1. Field of the Invention
This application relates to computer network security.
2. Description of the Related Technology
Computer networks are used to transmit data between computers in a seamless manner. A user can send a file or an email with an attachment to another user connected to the network. In many instances, this data transfer occurs over the Internet. Often, the content may contain sensitive information (i.e., business plans, financial data, product drawings, trade secrets, etc. . . . ) that should not be sent to the wrong recipient.
The owners of the data have an interest in preventing the leakage of sensitive data over computer networks. Currently, there are methods for analyzing and classifying data being sent over the network. These methods determine the type of data and prevent the dissemination of data classified as being protected. In this regard, these methods classify the data and apply a protection/transmission policy depending on the type of data. For example, a policy might forbid the transmission of any business information containing social security numbers.
However, a policy just based on the type of data may not provide the level of leakage prevention that is needed. For example, sometimes a company might want to limit the transmission of data to certain users or destinations. The analysis of the data itself cannot provide this level of classification and a reliable policy cannot be developed.
In one inventive aspect, a system for preventing the unauthorized transmission of data over a computer network is disclosed. The system has a data source having data in communication with the network. A network (Internet) gateway is in communication with the network and a destination. The network gateway is configured to determine a transmission policy in response to the type of data and contextual information of the data.
The contextual information can be sender contextual information and/or destination contextual information. For example, the sender contextual information may be an IP address of the data source, a user name or a group of users. The destination contextual information may be an IP address of the destination, a network of the destination or a category of the destination. The transmission policy may block transmission of the data, permit transmission of the data and/or report attempted transmission of the data.
Typically, the data source is an electronic device such as a PDA, computer, cell phone, etc. . . . and the devices communicate over the Internet.
The network gateway can include a classification module for determining the type of data, a context information module for determining the contextual information, a policy/reporting module for generating the transmission policy and an enforcement module for either transmitting the data, blocking the data and/or reporting the transmission of the data.
In another inventive aspect, a method of preventing an unauthorized transmission of data over a computer network is disclosed. The method comprises classifying the data and determining contextual information of the data. Next, a transmission policy is determined in response to the classification and contextual information. The data is either transmitted or blocked in response to the classification and the contextual information.
The following detailed description is directed to certain specific embodiments of the invention. However, the invention can be embodied in a multitude of different systems and methods. In this description, reference is made to the drawings wherein like parts are designated with like numerals throughout.
Referring to
The network 10 communicates with a network/Internet gateway 16 in order to provide the sources 10 a connection to the Internet 18. The Internet gateway 16 may be a server or combination of servers for translating TCP/IP protocols into proper protocols for communication across the local area network 12. The gateway 16 is well known in the art and normally communicates through routers or other data switching technology. Furthermore, the gateway 16 illustrated in
The Internet gateway 16 communicates with the Internet 18 and hence the destination 14 through commonly known techniques. Accordingly, other gateways, routers, switches and/or other devices may be in the path of communication between the Internet 18, the Internet gateway 16, the destination 14, the network 12 and the sources 10. The Internet gateway analyzes TCP/IP traffic passing there through. The destination 14 may be and electronic device, an IP address, email address, network address or other type of recipient.
Referring to
The Internet gateway 16 includes a classification module 22, a policy/reporting module 24, a who/where context information module 26 and an enforcement module 28. In addition, an administration module 30 may be in communication with the Internet gateway 16 and/or may be incorporated therein.
The classification module 22 analyzes the data 20 to determine whether the data 20 contains prohibited content by identifying a fingerprint and/or signature of the data 20. The fingerprint or signature of the data 20 is compared to a database of signatures in order to identify the content. As such, the classification module 22 determines the content of the data. The who/where context information module 26 determines who sent the data and the destination of the data. For example, the context information module 26 determines who sent the data by identifying the sender using directory services over the network 12. For example, senders can be identified by using a list of users complied in a company's database or using an LDAP service. Typically, the users are also mapped to IP addresses in order to obtain their location. The sender's identification is then used as contextual information that can be applied to the data. For instance, the sender's contextual information may be an IP address of the sender, the user's identity, group identity, or any other type of information that adds further context to the sender of the data 20.
