Embodiments of the disclosure relate to the field of cyber security. More specifically, embodiments of the disclosure relate to a system and computerized method that detects a system call during processing of an object by one or more virtual machines and classifies the detected system call, where the assigned classification at least partially controls the manner in which further virtual processing of that detected system call is conducted.
Malware detection systems often employ virtual environments to enable potentially malicious objects to be safely analyzed during run-time in one or more sandboxed virtual machines. Each virtual machine is provisioned with a guest image, where the guest image is configured in accordance with a particular software profile. This particular software profile is dependent on the type of object being analyzed. For example, where the object is an accessed web page, the software profile may prescribe a browser application that runs over a specific operating system (e.g., Windows®, Linux®, etc.). As another example, where the object is an electronic message, the software profile may prescribe an email application running over the same or a different operating system (e.g., Microsoft® Mobile®, Blackberry® OS, etc.).
For processing a suspicious object, the virtual machine is provisioned with a guest image that features software components for the prescribed software profile. Typically, during virtual processing, the suspicious object may cause a software application associated with the guest image to initiate a system call that requests a service from the guest operating system (OS). The service may include a hardware-related service (e.g., accessing a hard disk drive, etc.). According to certain conventional security architectures, all system calls are intercepted by a virtual machine monitor (VMM), which is operating in kernel mode. Thereafter, the parameters associated with the system call are subsequently passed to virtual machine memory inspection logic (VMMI), which monitors behaviors (e.g., activities and/or omissions) conducted by virtualized device hardware in the processing of an instruction pertaining to the system call. Stated differently, the VMM passes control of the virtual processing to the VMMI, which is operating in user mode.
This conventional system call monitoring process features a few disadvantages. One disadvantage is that the amount of processing time required for conducting a context switch in passing parameters associated with the system call (from the VMM operating in the kernel mode to the VMMI operating in the user mode) is substantial which may impact performance of the malware detection system.
Embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example and not by way of limitation in the figures of the accompanying drawings, in which like references indicate similar elements and in which:
Various embodiments of the disclosure relate to a system and computerized method that detects a system call during processing of an object by one or more virtual machines and classifies the detected system call. The assigned classification may be used to control whether or not the handling of the detected system call is conducted by virtualized device hardware targeted by the system call. Hence, by classifying the system call and controlling the handling of these system calls, the monitoring of guest operating system (OS) activity may be controlled.
A system call includes a request to the OS kernel for a service. Normally, the OS kernel manages input/output (I/O) requests from software and translates these requests into data processing instructions for a central processing unit (CPU) or other electronic components. The service may include hardware-related services (e.g., access to a storage device such as a hard disk drive), or process management (e.g., creation, termination, scheduling of a process). In a virtual analysis environment, a system call may be initiated from a process running on a virtual machine (VM). A virtual machine monitor (VMM), also referred to as a hypervisor, manages VM operability, including processing of the guest OS, and is configured to detect and control the handling of system calls through call classification.
Herein, system calls may be classified into a plurality of classes. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, these classes may include (1) a first class that features a first set of system calls (sometimes referred to as “system-wide” system calls), and (2) a second class that features a second set of system calls (sometimes referred to as “process-specific” system calls). It is contemplated that there is no specific set of system calls that are necessary to the implementation of the invention, as the illustrative system calls for a selected class may be dynamic in nature based on the security threat landscape.
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, “system-wide” system calls represent selected system calls that tend to occur during malicious attacks, but are less processing intensive and/or less frequently initiated than other types of system calls. “Process-specific” system calls represent selected system calls that tend to involve behaviors that may be more susceptible to malicious attacks for that particular process.
When the detected system call is a member of the first class (and in some cases the second class), the detected system call is serviced by virtualized device hardware and activities associated with the virtual processing of the detected system call by the virtualized device hardware are monitored by virtual machine memory inspection logic (VMMI) residing in the VMM. Similarly, when the detected system call is a member of the second class and the process initiating the detected system call has been identified as “suspicious” (e.g., activities of the process suggests that the process is associated with a malicious attack), the detected system call is serviced by virtualized device hardware and activities associated with the virtual processing of the detected system call by the virtualized device hardware are monitored by the VMMI.
For instance, in some deployments of the network appliance, VMMI monitors virtual processing of system-wide system calls by the virtualized device hardware, regardless of the process from which the system-wide system calls originated. Additionally, the VMMI monitors virtual processing of process-specific system calls where the process has been identified as suspicious. These process-specific system calls are applicable to all of the suspicious processes.
For other deployments, the VMMI monitors virtual processing of system-wide system calls by the virtualized device hardware, regardless of the process from which the system-wide system calls originated. The VMMI monitors virtual processing of the process-specific system calls (where the process has been identified as suspicious), but the process-specific system calls are selected for each type of process. As a result, the process-specific system calls may vary, in part or in total, from one categorized process to another categorized process. This deployment would allow the network appliance to concentrate resources in monitoring for different system calls among the processes, such as those system calls with a higher likelihood of being associated with a malicious attack for that particular process.
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the VMMI will not monitor the second set of system calls (e.g., process-specific system calls) in its classification of a detected system call from a particular process until a triggering event occurs. In response to the triggering event, the VMMI now classifies the detected system call based on both the first and second sets of system calls. An example of a triggering event may include detecting a “system-wide” system call previously initiated by the particular (first) process during virtual processing of the object under analysis within the virtual machine. Another example of a triggering event may include detecting a “system-wide” system call which was previously initiated by another (second) process and created the particular (first) process. Hence, at a minimum, the first process is deemed to be suspicious.
In the following description, certain terminology is used to describe aspects of the invention. For example, in certain situations, terms “logic,” “component” and “engine” are representative of hardware, firmware and/or software that is configured to perform one or more functions. As hardware, logic (or component or engine) may include circuitry having data processing or storage functionality. Examples of such processing or storage circuitry may include, but is not limited or restricted to a processor; one or more processor cores; a programmable gate array; a microcontroller; an application specific integrated circuit; receiver, transmitter and/or transceiver circuitry; semiconductor memory; or combinatorial logic, or combinations of one or more of the above components.
Logic (or component or engine) may be in the form of one or more software modules, such as executable code in the form of an executable application, an application programming interface (API), a subroutine, a function, a procedure, an applet, a servlet, a routine, source code, object code, a shared library/dynamic load library, or one or more instructions. These software modules may be stored in any type of a suitable non-transitory storage medium, or transitory storage medium (e.g., electrical, optical, acoustical or other form of propagated signals such as carrier waves, infrared signals, or digital signals). Examples of a “non-transitory storage medium” may include, but are not limited or restricted to a programmable circuit; non-persistent storage such as volatile memory (e.g., any type of random access memory “RAM”); persistent storage such as non-volatile memory (e.g., read-only memory “ROM”, power-backed RAM, flash memory, phase-change memory, etc.), a solid-state drive, hard disk drive, an optical disc drive, or a portable memory device; and/or a semiconductor memory. As firmware, the executable code is stored in persistent storage.
The term “object” generally refers to a collection of data, whether in transit (e.g., over a network) or at rest (e.g., stored), often having a logical structure or organization that enables it to be classified for purposes of analysis. During analysis, for example, the object may exhibit a set of expected behaviors. The object may also exhibit a set of unexpected behaviors systematic of malicious activity that may provide evidence that the object may be classified as malicious.
In general, a “process” is an instance of software that is executed, in a virtual environment, for processing of an object under analysis. Each process may include one or more threads of execution (“threads”). For a multi-thread deployment, it is contemplated that each thread may be responsible for processing an object under analysis. The threads may operate successively or concurrently (e.g., at least partially overlapping in time) within the process, and share state information, memory and other process resources.
