1 (e.g., to reconfigure the operator of the rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1 to BLOCK), and to implement one or more new packet-filtering rules configured to block all packets originating from host 126, and, at step 53, packet-filtering device 148 may reconfigure its packet-filtering rules accordingly.
At step 54, threat host 140 may generate a packet destined for host 124 and a packet destined for host 126, host 126 may generate a packet destined for benign host 142 and a packet destined for host 124, and packet-filtering device 148 may receive each of the four packets, apply one or more of its packet-filtering rules to the four packets, determine that the packets generated by threat host 140 correspond to criteria specified by the packet-filtering rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1, apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1 (e.g., the BLOCK operator) to each of the two packets generated by threat host 140, determine that the packets generated by host 126 correspond to criteria specified by the new packet-filtering rules (e.g., a network address associated with host 126), apply an operator specified by the new packet-filtering rules (e.g., the BLOCK operator) to each of the two packets generated by host 126, prevent each of the four packets from continuing toward its respective destination, and generate log data for each of the four packets.
At step 55, packet-filtering device 148 may continue processing the log data generated in step 49 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 54. At step 56, packet-filtering device 148 may communicate data to rule provider 128 (e.g., data indicating that eight packets corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_1 were received by packet-filtering device 148, packet-filtering device 148 allowed six of the eight packets to continue toward hosts in network 106, packet-filtering device 148 prevented two of the eight packets from continuing toward hosts in network 106, two packets corresponding to Threat ID: Threat_5 were received by packet-filtering device 148, and packet-filtering device 148 allowed both of the two packets to continue toward their respective destinations).
Referring to
At step 60, four packets may be communicated between host 114 and benign host 142 (e.g., two packets originating from host 114 and destined for benign host 142 and two packets originating from benign host 142 and destined for host 114), and packet-filtering device 144 may receive each of the four packets, apply one or more of packet-filtering rules 218 to the four packets, and allow the four packets to continue toward their respective destinations.
At step 61, three packets destined for threat host 136 may be communicated by host 112, and packet-filtering device 144 may receive each of the three packets, apply one or more of packet-filtering rules 218 to the three packets, determine that each of the three packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule of packet-filtering rules 404 (e.g., Rule: TI003), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., the BLOCK operator) to each of the three packets, prevent each of the three packets from continuing toward its respective destination (e.g., toward threat host 136), and generate log data for each of the three packets.
At step 62, packet-filtering device 144 may continue processing the log data generated in step 27 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 62. For example, referring to
At step 63, packet-filtering device 144 may utilize flow log 504 to generate data comprising an update for interface 600 and may communicate the data to host 110. For example, referring to
At step 64, three packets destined for host 112 and three packets destined for host 114 may be communicated by threat host 140, and packet-filtering device 144 may receive each of the six packets, apply one or more of packet-filtering rules 218 to the three packets, determine that each of the three packets corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule of packet-filtering rules 404 (e.g., Rule: TI001), apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule (e.g., the BLOCK operator) to each of the six packets, prevent each of the six packets from continuing toward its respective destination, and generate log data for each of the six packets.
At step 65, packet-filtering device 144 may continue processing the log data generated in step 61 and may begin processing the log data generated in step 64. For example, referring to
At step 66, packet-filtering device 144 may utilize flow log 504 to generate data comprising an update for interface 600 and may communicate the data to host 110. For example, referring to
At step 67, packet-filtering device 144 may continue processing the log data generated in step 64. For example, referring to
At step 68, packet-filtering device 144 may utilize flow log 504 to generate data comprising an update for interface 600 and may communicate the data to host 110. For example, referring to
At step 710, the packet-filtering device may generate a log entry comprising information from the packet-filtering rule that is distinct from the criteria and identifies the one or more network-threat indicators. For example, packet-filtering device 144 may generate an entry in packet log 502 comprising Threat ID: Threat_3 for the packet generated by host 112. At step 712, the packet-filtering device may generate data indicating whether the packet-filtering device prevented the packet from continuing toward its destination (e.g., blocked the packet) or allowed the packet to continue toward its destination. For example, packet-filtering device 144 may generate data comprising an update for interface 600 that indicates that packet-filtering device 144 allowed the packet generated by host 112 to continue toward threat host 136. At step 714, the packet-filtering device may communicate the data to a user device. For example, packet-filtering device 144 may communicate the data comprising the update for interface 600 to host 110. At step 716, the packet-filtering device may indicate in an interface whether the packet-filtering device prevented the packet from continuing toward its destination or allowed the packet to continue toward its destination. For example, communicating the data comprising the update for interface 600 may cause host 110 to indicate in interface 600 that packet-filtering device 144 allowed the packet generated by host 112 to continue toward threat host 136.