The context information module 26 also determines contextual information regarding the destination of the data 20. For example, by comparing the IP address of the destination to a database of IP addresses sorted by categories, it is possible to categorize the destination. The database of IP addresses includes known IP addresses that are sorted based on contextual information. The IP addresses are grouped into categories depending on the type of destination and content contained. Some non-limiting examples of categories may be “malicious addresses”, “competitors”, “public sites”, etc. . . . The IP addresses are grouped by categories as is commonly known in the web filtering industry and generated by analyzing the destination. In addition to categorizing the destination, it is also possible to add other contextual information such as the network of the destination or just the address of the destination. Therefore, the destination contextual information may be any additional information that further defines the data 20. For example, the destination contextual information may be the reputation of the destination, the name and/or type of entity, the location of the destination, known malicious recipients, etc. . . .
The policy/reporting module 24 is used to determine the policy applied to the data 20. Specifically, based on the classification of the data 20 determined by the classification module 22 and the contextual information determined by the context information module 26, it is possible to generate a policy for the data 20. The policy determines whether the data 20 is to be transmitted, blocked and/or reported, as will be further explained in
The enforcement module 28 applies the policy to the data 20 and either blocks or transmits the data 20 to the Internet 18. The administration module 30 allows an administrator to change policies and/or allow data 20 to be transmitted after further review.
Referring to
Next, in block 305, contextual information about the data 20 is determined by who/where context information module 26. Specifically, the “who” of the sender may be one or all of a specific IP address, an individual user or a member of a specified group. The “where” of the destination 14 may be one or all of a category of the destination, the network of the destination or the IP address of the destination.
In block 306 the policy for the data 20 is determined by policy/reporting module 24. The policy is determined using the classification determined from block 304 and the contextual information determined from block 305.
Referring to
Referring back to
While block 308 has been described as blocking data 20, it will be recognized that other types of actions may occur after the policy has been determined in block 306. Specifically, block 308 may initiate a workflow based upon the policy determined in block 306 whereby the data 20 is further analyzed, classified, inspected, etc. . . .
While the above description has shown, described, and pointed out novel features of the invention as applied to various embodiments, it will be understood that various omissions, substitutions, and changes in the form and details of the device or process illustrated may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/887,908, filed on Feb. 2, 2007, which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5414833 | Hershey et al. | May 1995 | A |
| 5581804 | Cameron et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5590403 | Cameron et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5596330 | Yokev et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5712979 | Graber et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5720033 | Deo | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5724576 | Letourneau | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5801747 | Bedard | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5828835 | Isfeld et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5832228 | Holden et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5899991 | Karch | May 1999 | A |
| 5905495 | Tanaka et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5919257 | Trostle | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5937404 | Csaszar et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 6012832 | Saunders et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6092194 | Touboul | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6185681 | Zizzi | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6252884 | Hunter | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6301658 | Koehler | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6338088 | Waters et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6357010 | Viets et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6460141 | Olden | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6493758 | McLain | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6654787 | Aronson et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6804780 | Touboul | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6832230 | Zilliacus et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6988209 | Balasubramaniam et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
| 7051200 | Manferdelli et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7058822 | Edery et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7080000 | Cambridge | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7089589 | Chefalas et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7100199 | Ginter et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7136867 | Chatterjee et al. | Nov 2006 | B1 |
| 7155243 | Baldwin et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7185361 | Ashoff et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7249175 | Donaldson | Jul 2007 | B1 |
| 7346512 | Li-chun Wang et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7376969 | Njemanze et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
| 7447215 | Lynch et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
| 7536437 | Zmolek | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7617532 | Alexander et al. | Nov 2009 | B1 |
| 7634463 | Katragadda et al. | Dec 2009 | B1 |
| 7644127 | Yu | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7693945 | Dulitz et al. | Apr 2010 | B1 |
| 7707157 | Shen | Apr 2010 | B1 |
| 7725937 | Levy | May 2010 | B1 |
| 7783706 | Robinson | Aug 2010 | B1 |
| 7814546 | Strayer et al. | Oct 2010 | B1 |
| 7818800 | Lemley, III et al. | Oct 2010 | B1 |
| 7991411 | Johnson et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8078625 | Zhang et al. | Dec 2011 | B1 |
| 8498628 | Shapiro et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8695100 | Cosoi | Apr 2014 | B1 |