A “virtual machine” generally refers to an operating system (OS) or application environment that is virtualized and operates with virtualized device hardware, which may be different from the device on which the virtualization is conducted. Virtual machines may be based on specifications of a hypothetical computer or emulate the computer architecture and functions of a real world computing device.
A “network appliance” generally refers to an electronic device which network connectivity that typically includes a housing that protects, and sometimes encases, circuitry with data processing and/or data storage. Examples of a network appliance may include a server or an endpoint device that may include, but is not limited or restricted to a stationary or portable computer including a desktop computer, laptop, electronic reader, netbook or tablet; a wireless or wired access point; a router or other signal propagation networking equipment; a smart phone; a video-game console; or wearable technology (e.g., watch phone, etc.).
The term “transmission medium” is a physical or logical communication path with an endpoint device. For instance, the communication path may include wired and/or wireless segments. Examples of wired and/or wireless segments include electrical wiring, optical fiber, cable, bus trace, or a wireless channel using infrared, radio frequency (RF), or any other wired/wireless signaling mechanism.
The term “computerized” generally represents that any corresponding operations are conducted by hardware in combination with software and/or firmware.
Lastly, the terms “or” and “and/or” as used herein are to be interpreted as inclusive or meaning any one or any combination. Therefore, “A, B or C” or “A, B and/or C” mean “any of the following: A; B; C; A and B; A and C; B and C; A, B and C.” An exception to this definition will occur only when a combination of elements, functions, steps or acts are in some way inherently mutually exclusive.
As this invention is susceptible to embodiments of many different forms, it is intended that the present disclosure is to be considered as an example of the principles of the invention and not intended to limit the invention to the specific embodiments shown and described.
Referring to
According to one embodiment, the network appliance 100 is adapted to analyze received objects for malware, where a portion of the analysis is directed to detecting and classifying system calls (sometimes referred to as “syscalls”) initiated by a process that is commenced during virtual processing of the received object within a sandboxed environment. The rules and/or parameters used in classifying the detected system call may be updated (e.g., upload new rules or modified rules, delete rules, modify parameters that are utilized by the rules) within a virtual machine monitor (VMM), which manages virtual processing of received objects that are deemed to be “suspicious” when loaded into the dynamic analysis engine 160 for further analysis.
As shown in
Although not shown, the network appliance 100 may be communicatively coupled with the network 110 via an interface 114 operating as a data capturing device. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the interface 114 is configured to receive the incoming data and provide information associated with the received incoming data to the network appliance 100. For instance, the interface 114 may operates a network tap that provides at least one or more objects (hereinafter “object(s)”) extracted from network traffic propagating over the transmission medium 112. Alternatively, although not shown, the network appliance 100 may be configured to receive files or other objects that automatically (or on command), accessed from a storage system. As yet another alternative, the network appliance 100 may be configured to receive objects that are not provided over the network 110. For instance, as an illustrative example, the interface 114 may be a data capturing device (e.g., port) for receiving objects manually provided via a suitable dedicated communication link or from portable storage media such as a flash drive.
Metadata may accompany the object(s) for analysis. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the metadata may be used, at least in part, to determine protocols, application types and other information that identifies characteristics of the object under analysis. The metadata may be used by logic (e.g., scheduler 140) within the network appliance 100 to select one or more software (guest) images that correspond to and include a particular software profile and which virtual machines 1621-162M are selected to be active or inactive. The software images are used to provision virtual machines 1621-162M (M≧1) within the dynamic analysis engine 160 according to a particular software profile. For instance, accessible by the scheduler 140, a plurality of different types of software images may be stored in a storage device 150, which correspond to a plurality of different types of software profiles. The software images can be updated via an external source (e.g., management system and/or cloud computing services) under a “push” or “pull” delivery scheme. These software images are used for configuring virtual machine(s) 1621-162M within the dynamic analysis engine 160.
In some embodiments, although not shown, interface 114 may be contained within the network appliance 100. In other embodiments, the interface 114 can be integrated into an intermediary device in the communication path (e.g., a firewall, router, switch or other networked electronic device) or can be a standalone component, such as an appropriate commercially available network tap.
As further shown in
The static analysis engine 130 may include processing circuitry, such as one or more processors for example, which features metadata capture logic 132 and static analysis logic 134. For example, the metadata capture logic 132 is responsible for extracting and/or generating metadata contained with and/or associated with incoming data (e.g., network traffic). The metadata may be identified as being associated with a particular object 145 under analysis, and is temporarily stored. Examples of types of the metadata may include, but are not restricted or limited to information associated with the object such as object type. For example, code is an example of an object type, which may be in the form of an executable file or code embedded into another type of object. This metadata may be subsequently used for configuring one or more VMs 1621-162M within the dynamic analysis engine for virtual processing the object associated with that metadata.
In addition to, or in lieu of the metadata associated with the source of the object 145, it is contemplated that other types of metadata may be captured by metadata capture logic 132. For instance, these other types of metadata may include metadata associated with the destination targeted to receive the object 145. As examples, the metadata may include the device type or Media Access Control (MAC) address for the endpoint device, the particular software configuration of the endpoint device 130, or the like.
Referring still to
Examples of the checks may include signature matching to conduct (a) exploit signature checks, which may be adapted to compare at least a portion of the object under analysis with one or more pre-stored exploit signatures (pre-configured and predetermined attack patterns) from signature database (not shown), and/or (b) vulnerability signature checks that may be adapted to uncover deviations in messaging practices (e.g., non-compliance in communication protocols, message formats or ordering, and/or payload parameters including size). Other examples of these checks may include (i) heuristics, which is based on rules or policies as applied to the object and may determine whether one or more portions of the object under analysis is associated with an anomalous or suspicious characteristic (e.g., a particular URL associated with known exploits, or a particular source or destination address etc.) associated with known exploits; or (ii) determinative rule-based analysis that may include blacklist or whitelist checking.
Upon static analysis of the features of the object 145, the static analysis engine 130 determines whether this object 145 is “suspicious,” namely the object 145 has features that suggest its association with a malicious attack. As a result, the static analysis engine 130 may route this suspicious object 148 (e.g., some or the entire analyzed object 145) to the dynamic analysis engine 160 for more in-depth analysis.
More specifically, after analysis of the features of the object 145 has been completed, the static analysis engine 130 may provide the suspicious object 148 to the dynamic analysis engine 160 for in-depth dynamic analysis by VMs 1621-162M that is part of the virtual analysis environment 165 (see operation 4). Such analysis is illustrated in
Referring still to
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the dynamic analysis engine 160 may be adapted to execute one or more VMs 1621-162M, which provides processing for the suspicious object 148 within a virtual run-time environment (see operation 4). For instance, dynamic analysis engine 160 comprises the VMM 164 operating in a kernel mode, which is configured to detect and classify system calls received from the VM(s) 1621-162M operating in a user mode. The “kernel mode” is a privileged mode, where a processor in this mode can access the entire address space, executes the entire instruction set (privileged and non-privileged instructions).
Additionally, the VMM 164 may emulate and/or provide anticipated signaling to the VM(s) 1621, . . . , and/or 162M during virtual processing. As an example, the VMM 164 is configured to obtain information associated with the system call received from one of the VMs 1621-162M (e.g., VM 1621). For instance, when the VMM 164 detects of a system call, virtual machine memory inspection logic (VMMI) 166 that is part of the VMM 164 accesses certain portions of the virtualized device hardware (e.g., one or more registers of the virtual processor “vCPU”, virtualized memory, etc.) to identify the type of system call detected. The VMMI 166 may obtain a system call identifier (e.g., a value that uniquely represents the system call) and/or additional parameters associated with the system call. It is contemplated that retrieval of the additional parameters may require address translations prior to accessing the additional parameters where the content associated with the parameters is referenced by address pointers.