The functions and steps described herein may be embodied in computer-usable data or computer-executable instructions, such as in one or more program modules, executed by one or more computers or other devices to perform one or more functions described herein. Generally, program modules include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, etc. that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types when executed by one or more processors in a computer or other data-processing device. The computer-executable instructions may be stored on a computer-readable medium such as a hard disk, optical disk, removable storage media, solid-state memory, RAM, etc. As will be appreciated, the functionality of the program modules may be combined or distributed as desired. In addition, the functionality may be embodied in whole or in part in firmware or hardware equivalents, such as integrated circuits, application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA), and the like. Particular data structures may be used to more effectively implement one or more aspects of the disclosure, and such data structures are contemplated to be within the scope of computer-executable instructions and computer-usable data described herein.
Although not required, one of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that various aspects described herein may be embodied as a method, system, apparatus, or one or more computer-readable media storing computer-executable instructions. Accordingly, aspects may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment, an entirely firmware embodiment, or an embodiment combining software, hardware, and firmware aspects in any combination.
As described herein, the various methods and acts may be operative across one or more computing devices and networks. The functionality may be distributed in any manner or may be located in a single computing device (e.g., a server, client computer, or the like).
Aspects of the disclosure have been described in terms of illustrative embodiments thereof. Numerous other embodiments, modifications, and variations within the scope and spirit of the appended claims will occur to persons of ordinary skill in the art from a review of this disclosure. For example, one of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the steps illustrated in the illustrative figures may be performed in other than the recited order and that one or more illustrated steps may be optional. Any and all features in the following claims may be combined or rearranged in any way possible.
This application is a continuation of and claims priority to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/690,302, filed Apr. 17, 2015, and entitled “RULE-BASED NETWORK-THREAT DETECTION,” the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety and made part hereof.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6098172 | Coss et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6226372 | Beebe et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6317837 | Kenworthy | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6484261 | Wiegel | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6611875 | Chopra et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6662235 | Callis et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
7089581 | Nagai et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7107613 | Chen et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7215637 | Ferguson | May 2007 | B1 |
7227842 | Ji et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7237267 | Rayes et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7263099 | Woo et al. | Aug 2007 | B1 |
7299353 | Le Pennec et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7331061 | Ramsey et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7478429 | Lyon | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7539186 | Aerrabotu et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7684400 | Govindarajan et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7710885 | Ilnicki et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7721084 | Salminen et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7818794 | Wittman | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7954143 | Aaron | May 2011 | B2 |
8004994 | Darisi et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
3042167 | Fulp et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
8037517 | Fulp et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8176561 | Hurst | May 2012 | B1 |
8306994 | Kenworthy | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8495725 | Ahn | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8726379 | Stiansen et al. | May 2014 | B1 |
8806638 | Mani | Aug 2014 | B1 |
8856926 | Narayanaswamy et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8935785 | Pandrangi | Jan 2015 | B2 |
9094445 | Moore et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9124552 | Moore | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9137205 | Rogers et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9160713 | Moore | Oct 2015 | B2 |
20010039579 | Trcka | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010039624 | Kellum | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020016858 | Sawada et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020038339 | Xu | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020049899 | Kenworthy | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020165949 | Na et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020198981 | Corl et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030035370 | Brustoloni | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030097590 | Syvanne | May 2003 | A1 |