| 20010047474 | Takagi et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20020078045 | Dutta | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087882 | Schneier et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020091947 | Nakamura | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020095592 | Daniell et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020099952 | Lambert et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020129140 | Peled et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020129277 | Caccavale | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020162015 | Tang | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174358 | Wolff et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020199095 | Bandini et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030018491 | Nakahara et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030018903 | Greca et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030074567 | Charbonneau | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030093694 | Medvinsky et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030110168 | Kester et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030135756 | Verma | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030172292 | Judge | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030177361 | Wheeler et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030185395 | Lee et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030185399 | Ishiguro | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030188197 | Miyata et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030202536 | Foster et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20040003139 | Cottrille et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040003286 | Kaler et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040034794 | Mayer et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040039921 | Chuang | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040111632 | Halperin | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040117624 | Brandt et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040139351 | Tsang | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040153644 | McCorkendale | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040162876 | Kohavi | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040187029 | Ting | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040203615 | Qu et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040255147 | Peled et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040260924 | Peled et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050025291 | Peled et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050027980 | Peled et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050033967 | Morino et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050048958 | Mousseau et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050055327 | Agrawal et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050066197 | Hirata et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050086520 | Dharmapurikar et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091535 | Kavalam et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108557 | Kayo et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050111367 | Jonathan Chao et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050120229 | Lahti | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050131868 | Lin et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050138109 | Redlich et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050138353 | Spies et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050149726 | Joshi et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050210035 | Kester et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050223001 | Kester et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050229250 | Ring et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050251862 | Talvitie | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050273858 | Zadok et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050283836 | Lalonde et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050288939 | Peled et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060004636 | Kester et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060020814 | Lieblich et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060021031 | Leahy et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060026105 | Endoh | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060026681 | Zakas | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060031504 | Hegli et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060036874 | Cockerille et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060053488 | Sinclair et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060068755 | Shraim et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060080735 | Brinson et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
| 20060095459 | Adelman et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060095965 | Phillips et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060098585 | Singh et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060101514 | Milener et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060129644 | Owen et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060168006 | Shannon et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060191008 | Fernando et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060212723 | Sheymov | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060251068 | Judge et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060259948 | Calow et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060265750 | Huddleston | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060272024 | Huang et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060277259 | Murphy et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060282890 | Gruper et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20060288076 | Cowings et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070005762 | Knox et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070011739 | Zamir et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070027965 | Brenes et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070028302 | Brennan et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070067844 | Williamson et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070143424 | Schirmer et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070150827 | Singh et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070156833 | Nikolov et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070195779 | Judge et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070199054 | Florencio et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070220607 | Sprosts et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070260602 | Taylor | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070261112 | Todd et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070294199 | Nelken et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070294428 | Guy et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070299915 | Shraim et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080009268 | Ramer et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080040804 | Oliver et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080047017 | Renaud | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080100414 | Diab et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080262991 | Kapoor