Thereafter, the VMMI 166 is configured to classify the detected system call from the VMs 1621-162M to determine whether the system call is to be handled by the virtualized device hardware 168 (operating in the user mode). While switching from VM mode to VMM mode (sometimes referred to as “kernel mode”) is not “expensive” from a processing time perspective, the context switching from kernel mode to user mode is expensive. Hence, system call classification may, in certain situations, avoid unnecessary processing of a system call by the virtualized device hardware 168.
Where the detected system call from a virtual machine (e.g., VM 1621) is part of a first set of system calls, one or more instructions associated with the detected system call are provided to the virtualized device hardware 168 and the resultant behaviors by the virtualized device hardware 168 are monitored and/or stored. After the virtualized device hardware 168 has completed such processing, the VMMI 166 signals the VMM 164 to issue a message that causes the VM 1621 to resume operations. The first set of system calls may include one or more system calls where system call hooking using the VMMI 166 is enabled for all processes in the guest OS.
Herein, according to one embodiment of the disclosure, the classification of system calls may be dynamic in nature based on the security threat landscape. For instance, the first set of system calls may represent “system-wide” system calls, namely selected system calls that tend to occur during malicious attacks, but are less processing intensive and/or less frequently initiated than other system calls. As a result, the monitoring of guest OS activity initiated by the first set of system calls does not warrant significant performance overhead. Examples of some of the first set of system calls may include, but are not limited to, certain system calls may be directed to (i) process control); (ii) certain file management system calls; and/or (iii) device management system calls such as input/output control that conducts device-specific input/output operations and other operations which cannot be expressed by regular system calls.
Given that the level of security threats may change on a weekly or daily basis and the particular system calls used by exploits may vary depending on the particular customers and/or its industry, the first set of system calls may be dynamic in nature with updates to the first set of system calls from external sources. This allows for some or all of the system calls to be added and/or removed on a periodic or aperiodic basis.
Where the detected system call from a particular process running on the VM 1621 is one of the second set of the system calls and the particular process has already been determined to be suspicious, one or more instructions (sometimes referred to as “instruction(s)”) associated with the detected system call is provided to the virtualized device hardware 168. Thereafter, the resultant behaviors by the virtualized device hardware 168 are monitored and/or stored in a data store (sometimes referred to as an “event log”) 170.
Herein, the second set of system calls include “process-specific” system calls, namely selected system calls which may involve behaviors that are more susceptible to malicious attacks for that particular process. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the process-specific system calls may include one or more system calls that differ from the “system-wide” system calls, and these process-specific system calls are selected for all suspicious processes. For other deployments, the process-specific system calls may include one or more system calls, different than the “system-wide” system calls, which are configurable for each type of process.
Thus, these process-specific system calls may differ, in part or in total, from one categorized process to another categorized process in order to target those system calls from different processes that may be more susceptible to malicious attack. Examples of the process-specific system calls may include, but are not limited or restricted to file management system calls; communication-based system calls; and/or other types of system calls that are hooked to identify necessary OS activity of the suspicious process for analyzing malicious behavior.
Additionally, where the detected system call is not a member of the first class or second class of system calls, instruction(s) within the second set of system calls are not handled by the virtual device hardware 168 to avoid the need for context switching. Rather, the VMM 164 merely emulates operation of the instruction(s) and returns a message to cause the VM 1621 to resume its current process.
The monitored behaviors by the VMs 1621-162M and/or the virtualized device hardware 168 may be stored within the data store 170 for subsequent transfer as part of the VM-based results 172 to the object classification engine 180 (see operation 6).
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the object classification engine 180 includes logic that is configured to receive the VM-based result 172, which include information associated with the monitored behaviors associated with processing of the suspicious object 148 with the VM(s) 1621, . . . , and/or 162M. Based on the VM-based results 172, the object classification engine 180 classifies the suspicious object 148 as malicious or not. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the object classification engine 180 comprises prioritization logic 182, score determination logic 184, and comparison logic 186. The optional prioritization logic 182 may be configured to apply weighting to analysis results 174 from the static analysis engine 130 (illustrated by dashed lines) and/or the VM-based results 172.
The score determination logic 184 analyzes the VM-based results and determines (i) a probability (e.g., a score value) that the suspicious object 148 is associated with a malicious attack and/or (ii) a suspected severity of the malicious attack. The probability (score) may be included as part of the results provided to the reporting engine 190. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the score determination logic 184 may rely on a rule-based predictive model to determine the probability (score) and/severity assigned to the suspicious object 148. Such information may be used in reporting for ordering of alerts, determining the medium or mediums of transmission of the alert from the reporting engine 190, the presentation style (font color, font size, selected image, etc.) used for the alert, or the like.
As shown in
Referring to
The VMM 164 is in communication with the VM 1621. The VMM 164 includes a virtual machine control structure (VMCS) 210, which is a data store pre-loaded with information 215 that enables management logic 220 of the VMM 164 to intercept a system call 230 generated by process 2001 during virtual processing of the suspicious object. The system call 230 comprises (i) one or more instructions 232, and (ii) an index 234 to one or more parameter values that are needed for execution of the instruction(s) 232.
In response to detecting and intercepting the system call 230, the VMM management logic 220 temporarily halts execution of the process 2001 running in the VM 1621 and passes information associated with the detected system call 230 to the VMMI 166. In fact, it is contemplated that the VM 1621 is halted for all system calls, and thus, all processes running on the VM 1621 are halted as well. The information associated with the detected system call 230 comprises (i) the instruction(s) 232, (ii) the index 234, and/or (iii) a process identifier 236 (e.g., PID_1) for the process 2001 that initiated the system call 230.
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the VMMI 166 includes classification logic 240, a first data store 250 and a second data store 260. Initially, in response to receipt of the information associated with the detected system call 230, the classification logic 240 of the VMMI 166 accesses portions of the virtualized hardware 168 to obtain a system call identifier 270 and/or parameters 275 associated with the detected system call 230. For instance, as an illustrative example, in response to receipt of signaling identifying receipt of the system call 230 by the VMM management logic 220, the VMMI 166 accesses one or more registers 282 associated with virtual processor (vCPU 280) that is part of the virtualized device hardware 168. The register(s) 282 includes the system call identifier 270, namely data that enables the VMMI 166 to identify system call type. Additionally, the VMMI 166 may access certain memory locations 292 within the virtual memory (vMemory) 290, which is part of the virtualized device hardware 168, to obtain the parameters 275 needed to complete execution of the instruction(s) 232 that are part of the system call 230. For instance, the VMMI 166 may access memory locations 292 to obtain the content of an address pointer, which is subsequently used to determine a handle for a particular file to be opened.
Additionally, the classification logic 240 accesses the first data store 250 to determine whether the process 2001 has been previously identified as being suspicious. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, this determination may be conducted by the classification logic 240 comparing the process identifier (PID_1) 236 of the process 2001 with a listing of PIDs within the first data store 250 that have been previously identified as suspicious. A process may be identified as suspicious based on the type of system calls generated by the process and/or how the process was created. For instance, where process 2001 has been created through a fork system call initiated by another process (e.g., process 200N), the first data store 250 would identify PID_1 for process 2001 as a suspicious process. Additionally, unless process 200N is a trusted process, it is contemplated that the first data store 250 may also include PID_N to identify that process 200N is suspicious as well.
When the classification logic 240 determines that the process 2001 has not been previously identified as being suspicious (e.g., PID_1 236 fails to match any PIDs in the first data store 250), the classification logic 240 compares the system call identifier 270, which identifies the specific system call type, against identifiers associated with a first set of system calls 262 within the second data store 260. The first set of system calls 262 includes system call identifiers for system-wide system calls.