20030105976 | Copeland, III | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030120622 | Nurmela et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030123456 | Denz et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030142681 | Chen et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030145225 | Bruton, III et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030154297 | Suzuki et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030154399 | Zuk | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030188192 | Tang et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212900 | Liu et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040010712 | Hui et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040073655 | Kan et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040088542 | Daude et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040093513 | Cantrell et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040151155 | Jouppi | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040177139 | Schuba et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040193943 | Angelino et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040205360 | Norton et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040250124 | Chesla | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050010765 | Swander et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050114704 | Swander | May 2005 | A1 |
20050117576 | McDysan et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050125697 | Tahara | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050138204 | Iyer et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050141537 | Kumar et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050183140 | Goddard | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050229246 | Rajagopal et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050251570 | Heasman et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050286522 | Paddon et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060048142 | Roese et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060053491 | Khuti | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060070122 | Bellovin | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060104202 | Reiner | May 2006 | A1 |
20060114899 | Toumura et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136987 | Okuda | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060137009 | Chesla | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060146879 | Anthias et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060195896 | Fulp et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060212572 | Afek et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060248580 | Fulp et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060262798 | Joshi et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070083924 | Lu | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070211644 | Ottamalika | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070240208 | Yu et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080005795 | Acharya et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080043739 | Suh et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080072307 | Maes | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080077705 | Li et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080163333 | Kasralikar | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080229415 | Kapoor et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080235755 | Blaisdell et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080279196 | Friskney et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080301765 | Nicol et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090138938 | Harrison et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090172800 | Wool | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090328219 | Narayanaswamy | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100011433 | Harrison et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100011434 | Kay | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100082811 | Van Der Merwe et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100095367 | Narayanaswamy | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100132027 | Ou | May 2010 | A1 |
20100199346 | Ling et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100211678 | McDysan et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100242098 | Kenworthy | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100268799 | Maestas | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100296441 | Barkan | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100303240 | Beachem et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110055916 | Ahn | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110055923 | Thomas | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110088092 | Nguyen et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110185055 | Nappier et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110270956 | McDysan et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120023576 | Sorensen et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120113987 | Riddoch et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120240135 | Risbood et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120264443 | Ng et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120314617 | Erichsen et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120331543 | Bostrom et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130059527 | Hasesaka et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130061294 | Kenworthy | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130117852 | Stute | May 2013 | A1 |
20130254766 | Zuo et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20140075510 | Sonoda | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140115654 | Rogers et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140201123 | Ahn et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140215574 | Erb et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140281030 | Cui et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140283004 | Moore | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140283030 | Moore et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140366132 | Stiansen et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150237012 | Moore | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150304354 | Rogers et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150334125 | Bartos | Nov 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2005328336 | Sep 2011 | AU |