et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080267144 | Jano et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080282338 | Beer | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080295177 | Dettinger et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20090064326 | Goldstein | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090100055 | Wang | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090100518 | Overcash | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090119402 | Shull et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090131035 | Aiglstorfer | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090241191 | Keromytis et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090320135 | Cavanaugh | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100024037 | Grzymala-Busse et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100064347 | More et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100198928 | Almeida | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100312843 | Robinson | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1367595 | Sep 2002 | CN |
| 1756147 | Apr 2006 | CN |
| 101060421 | Oct 2007 | CN |
| 1 180 889 | Feb 2002 | EP |
| 1 278 330 | Jan 2003 | EP |
| 1 280 040 | Jan 2003 | EP |
| 1 457 885 | Sep 2004 | EP |
| 1 510 945 | Mar 2005 | EP |
| 1571578 | Sep 2005 | EP |
| 1 638 016 | Mar 2006 | EP |
| 1 643 701 | Apr 2006 | EP |
| 1 643 701 | Apr 2006 | EP |
| 2418330 | Mar 2006 | GB |
| 2000-235540 | Aug 2000 | JP |
| WO 9605549 | Feb 1996 | WO |
| WO 9642041 | Dec 1996 | WO |
| WO 0124012 | Apr 2001 | WO |
| WO 2005017708 | Feb 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005119488 | Dec 2005 | WO |
| WO 2006027590 | Mar 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006062546 | Jun 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006136605 | Dec 2006 | WO |
| WO 2007059428 | May 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007106609 | Sep 2007 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Feb. 11, 2009 for International Application No. PCT/US2008/052483. |
| “Google + StopBadward.org = Internet Gestapo?”, http://misterpoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/05/google-stopbadwareorg-internet-gestapo/, Jan. 5, 2007. |
| “Trends in Badware 2007”, StopBadware.org. |
| Borck, James R., Clearswift makes a clean sweep of Web threats, originally downloaded from http://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/clearswift-makes-clean-sweep-web-threats-818., Aug. 22, 2007, pp. 2. |
| Broder et al., Network Applications of Bloom Filters: A Survey, Internet Mathematics, Apr. 13, 2004, vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 485-509. |
| Honoroff, Jacob, An Examination of Bloom Filters and their Applications, originally downloaded from http://cs.unc.edu/˜fabian/courses/CS600.624/slides/bloomslides.pdf, Mar. 16, 2006, pp. 113. |
| IronPort Web Reputation White Paper, A Comprehensive, Proactive Approach to Web-Based Threats, Ironport Systems,, 2009, pp. 10. |
| Long, John A., Risk and the Right Model, originally downloaded from http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GEtTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA161757, Jan. 1986, pp. 13. |
| Rubenking, Neil J., Norton Confidential, originally downloaded from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1999239,00.asp, Aug. 4, 2006, pp. 3. |
| Ruffo et al., EnFilter: A Password Enforcement and Filter Tool Based on Pattern Recognition Techniques, ICIAP 2005, LNCS 3617, pp. 75-82, 2005. |
| Spafford, Eugene, Prventing Weak Password Choices, Computer Science Technical Reports. Paper 875. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cstech/875, 1991. |
| Yang et al., Performance of Full Text Search in Structured and Unstructured Peer-to-Peer Systems, Proceedings IEEE Infocom; originally downloaded from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=04146962, 2006, pp. 12. |
| Wang Ping, “Research on Content Filtering-based Anti-spam Technology,” Outstanding Master's Degree Thesis of China, Issue 11, Nov. 15, 2006. |
| Ma Zhe, “Research and Realization of Spam Filtering System,” Outstanding Master's Degree Thesis of China, Issue 2, Jun. 15, 2005. |
| Zhang Yao Long, “Research and Application of Behavior Recognition in Anti-spam System,” Outstanding Master's Degree Thesis of China, Issue 11, Nov. 15, 2006. |
| Shanmugasundaram et al, Payload Attribution via Hierarchical Bloom Filters, CCS, Oct. 25-29, 2004. |
| Shanmugasundaram et al., ForNet: A Distributed Forensics Network, In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Mathematical Methods, Models and Architectures for Computer Networks Security, 2003. |
| Clear Text Password Risk Assessment Documentation, SANS Institute, 2002. |
| Song et al., Multi-pattern signature matching for hardware network intrusion detection systems, IEEE Globecom 2005, Jan. 23, 2006. |
| Adam Lyon, “Free Spam Filtering Tactics Using Eudora,”, May 21, 2004, pp. 1-4. |
| Cohen, F., A Cryptographic Checksum for Integrity Protection, Computers & Security, Elsevier Science Publishers, Dec. 1, 1987, vol. 6, Issue 6, pp. 505-510, Amsterdam, NL. |
| Dahan, M. Ed., “The Internet and government censorship: the case of the Israeli secretservice” Online information., Proceedings of the International Online Information Meeting, Oxford, Learned Infomration, GB, Dec. 12-14, 1989, vol. Meeting 13, December, Issue XP000601363, pp. 41-48, Sections 1,3., London. |
| Gittler F., et al., The DCE Security Service, Pub: Hewlett-Packard Journal, Dec. 1995, pp. 41-48. |
| IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, Mean to Protect System from Virus, IBM Corp., Aug. 1, 1994, Issue 659-660. |
| Igakura, Tomohiro et al., Specific quality measurement and control of the service-oriented networking application., Technical Report of IEICE, IEICE Association, Jan. 18, 2002, vol. 101, Issue 563, pp. 51-56, Japan. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/GB2005/003482, Dec. 9, 2005. |
| IronPort Web Reputation: Protect and Defend Against URL-Based Threats; Ironport Systems, Apr. 2006, 8 pages. |
| PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2008/052483, Feb. 11, 2009. |
| Reid, Open Systems Security: Traps and Pitfalls, Computer & Security, 1995, Issue 14, pp. 496-517. |
| Resnick, P. et al., “PICS: Internet Access Controls Without Censorship”, Communications of the Association for Comuting Machinery, ACM, Oct. 1, 1996, vol. 39, Issue 10, pp. 87-93, New York, NY. |
| Stein, Web Security—a step by step reference guide, Addison-Wesley, 1997, pp. 387-415. |
| Symantec Corporation, E-security begins with sound security policies, Announcement Symantec, XP002265695, Jun. 14, 2001, pp. 1,9. |
| Williams, R., Data Integrity with Veracity, Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: ftp://ftp.rocksoft.com/clients/rocksoft/papers/vercty10.ps>, Sep. 12, 1994. |
| Zhang et al., The Role of URLs in Objectionable Web Content Categorization, Web Intelligence, 2006. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20080307489 A1 | Dec 2008 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60887908 | Feb 2007 | US |