In response to determining that the detected system call 230 is one of the system-wide system calls 262, the classification logic 240 now identifies the process (PID_1) as suspicious in the first data store 250. Additionally, the VMMI 166 provides the information associated with the detected system call 230 to the virtualized device hardware 168 for processing. The activities of the virtualized device hardware 168 are monitored by the VMMI 166 and data pertaining to these activities (e.g., state changes including changes in content within register or addressed memory, ports accessed, etc.) is stored in the event log (not shown). Thereafter, the classification logic 240 signals the VMM management logic 220 to emulate the instruction 232 by returning a message to the VM 1621 that causes the process 2001 to resume operations.
In contrast, in response to determining that the detected system call 230 is not one of the system-wide system calls 262, the classification logic 240 signals the VMM management logic 220 to emulate the instruction 232 and return a message to the VM 1621 that causes the process 2001 to resume operations.
When the classification logic 240 determines that the process 2001 has been previously identified as being suspicious (e.g., PID_1 236 matches a PID in the first data store 250), the classification logic 240 compares the system call identifier 270, which identifies the specific system call type, against identifiers associated with both the first set of system calls 262 and the second set of system calls 264 within the second data store 260. The second set of system calls 264 includes system call identifiers for process-specific system calls, as described above.
In response to determining that the detected system call 230 is one of the system-wide system calls 262 or one of the process-specific system calls, the classification logic 240 provides the information associated with the detected system call 230 to the virtualized device hardware 168 for processing. The activities of the virtualized device hardware 168 are monitored by the VMMI 168 and stored in the event log (not shown). Thereafter, the classification logic 240 signals the VMM management logic 220 to emulate the instruction 232 by returning a message to the VM 1621 that causes the process 2001 to resume operations.
In contrast, in response to determining that the detected system call 230 is not one of the system-wide system calls 262 or one of the process-specific system calls 264, the classification logic 240 signals the VMM management logic 220 to emulate the instruction 232 by returning a message to the VM 1621 that causes the process 2001 to resume operations.
As a secondary embodiment of the disclosure, prior to comparison of the first and second sets of system calls, the classification logic 240 may determine whether the system call identifier 270, which identifies the specific system call type, is present in a third set of system calls 266. The third set of system calls 266 operates as a “white list” to identify those system calls that should not to be passed to the virtualized device hardware 168 under any circumstance or in response to a prescribed state of operation (e.g., the virtual analysis environment exceeding certain load conditions or falling before performance thresholds). Rather, the classification logic 240 signals the VMM management logic 220 to emulate the instruction 232 by returning a message to the VM 1621 that causes the process 2001 to resume operations.
Referring to
In response to detecting and intercepting the system call 230, the VMM management logic 220 temporarily halts execution of the process 2001 running in the VM 1621 and passes information associated with the detected system call 230 to the VMMI 166. The information associated with the detected system call 230 comprises (i) one or more instructions 232, (ii) the index 234, and/or (iii) the process identifier 236 (e.g., PID_1) for the process 2001 that initiated the system call 230.
It is contemplated that VMM management logic 220 may be configured to halt the VM 1621 in response to detecting the system call 230. This halts all of the processes running on the VM 1621. Where the VM 1621 includes multiple virtual processors (e.g., multiple vCPUs), for a process running on a first vCPU and initiating a system call during an analysis of an object, the second vCPU is also halted to avoid changing data within the virtual memory.
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, in response to receipt of the information associated with the detected system call 230, the classification logic 240 of the VMMI 166 accesses portions of the virtualized hardware 168 to obtain the system call identifier 270 and/or parameters 275 associated with the detected system call 230, as described above. Additionally, the classification logic 240 accesses the first data store 250 to determine whether the process 2001 has been previously identified as being suspicious, as described above.
When the classification logic 240 determines that the process 2001 has not been previously identified as being suspicious (e.g., PID_1 236 fails to match any PIDs in the first data store 250), the classification logic 240 compares the system call identifier 270 against identifiers associated with the first set of system calls 262 within the second data store 260, namely the system-wide system calls, as described above.
In response to determining that the detected system call 230 is one of the system-wide system calls 262, the classification logic 240 now identifies the process (PID_1) as suspicious in the first data store 250. Additionally, the VMMI 166 provides the information associated with the detected system call 230 to the virtualized device hardware 168 for processing. The activities of the virtualized device hardware 168 are monitored by the VMMI 166 and data pertaining to these activities is stored. Thereafter, the classification logic 240 signals the VMM management logic 220 to emulate the instruction 232 by returning a message to the VM 1621 that causes the process 2001 to resume operations.
In contrast, in response to determining that the detected system call 230 is not one of the system-wide system calls 262, the classification logic 240 signals the VMM management logic 220 to emulate the instruction 232 and return a message to the VM 1621 that causes the process 2001 to resume operations.
When the classification logic 240 determines that the process 2001 has been previously identified as being suspicious (e.g., PID_1 236 matches a PID in the first data store 250), the classification logic 240 compares the system call identifier 270, which identifies the specific system call type, against identifiers associated with both the first set of system calls 262 and the second set of system calls 264 within the second data store 260. The second set of system calls 264 includes system call identifiers for process-specific system calls, as described above.
However, with respect to comparison of the system call identifier 270 identifiers associated with the second set of system calls 264 within the second data store 260, the classification logic 240 may PID_1 or other data associated with the process 2001 in order to identify a particular category for the process 2001 (e.g., network connectivity, file management, etc.). After associating the process 2001 to a particular process category, the system call identifier is compared to those identifiers associated with system calls selected for that particular process category. As a result, a first process category 268 (e.g., network connectivity) may include a first subset of system calls, which may be more prone for use in malicious attacks against network connection-based processes than a second subset of system calls assigned to a second process category 269 (e.g., file management).
It is contemplated that the granularity of the process categories may be adjusted to achieve desired performance for the network appliance. For instance, the first process category 268 may be directed to system calls that are typically used for malicious attacks against Microsoft® Internet Explorer® browser applications while another process category may be directed to a different type of browser application. Additionally, another process category 269 may be directed to system calls that are more commonly used for malicious attacks against Portable Document Format (PDF) reader applications. Hence, the system calls for one process category may vary from system calls for another process category.
In contrast, in response to determining that the detected system call 230 is not one of the system-wide system calls 262 or one of the process-specific system calls 264, the classification logic 240 signals the VMM management logic 220 to emulate the instruction 232 by returning a message to the VM 1621 that causes the process 2001 to resume operations.
Referring now to
Processor(s) 310 is further coupled to persistent storage 350 via transmission medium 340. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, persistent storage 350 may include (a) processing engine 120; (b) static analysis engine 130; (c) the dynamic analysis engine 160, which includes one or more VMs 1621-162M and the VMM 164; (d) object classification engine 180; and (e) reporting engine 190. Of course, when implemented as hardware, one or more of these logic units could be implemented separately from each other.
Collective logic within the dynamic analysis engine 160 may be configured to detect a system call during processing of an object by one or more virtual machines and classify the detected system call. The assigned classification may be used to control whether or not the handling of the detected system call is conducted by virtualized device hardware targeted by the system call to enhance overall performance of the network appliance.
Referring to now
During processing of a received object by a particular process running on a VM, a system call is detected by the VMM (blocks 410 and 415). Thereafter, the system call identifier for the detected system call and the process identifier (PID) for the process that initiated the detected system call are determined (block 420).