2006230171 | Jun 2012 | AU |
2600236 | Oct 2006 | CA |
1006701 | Jun 2000 | EP |
1313290 | May 2003 | EP |
1484884 | Dec 2004 | EP |
1677484 | Jul 2006 | EP |
2385676 | Nov 2011 | EP |
2498442 | Sep 2012 | EP |
1864226 | May 2013 | EP |
20010079361 | Aug 2001 | KR |
2005046145 | May 2005 | WO |
2006093557 | Sep 2006 | WO |
2006105093 | Oct 2006 | WO |
2011038420 | Mar 2011 | WO |
2012146265 | Nov 2012 | WO |
Entry |
---|
D. Comer, “Analysis of a Heuristic for Full Trie Minimization”, ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 6(3): 513-537, Sep. 1981. |
R.L. Graham et al., “Optimization and Approximation in Deterministic Sequencing and Scheduling: A Survey”, Annals of Discrete Mathematics, 5: 287-326, 1979. |
E.L. Lawler, “Sequencing Jobs to Minimize Total Weighted Completion oTime Subject to Precedence Constraints”, Annals of Discrete Mathematics, 2: 75-90, 1978. |
J.K. Lenstra et al., “Complexity of Scheduling Under Precedence Constraints”, Operations Research, 26(1): 22-35,1978. |
R. Rivest, “On Self-Organizing Sequential Search Heuristics”, Communications of the ACM, 19(2): 1976. |
W.E. Smith, “Various Optimizers for Single-Stage Productions”, Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 3: 59-66, 1956. |
Bellion, “High Performance Packet Classification”, http://www.hipac.org (Publication Date Unknown). |
Oct. 18, 2011—(EP) Communication Pursuant to Article 94(3)—App 06 758 213.0. |
Jun. 9, 2011—(US) Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 11/390,976. |
Jun. 26, 2012—(EP) Extended Search Report—App 05857614.1. |
Jun. 9, 2012—(AU) Notice of Acceptance—App 2006230171. |
Nov. 11, 2011—(AU) Second Office Action—App 2006230171. |
Jan. 17, 2013—(CA) Office Action—App 2,600,236. |
Jan. 16, 2013—(CA) Office Action—App 2,594,020. |
Nov. 20, 2012—(EP) Communication under rule 71(3)—App 06 758 213.0. |
Apr. 18, 2013—(EP) Decision to Grant a European Patent—App 06758212.0. |
Aug. 25, 2011—(US) Non Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 12/871,806. |
Feb. 6, 2012—(US) Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 12/871,806. |
Aug. 7, 2012—(US) Non Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 12/871,806. |
Nov. 26, 2012—(US) Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 12/871,806. |
Apr. 4, 2013—(US) Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 12/871,806. |
Jan. 14, 2015—(EP) Extended Search Report—10819667.6. |
May 26, 2014—(CA) Office Action—App 2010297968. |
May 25, 2015—(AU) Notice of Acceptance—App 2010297968. |
May 14, 2015—(US) Non Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 13/940,240. |
Nov. 27, 2015—(US) Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 13/940,240. |
Jan. 28, 2016—(WO) International Search Report and Written Opinion—App PCT/US2015/062691. |
Dec. 22, 2015—(US) Final Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 14/714,207. |
Feb. 26, 2016—(US) Non Final Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 14/253,992. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International App. No. PCT/US2013/057502, dated Nov. 7, 2013. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International App. No. PCT/US2013/072566, dated Mar. 24, 2014. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International App. No. PCT/US2014/023286, dated Jun. 24, 2014. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International App. No. PCT/US2014/027723, dated Jun. 26, 2014. |
Communication Relating to the Results of the Partial International Search for International App. No. PCT/US2015/024691, dated Jul. 10, 2015. |
Greenwald et al., Designing an Academic Firewall: Policy, Practice, and Experience With SURF, Proceedings of SNDSS '96, IEEE, 1996, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. |
Reumann et al., Adaptive Packet Filters, IEEE, 2001, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. |
Mizuno et al., A New Remote Configurable Firewall System for Home-use Gateways, IEEE, 2004, NTT Information Sharing Platform Laboratories. |
Kindervag et al., Build Security Into Your Network's DNA: The Zero Trust Network Architecture, Nov. 5, 2010, Forrester Research, Inc., Cambridge MA. |
Moore, SBIR Case Study: Centripetal Networks, How CNI Leveraged DHS S&T SBIR Funding to Launch a Successful Cyber Security Company, Cyber Security Division, 2012 Principal Investigators' Meeting, Oct. 10, 2012, Centripetal Networks, Inc. |
Designing a Zero Trust Network With Next-Generation Firewalls, Palo Alto Networks: Technology Brief, viewed Oct. 21, 2012, Palo Alto Networks, Santa Clara, CA. |
Control Plane Policing Implementation Best Practices, Mar. 13, 2013, Cisco Systems. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International App. No. PCT/US2013/072566, dated Jul. 23, 2015. |
Statement RE: Related Application, dated Sep. 16, 2015. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International App. No. PCT/US2015/024691, dated Sep. 16, 2015. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International App. No. PCT/US2013/057502, dated May 7, 2015. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International App. No. PCT/US2014/023286, dated Sep. 24, 2015. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International App. No. PCT/US2014/027723, dated Sep. 24, 2015. |
Jan. 11, 2016—(US) Non Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 14/698,560. |
Apr. 27, 2011—(WO) International Search Report and Written Opinion—App PCT/US2010/054520. |
Mar. 4, 2011—(US) Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 11/316,331. |