Based on the PID, a determination is made whether the process has been previously identified as suspicious (block 425). If not, a determination is made whether the detected system call is one of the system-wide system calls (block 430). If the detected system call is one of the system-wide system calls, the information associated with the detected system call (e.g. instruction(s), parameters used in execution of the instruction(s), etc.) is provided to the virtualized device hardware (block 435). Then, the activities that occur during the processing of the information are monitored and the data associated with the activities (e.g., state changes including changes in content within register or addressed memory, ports accessed, etc.) is stored (block 440). Thereafter, the instruction(s) associated with the detected system call is emulated by generating a message for the VM to resume operations (blocks 445 and 450).
Alternatively, if the process has been previously identified as suspicious, a determination is made whether the detected system call is either one of the system-wide system calls or one of the process-specific system calls (blocks 455 and 460). If the detected system call is one of the system-wide system calls or one of the process-specific system calls, the information associated with the detected system call is provided to the virtualized device hardware, activities that occur during the processing of the information is monitored, and the resultant data is stored (blocks 435 and 440). Thereafter, the instruction(s) associated with the detected system call is emulated by generating a message for the VM to resume operations (blocks 445 and 450).
Once virtual processing of the object is complete, a determination may be made as to whether any system call classes require an update (block 465). If so, the class hierarchy for system calls is updated and the selective system call monitoring operations continue (block 470).
In the foregoing description, the invention is described with reference to specific exemplary embodiments thereof. It will, however, be evident that various modifications and changes may be made thereto without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims. For instance, the selective system call monitoring may be conducted on system calls generated by logic outside the guest image.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4292580 | Ott et al. | Sep 1981 | A |
5175732 | Hendel et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5440723 | Arnold et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5490249 | Miller | Feb 1996 | A |
5657473 | Killean et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5842002 | Schnurer et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5978917 | Chi | Nov 1999 | A |
6088803 | Tso et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6094677 | Capek et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6108799 | Boulay et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6118382 | Hibbs et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6269330 | Cidon et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272641 | Ji | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6279113 | Vaidya | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6298445 | Shostack et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6357008 | Nachenberg | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6417774 | Hibbs et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6424627 | Sørhaug et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6442696 | Wray et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6484315 | Ziese | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487666 | Shanklin et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6493756 | O'Brien et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6550012 | Villa et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6700497 | Hibbs et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6775657 | Baker | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6831893 | Ben Nun et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6832367 | Choi et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6895550 | Kanchirayappa et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6898632 | Gordy et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6907396 | Muttik et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6941348 | Petry et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6971097 | Wallman | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6981279 | Arnold et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6995665 | Appelt et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7007107 | Ivchenko et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7028179 | Anderson et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7043757 | Hoefelmeyer et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7069316 | Gryaznov | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7080407 | Zhao et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7080408 | Pak et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7093002 | Wolff et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7093239 | van der Made | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7096498 | Judge | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7100201 | Izatt | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7107617 | Hursey et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7159149 | Spiegel et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7213260 | Judge | May 2007 | B2 |
7231667 | Jordan | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7240364 | Branscomb et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7240368 | Roesch et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7243371 | Kasper et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7249175 | Donaldson | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7287278 | Liang | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7308716 | Danford et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7328453 | Merkle, Jr. et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7346486 | Ivancic et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7356736 | Natvig | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7386888 | Liang et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7392542 | Bucher | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7418729 | Szor | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7428300 | Drew et al. | Sep 2008 | B1 |
7441272 | Durham et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7448084 | Apap et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7458098 | Judge et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7464404 | Carpenter et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7464407 | Nakae et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7467408 | O'Toole, Jr. | Dec 2008 | B1 |
7478428 | Thomlinson | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7480773 | Reed | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7487543 | Arnold et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7496960 | Chen et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7496961 | Zimmer et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7519990 | Xie | Apr 2009 | B1 |
7523493 | Liang et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7530104 | Thrower et al. | May 2009 | B1 |
7540025 | Tzadikario | May 2009 | B2 |
7565550 | Liang et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7568233 | Szor et al. | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7584455 | Ball | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7603715 | Costa et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7607171 | Marsden et al. | Oct 2009 | B1 |
7639714 | Stolfo et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7644441 | Schmid et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7657419 | van der Made | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7676841 | Sobchuk et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7698548 | Shelest et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7707633 | Danford et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7712136 | Sprosts et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7730011 | Deninger et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7739740 | Nachenberg et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7779463 | Stolfo et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7784097 | Stolfo et al. | Aug 2010 | B1 |
7832008 | Kraemer | Nov 2010 | B1 |
7836502 | Zhao et al. | Nov 2010 | B1 |
7849506 | Dansey et al. | Dec 2010 | B1 |
7854007 | Sprosts et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7869073 | Oshima | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7877803 | Enstone et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7904959 | Sidiroglou et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7908660 | Bahl | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7930738 | Petersen | Apr 2011 | B1 |
7937761 | Bennett | May 2011 | B1 |
7949849 | Lowe et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7996556 | Raghavan et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
7996836 | McCorkendale et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
7996904 | Chiueh et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
7996905 | Arnold et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8006305 | Aziz | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8010667 | Zhang et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8020206 | Hubbard et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8028338 | Schneider et al. | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8042184 | Batenin | Oct 2011 | B1 |
8045094 | Teragawa | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8045458 | Alperovitch et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8069484 | McMillan et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8087086 | Lai et al. | Dec 2011 | B1 |
8171553 | Aziz et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8176049 | Deninger et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8176480 | Spertus | May 2012 | B1 |
8201246 | Wu et al. | Jun 2012 | B1 |
8204984 | Aziz et al. | Jun 2012 | B1 |
8214905 | Doukhvalov et al. | Jul 2012 | B1 |
8220055 | Kennedy | Jul 2012 | B1 |
8225288 | Miller et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8225373 | Kraemer | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8233882 | Rogel | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8234640 | Fitzgerald et al. | Jul 2012 | B1 |
8234709 | Viljoen et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8239944 | Nachenberg et al. | Aug 2012 | B1 |
8260914 | Ranjan | Sep 2012 | B1 |
8266091 | Gubin et al. | Sep 2012 | B1 |
8286251 | Eker et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8290763 | Zhang | Oct 2012 | B1 |
8291499 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8307435 | Mann et al. | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8307443 | Wang et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8312545 | Tuvell et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8321936 | Green et al. | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8321941 | Tuvell et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8332571 | Edwards, Sr. | Dec 2012 | B1 |
8365286 | Poston | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8365297 | Parshin et al. | Jan 2013 | B1 |
8370938 | Daswani et al. | Feb 2013 | B1 |
8370939 | Zaitsev et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8375444 | Aziz et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8381299 | Stolfo et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8402529 | Green et al. | Mar 2013 | B1 |
8464340 | Ahn et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8479174 | Chiriac | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8479276 | Vaystikh et al. | Jul 2013 | B1 |
8479291 | Bodke | Jul 2013 | B1 |
8510827 | Leake et al. | Aug 2013 | B1 |
8510828 | Guo et al. | Aug 2013 | B1 |
8510842 | Amit et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8516478 | Edwards et al. | Aug 2013 | B1 |
8516590 | Ranadive et al. | Aug 2013 | B1 |
8516593 | Aziz | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8522348 | Chen et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8528086 | Aziz | Sep 2013 | B1 |
8533824 | Hutton et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8539582 | Aziz et al. | Sep 2013 | B1 |
8549638 | Aziz | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8555391 | Demir et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8561177 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8566946 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8584094 | Dadhia et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8584234 | Sobel et al. | Nov 2013 | B1 |
8584239 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8595834 | Xie et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8627476 | Satish et al. | Jan 2014 | B1 |
8635696 | Aziz | Jan 2014 | B1 |
8682054 | Xue et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8682812 | Ranjan | Mar 2014 | B1 |
8689333 | Aziz | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8695096 | Zhang | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8713631 | Pavlyushchik | Apr 2014 | B1 |
8713681 | Silberman et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8726392 | McCorkendale et al. | May 2014 | B1 |
8739280 | Chess et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8776229 | Aziz | Jul 2014 | B1 |
8782792 | Bodke | Jul 2014 | B1 |
8789172 | Stolfo et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8789178 | Kejriwal et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8793787 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8805947 | Kuzkin et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
8806647 | Daswani et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
8832829 | Manni et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8850570 | Ramzan | Sep 2014 | B1 |
8850571 | Staniford et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8881234 | Narasimhan et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8881282 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8898788 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8935779 | Manni et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8984638 | Aziz et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
8990939 | Staniford et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
8990944 | Singh et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
8997219 | Staniford et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9009822 | Ismael et al. | Apr 2015 | B1 |
9009823 | Ismael et al. | Apr 2015 | B1 |
9027135 | Aziz | May 2015 | B1 |
9071638 | Aziz et al. | Jun 2015 | B1 |
9104867 | Thioux et al. | Aug 2015 | B1 |
9106694 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9118715 | Staniford et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
20010005889 | Albrecht | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010047326 | Broadbent et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020018903 | Kokubo et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020038430 | Edwards et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020091819 | Melchione et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020095607 | Lin-Hendel | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020116627 | Tarbotton et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020144156 | Copeland | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162015 | Tang | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020166063 | Lachman et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020169952 | DiSanto et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020184528 | Shevenell et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020188887 | Largman et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020194490 | Halperin et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030074578 | Ford et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030084318 | Schertz | May 2003 | A1 |
20030101381 | Mateev et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030115483 | Liang | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030188190 | Aaron et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030191957 | Hypponen et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200460 | Morota et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212902 | van der Made | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030229801 | Kouznetsov et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030237000 | Denton et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040003323 | Bennett et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040015712 | Szor | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040019832 | Arnold et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040047356 | Bauer | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040083408 | Spiegel et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040088581 | Brawn et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040093513 | Cantrell et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040111531 | Staniford et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040117478 | Triulzi et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040117624 | Brandt et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040128355 | Chao et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040165588 | Pandya | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040236963 | Danford et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040243349 | Greifeneder et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040249911 | Alkhatib et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040255161 | Cavanaugh | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040268147 | Wiederin et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050005159 | Oliphant | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050021740 | Bar et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050033960 | Vialen et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050033989 | Poletto et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050050148 | Mohammadioun et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050086523 | Zimmer et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091513 | Mitomo et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091533 | Omote et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091652 | Ross et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050108562 | Khazan et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050114663 | Cornell et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050125195 | Brendel | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050149726 | Joshi et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050157662 | Bingham et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050183143 | Anderholm et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050201297 | Peikari | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050210533 | Copeland et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050238005 | Chen et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240781 | Gassoway | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050262562 | Gassoway | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050265331 | Stolfo | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283839 | Cowburn | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060010495 | Cohen et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060015416 | Hoffman et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060015715 | Anderson | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060015747 | Van de Ven | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060021029 | Brickell et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060021054 | Costa et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060031476 | Mathes et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060047665 | Neil | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060070130 | Costea et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060075496 | Carpenter et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060095968 | Portolani et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060101516 | Sudaharan et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060101517 | Banzhof et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060117385 | Mester et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060123477 | Raghavan et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060143709 | Brooks et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060150249 | Gassen et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060161983 | Cothrell et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060161987 | Levy-Yurista | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060161989 | Reshef et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060164199 | Gilde et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060173992 | Weber et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060179147 | Tran et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060184632 | Marino et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060191010 | Benjamin | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060221956 | Narayan et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060236393 | Kramer et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060242709 | Seinfeld et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060248519 | Jaeger et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060248582 | Panjwani et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060251104 | Koga | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060288417 | Bookbinder et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070006288 | Mayfield et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070006313 | Porras et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070011174 | Takaragi et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070016951 | Piccard et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070033645 | Jones | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070038943 | FitzGerald et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070064689 | Shin et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070074169 | Chess et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070094730 | Bhikkaji et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070101435 | Konanka et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070128855 | Cho et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070142030 | Sinha et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070143827 | Nicodemus et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070156895 | Vuong | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070157180 | Tillmann et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070157306 | Elrod et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070168988 | Eisner et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070169194 | Church et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070171824 | Ruello et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070174915 | Gribble et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070192500 | Lum | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070192858 | Lum | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070198275 | Malden et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070208822 | Wang et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070220607 | Sprosts et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070240218 | Tuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070240219 | Tuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070240220 | Tuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070240222 | Tuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070250930 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070256132 | Oliphant | Nov 2007 | A2 |