Mar. 3, 2011—(EP) Communication Pursuant to Rules 70(2) and 70a(2)—App 06758213.0. |
Feb. 14, 2011—(EP) Search Report—App 06758213.0. |
Fulp, Errin: “Errin Fulp,” XP002618346, www.cs.wfu.edu/fulp/ewfPub.html, pp. 1-5 (Copyright 2010). |
Sep. 30, 2010—(US) Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 11/390,976. |
Sep. 10, 2010—(AU) Office Action—App 2006230171. |
Aug. 20, 2010—(AU) Office Action—App 2005328336. |
Jun. 23, 2010—(US) Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 11/316.331. |
Apr. 29, 2010—(US) Interview Summary—U.S. Appl. No. 11/390,976. |
Mar. 26, 2010—(US) Final Rejection—U.S. Appl. No. 11/390,976. |
Sep. 14, 2009 (US) Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 11/316,331. |
Jun. 24, 2009—(US) Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 11/390,976. |
Jul. 3, 2008—(WO) Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority—App PCT/US06/11291. |
Aug. 31, 2007—(EP) Communication Pursuant to Rules 109 and 110—App 05857614.1. |
Acharya et al, “OPTWALL: A Hierarchical Traffic-Aware Firewall,” Department of Computer Science, Telecommunications Program, University of Pittsburgh, pp. 1-11 (2007). |
Sep. 11, 2006—(WO) Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority—App PCT/US05/47008. |
Tarsa et al., “Balancing Trie-Based Policy representations for Network Firewalls,” Department of Computer Science, Wake Forest University, pp. 1-6 (2006). |
Fulp, “Trie-Based Policy Representations for Network Firewalls,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Computer Communications (2005). |
E. Fulp, “Optimization of Network Firewall Policies Using Ordered Sets and Directed Acyclical Graphs”, Technical Report, Computer Scient Department, Wake Forest University, Jan. 2004. |
E. Fulp et al., “Network Firewall Policy Tries”, Technical Report, Computer Science Department, Wake Forest University, 2004. |
E. Al-Shaer et al., “Modeling and Management of Firewall Policies”, IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 1(1): 2004. |
E.W. Fulp, “Firewall Architectures for High Speed Networks”, U.S. Department of Energy Grant Application, Funded Sep. 2003. |
E. Al-Shaer et al., “Firewall Policy Advisor for Anomaly Discovery and Rule Editing”, Proceedings of the IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management, 2003. |
V.P. Ranganath, “A Set-Based Approach to Packet Classification”, Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing and Systems, 889-894, 2003. |
M. Christiansen et al., “Using IDDsfor Packet Filtering”, Technical Report, BRICS, Oct. 2002. |
Lee et al., “Development Framework for Firewall Processors,” IEEE, pp. 352-355 (2002). |
L. Qui et al., “Fast Firewall Implementations for Software and Hardware-Based Routers”, Proceedings of ACM Sigmetrics, Jun. 2001. |
D. Eppstein et al., “Internet Packet Filter Management and Rectangle Geometry”, Proceedings of the Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, 827-835, 2001. |
E. Fulp, “Preventing Denial of Service Attacks on Quality of Service”, Proceedings of the 2001 DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition II, 2001. |
S. Goddard et al., “An Unavailability Analysis of Firewall Sandwich Configurations”, Proceedings of the 6th IEEE Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering, 2001. |
G.V. Rooij, “Real Stateful TCP Packet Filtering in IP Filter”, Proceedings of the 10th USENIX Security Symposium, 2001. |
P. Warkhede et al., “Fast Packet Classification for Two-Dimensional Conflict-Free Filters”, Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, 1434-1443, 2001. |
D. Decasper et al., “Router Plugins: A Software Architecture for Next-Generation Routers”, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 8(1): Feb. 2000. |
A. Feldmann et al., “Tradeoffs for Packet Classification”, Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM, 397-413, 2000. |
X. Gan et al “LSMAC vs. LSNAT: Scalable Cluster-based Web servers”, Journal of Networks, Software Tools, and Applications, 3(3): 175-185, 2000. |
A. Hari et al., “Detecting and Resolving Packet Filter Conflicts”, Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, 1203-1212, 2000. |
O. Paul et al., “A full Bandwidth ATM Firewall”, Proceedings of the 6th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security ESORICS'2000, 2000. |
J. Xu et al., “Design and Evaluation of a High-Performance ATM Firewall Switch and Its Applications”, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 17(6): 1190-1200, Jun. 1999. |
C. Benecke, “A Parallel Packet Screen for High Speed Networks”, Proceedings of the 15th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, 1999. |
R. Funke et al., “Performance Evaluation of Firewalls in Gigabit-Networks”, Proceedings of the Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 1999. |
S. Suri et al., “Packet Filtering in High Speed Networks”, Proceedings of the Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, 969-970, 1999. |
J. Ellermann et al., “Firewalls for ATM Networks”, Proceedings of INFOSEC'COM, 1998. |
V. Srinivasan et al., “Fast and Scalable Layer Four Switching”, Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, 191-202, 1998. |
M. Degermark et al., “Small Forwarding Tables for Fast Routing Lookups”, Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, 4-13, 1997. |
S,M. Bellovin et al., “Network Firewalls”, IEEE Communications Magazine, 50-57, 1994. |
W.E. Leland et al., “On the Self-Similar Nature of Ethernet Traffic”, IEEE Transactions on Networking, 2(1); 15, 1994. |
G. Brightwell et al., “Counting Linear Extensions is #P-Complete”, Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 1991. |
M. Al-Suwaiyel et al., “Algorithms for Trie Compaction”, ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 9(2): 243-263, Jun. 1984. |
Jun 9, 2016—(WO) International Search Report—PCT/US2016/026339. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14690302 | Apr 2015 | US |
Child | 14855374 | US |