20070271446 | Nakamura | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080005782 | Aziz | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080028463 | Dagon et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080032556 | Schreier | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080040710 | Chiriac | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080046781 | Childs et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080066179 | Liu | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080072326 | Danford et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080077793 | Tan et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080080518 | Hoeflin et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080086720 | Lekel | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080098476 | Syversen | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080120722 | Sima et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080134178 | Fitzgerald et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080134334 | Kim et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080141376 | Clausen et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080184373 | Traut et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080189787 | Arnold et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080201778 | Guo et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080209557 | Herley et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080215742 | Goldszmidt et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080222729 | Chen et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080263665 | Ma et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080295172 | Bohacek | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080301810 | Lehane et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080307524 | Singh et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080313738 | Enderby | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080320594 | Jiang | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090003317 | Kasralikar et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090007100 | Field et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090013408 | Schipka | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090031423 | Liu et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090036111 | Danford et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090037835 | Goldman | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090044024 | Oberheide et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090044274 | Budko et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090064332 | Porras et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090077666 | Chen et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090083369 | Marmor | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090083855 | Apap et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090089879 | Wang et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090094697 | Provos et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090113425 | Ports et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090125976 | Wassermann et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090126015 | Monastyrsky et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090126016 | Sobko et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090133125 | Choi et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090144823 | Lamastra et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090158430 | Borders | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090172815 | Gu et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090187992 | Poston | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090193293 | Stolfo et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090199296 | Xie et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090228233 | Anderson et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090241187 | Troyansky | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090241190 | Todd et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090265692 | Godefroid et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090271867 | Zhang | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090300415 | Zhang et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090300761 | Park et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090328185 | Berg et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090328221 | Blumfield et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100005146 | Drako et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100011205 | McKenna | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100017546 | Poo et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100031353 | Thomas et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100037314 | Perdisci et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100043073 | Kuwamura | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100054278 | Stolfo et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100058474 | Hicks | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100064044 | Nonoyama | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100077481 | Polyakov et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100083376 | Pereira et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100115621 | Staniford et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100132038 | Zaitsev | May 2010 | A1 |
20100154056 | Smith et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100180344 | Malyshev et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100192223 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100220863 | Dupaquis et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100229239 | Rozenberg | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100235831 | Dittmer | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100251104 | Massand | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100281102 | Chinta et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100281541 | Stolfo et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100281542 | Stolfo et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100287260 | Peterson et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100299754 | Amit et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100306173 | Frank | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110004737 | Greenebaum | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110025504 | Lyon et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110041179 | Ståhlberg | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110047594 | Mahaffey et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110047620 | Mahaffey et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110055907 | Narasimhan et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110078794 | Manni et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110083186 | Niemela et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110093951 | Aziz | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099620 | Stavrou et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099633 | Aziz | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110113231 | Kaminsky | May 2011 | A1 |
20110145918 | Jung et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110145920 | Mahaffey et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110145934 | Abramovici et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110167493 | Song et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110167494 | Bowen et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110173460 | Ito et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110219449 | St. Neitzel et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110219450 | McDougal et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110225624 | Sawhney et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110225655 | Niemela et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110247072 | Staniford et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110265182 | Peinado et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110289582 | Kejriwal et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110302587 | Nishikawa et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110307954 | Melnik et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110307955 | Kaplan et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110307956 | Yermakov et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110314546 | Aziz et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120023593 | Puder et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120054869 | Yen et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120066698 | Yanoo | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120079596 | Thomas et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120084859 | Radinsky et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120110667 | Zubrilin et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120117652 | Manni et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120121154 | Xue et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120124426 | Maybee et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120174186 | Aziz et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120174196 | Bhogavilli et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120174218 | McCoy et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120198279 | Schroeder | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120210423 | Friedrichs et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120222121 | Staniford et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120255015 | Sahita et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120255017 | Sallam | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120260342 | Dube et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120266244 | Green et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120278886 | Luna | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120297489 | Dequevy | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120330801 | McDougal et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130014259 | Gribble et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130036472 | Aziz | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130047257 | Aziz | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130074185 | McDougal et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130086684 | Mohler | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130097699 | Balupari et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130097706 | Titonis et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130111587 | Goel et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130111593 | Shankar | May 2013 | A1 |
20130117852 | Stute | May 2013 | A1 |
20130117855 | Kim et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130139264 | Brinkley et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130160125 | Likhachev et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130160127 | Jeong et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130160130 | Mendelev et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130160131 | Madou et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130167236 | Sick | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130174214 | Duncan | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130185789 | Hagiwara et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130185795 | Winn et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130185798 | Saunders et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130191915 | Antonakakis et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130196649 | Paddon et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130227691 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130246370 | Bartram et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130263260 | Mahaffey et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130291109 | Staniford et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130298243 | Kumar et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130326625 | Anderson | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140053260 | Gupta et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140053261 | Gupta et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140130158 | Wang et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140137180 | Lukacs et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140169762 | Ryu | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140179360 | Jackson et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140328204 | Klotsche et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140337836 | Ismael | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140351935 | Shao et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20150096025 | Ismael | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150121135 | Pape | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20160164946 | Bazzi | Jun 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2439806 | Jan 2008 | GB |
2490431 | Oct 2012 | GB |
0206928 | Jan 2002 | WO |
0223805 | Mar 2002 | WO |
2007117636 | Oct 2007 | WO |
2008041950 | Apr 2008 | WO |
2011084431 | Jul 2011 | WO |
2011112348 | Sep 2011 | WO |
2012075336 | Jun 2012 | WO |
2012145066 | Oct 2012 | WO |
2013067505 | May 2013 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“Network Security: NetDetector—Network Intrusion Forensic System (NIFS) Whitepaper”, (“NetDetector Whitepaper”), (2003). |
“Packet”, Microsoft Computer Dictionary Microsoft Press, (Mar. 2002), 1 page. |
“When Virtual is Better Than Real”, IEEEXplore Digital Library, available at, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jso?reload=true&arnumber=990073, (Dec. 7, 2013). |
Abdullah, et al., Visualizing Network Data for Intrusion Detection, 2005 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security, pp. 100-108. |
Adetoye, Adedayo, et al., “Network Intrusion Detection & Response System”, (“Adetoye”) (Sep. 2003). |
Adobe Systems Incorporated, “PDF 32000-1:2008, Document management—Portable document format—Part1:PDF 1.7”, First Edition, Jul. 1, 2008, 756 pages. |
AltaVista Advanced Search Results. “attack vector identifier” Http://www.altavista.com/web/results?Itag=ody&pg=aq&aqmode=aqa=Event+Orchestrator . . . , (Accessed on Sep. 15, 2009). |
AltaVista Advanced Search Results. “Event Orchestrator”. Http://www.altavista.com/web/results?Itag=ody&pg=aq&aqmode=aqa=Event+Orchesrator . . . , (Accessed on Sep. 3, 2009). |
Apostolopoulos, George; hassapis, Constantinos; “V-eM: A cluster of Virtual Machines for Robust, Detailed, and High-Performance Network Emulation”, 14th IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, Sep. 11-14, 2006, pp. 117-126. |
Aura, Tuomas, “Scanning electronic documents for personally identifiable information”, Proceedings of the 5th ACM workshop on Privacy in electronic society. ACM, 2006. |
Aziz, Ashar, System and Method for Malware Containment, U.S. Appl. No. 14/620,060, filed Feb. 11, 2015, non-Final Office Action dated Apr. 3, 2015. |
Baecher, “The Nepenthes Platform: An Efficient Approach to collect Malware”, Springer-verlaq Berlin Heidelberg, (2006), pp. 165-184. |
Baldi, Mario; Risso, Fulvio; “A Framework for Rapid Development and Portable Execution of Packet-Handling Applications”, 5th IEEE International Symposium Processing and Information Technology, Dec. 21, 2005, pp. 233-238. |
Bayer, et al., “Dynamic Analysis of Malicious Code”, J Comput Virol, Springer-Verlag, France., (2006), pp. 67-77. |
Boubalos, Chris , “Extracting syslog data out of raw pcap dumps, seclists.org, Honeypots mailing list archives”, available at http://seclists,org/honeypots/2003/q2/319 (“Boubalos”), (Jun. 5, 2003). |
Chaudet, C., et al., “Optimal Positioning of Active and Passive Monitoring Devices”, International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Conference on Emerging Network Experiment and Technology, CoNEXT '05, Toulousse, France, (Oct. 2005), pp. 71-82. |
Cisco “Intrusion Prevention for the Cisco ASA 5500-x Series” Data Sheet (2012). |
Cisco, Configuring the Catalyst Switched Port Analyzer (SPAN) (“Cisco”), (1992-2003). |
Clark, John, Sylvian Leblanc,and Scott Knight. “Risks associated with usb hardware trojan devices used by insiders.” Systems Conference (SysCon), 2011 IEEE International. IEEE, 2011. |
Cohen, M.I., “PyFlag—An advanced network forensic framework”, Digital investigation 5, Elsevier, (2008), pp. S112-S120. |
Costa, M., et al., “Vigilante: End-to-End Containment of Internet Worms”, SOSP '05 Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., Brighton U.K., (Oct. 23-26, 2005). |
Crandall, J.R., et al., “Minos:Control Data Attack Prevention Orthogonal to Memory Model”, 37th International Symposium on Microarchitecture, Portland, Oregon, (Dec. 2004). |
Deutsch, P., ““Zlib compressed data format specification version 3.3” RFC 1950, (1996)”. |
Distler, “Malware Analysis: An Introduction”, SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room, SANS Institute, (2007). |
Dunlap, George W. , et al., “ReVirt: Enabling Intrusion Analysis through Virtual-Machine Logging and Replay”, Proceeding of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX Association, (“Dunlap”), (Dec. 9, 2002). |
Excerpt regarding First Printing Date for Merike Kaeo, Designing Network Security (“Kaeo”), (2005). |
Filiol, Eric , et al., “Combinatorial Optimisation of Worm Propagation on an Unknown Network”, International Journal of Computer Science 2.2 (2007). |
FireEye Malware Analysis & Exchange Network, Malware Protection System, FireEye Inc., 2010. |
FireEye Malware Analysis, Modern Malware Forensics, FireEye Inc., 2010. |
FireEye v.6.0 Security Target, pp. 1-35, Version 1.1, FireEye Inc., May 2011. |
Gibler, Clint, et al. AndroidLeaks: automatically detecting potential privacy leaks in android applications on a large scale. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012. |
Goel, et al., Reconstructing System State for Intrusion Analysis, Apr. 2008 SIGOPS Operating Systems Review vol. 42 Issue 3, pp. 21-28. |
Gregg Keizer: “Microsoft's HoneyMonkeys Show Patching Windows Works”, Aug. 8, 2005, XP055143386, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://web.archive.org/web/20121022220617/http://www.informationweek- .com/microsofts-honeymonkeys-show-patching-wi/167600716 [retrieved on Sep. 29, 2014]. |
Heng Yin et al, Panorama: Capturing System-Wide Information Flow for Malware Detection and Analysis, Research Showcase @ CMU, Carnegie Mellon University, 2007. |
Hjelmvik, Erik, “Passive Network Security Analysis with NetworkMiner”, (IN)Secure, Issue 18, (Oct. 2008), pp. 1-100. |
Idika et al., A-Survey-of-Malware-Detection-Techniques, Feb. 2, 2007, Department of Computer Science, Purdue University. |
IEEE Xplore Digital Library Sear Results for “detection of unknown computer worms”. Http//ieeexplore.ieee.org/searchresult.jsp?SortField=Score&SortOrder=desc&ResultC . . . (Accessed on Aug. 28, 2009). |
Isohara, Takamasa, Keisuke Takemori, and Ayumu Kubota. “Kernel-based behavior analysis for android malware detection.” Computational intelligence and Security (CIS), 2011 Seventh International Conference on. IEEE, 2011. |
Kaeo, Merike, “Designing Network Security”, (“Kaeo”), (Nov. 2003). |
Kevin A Roundy et al: “Hybrid Analysis and Control of Malware”, Sep. 15, 2010, Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 317-338, XP019150454 ISBN:978-3-642-15511-6. |
Kim, H., et al., “Autograph: Toward Automated, Distributed Worm Signature Detection”, Proceedings of the 13th Usenix Security Symposium (Security 2004), San Diego, (Aug. 2004), pp. 271-286. |
Krasnyansky, Max, et al., Universal TUN/TAP driver, available at https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/tuntap.txt (2002) (“Krasnyansky”). |
Kreibich, C., et al., “Honeycomb-Creating Intrusion Detection Signatures Using Honeypots”, 2nd Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-11), Boston, USA, (2003). |
Kristoff, J., “Botnets, Detection and Mitigation: DNS-Based Techniques”, NU Security Day, (2005), 23 pages. |
Leading Colleges Select FireEye to Stop Malware-Related Data Breaches, FireEye Inc., 2009. |
Li et al., A VMM-Based System Call Interposition Framework for Program Monitoring, Dec. 2010, IEEE 16th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems, pp. 706-711. |
Liljenstam, Michael, et al., “Simulating Realistic Network Traffic for Worm Warning System Design and Testing”, Institute for Security Technology studies, Dartmouth College, (“Liljenstam”), (Oct. 27, 2003). |
Lindorfer, Martina, Clemens Kolbitsch, and Paolo Milani Comparetti. “Detecting environment-sensitive malware.” Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011. |
Lok Kwong et al: “DroidScope: Seamlessly Reconstructing the OS and Dalvik Semantic Views for Dynamic Android Malware Analysis”, Aug. 10, 2012, XP055158513, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurity12/sec12- -final107.pdf [retrieved on Dec. 15, 2014]. |
Marchette, David J., Computer Intrusion Detection and Network Monitoring: A Statistical (“Marchette”), (2001). |
Margolis, P. E., “Random House Webster's 'Computer & Internet Dictionary 3rd Edition”, ISBN 0375703519, (Dec. 1998). |
Moore, D., et al., “Internet Quarantine: Requirements for Containing Self-Propagating Code”, INFOCOM, vol. 3, (Mar. 30-Apr. 3, 2003), pp. 1901-1910. |
Morales, Jose A., et al., ““Analyzing and exploiting network behaviors of malware.””, Security and Privacy in Communication Networks. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. 20-34. |
Mod, Detecting Unknown Computer Viruses, 2004, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. |
Natvig, Kurt, “SandBoxII: Internet”, Virus Bulletin Conference, (“Natvig”), (Sep. 2002). |
NetBIOS Working Group. Protocol Standard for a NetBIOS Service on a TCP/UDP transport: Concepts and Methods. Std 19, RFC 1001, Mar. 1987. |
Newsome, J., et al., “Dynamic Taint Analysis for Automatic Detection, Analysis, and Signature Generation of Exploits on Commodity Software”, In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security, Symposium (NDSS '05), (Feb. 2005). |
Newsome, J., et al., “Polygraph: Automatically Generating Signatures for Polymorphic Worms”, In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, (May 2005). |
Nojiri, D. , et al., “Cooperation Response Strategies for Large Scale Attack Mitigation”, DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition, vol. 1, (Apr. 22-24, 2003), pp. 293-302. |
Oberheide et al., CloudAV.sub.--N-Version Antivirus in the Network Cloud, 17th USENIX Security Symposium USENIX Security '08 Jul. 28-Aug. 1, 2008 San Jose, CA. |
Peter M. Chen, and Brian D. Noble, “When Virtual is Better Than Real, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science”, University of Michigan (“Chen”). |
Reiner Sailer, Enriquillo Valdez, Trent Jaeger, Roonald Perez, Leendert van Doom, John Linwood Griffin, Stefan Berger., sHype: Secure Hypervisor Approach to Trusted Virtualized Systems (Feb. 2, 2005) (“Sailer”). |
Silicon Defense, “Worm Containment in the Internal Network”, (Mar. 2003), pp. 1-25. |
Singh, S., et al., “Automated Worm Fingerprinting”, Proceedings of the ACM/USENIX Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation, San Francisco, California, (Dec. 2004). |
Spitzner, Lance, “Honeypots: Tracking Hackers”, (“Spizner”), (Sep. 17, 2002). |
The Sniffers's Guide to Raw Traffic available at: yuba.stanford.edu/˜casado/pcap/sectionl.html, (Jan. 6, 2014). |
Thomas H. Ptacek, and Timothy N. Newsham , “Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection”, Secure Networks, (“Ptacek”), (Jan. 1998). |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/717,475, filed Mar. 12, 2007 Final Office Action dated Feb. 27, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/717,475, filed Mar. 12, 2007 Final Office Action dated Nov. 22, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/717,475, filed Mar. 12, 2007 Non-Final Office Action dated Aug. 28, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/717,475, filed Mar. 12, 2007 Non-Final Office Action dated May 6, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/059,381, filed Oct. 21, 2013 Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 29, 2014. |
U.S. Pat. No. 8,171,553 filed Apr. 20, 2006, Inter Parties Review Decision dated Jul. 10, 2015. |
U.S. Pat. No. 8,291,499 filed Mar. 16, 2012, Inter Parties Review Decision dated Jul. 10, 2015. |
Venezia, Paul, “NetDetector Captures Intrusions”, InfoWorld Issue 27, (“Venezia”), (Jul. 14, 2003). |
Wahid et al., Characterising the Evolution in Scanning Activity of Suspicious Hosts, Oct. 2009, Third International Conference on Network and System Security, pp. 344-350. |
Whyte, et al., “DNS-Based Detection of Scanning Works in an Enterprise Network”, Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, (Feb. 2005), 15 pages. |
Williamson, Mathew M., “Throttling Virses: Restricting Propagation to Defeat Malicious Mobile Code”, ACSAC Conference, Las Vegas, NV, USA, (Dec. 2002), pp. 1-9. |
Yuhei Kawakoya et al: “Memory behavior-based automatic malware unpacking in stealth debugging environment”, Malicious and Unwanted Software (Malware), 2010 5th International Conference on, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, Oct. 19, 2010, pp. 39-46, XP031833827, ISBN:978-1-4244-8-9353-1. |
Zhang et al., The Effects of Threading, Infection Time, and Multiple-Attacker Collaboration on Malware Propagation, Sep. 2009, IEEE 28th International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, pp. 73-82. |