Embodiments of the disclosure relate to the field of cyber security. More specifically, embodiments of the disclosure relate to a system and computerized method for scalable bootkit detection.
While the cyber threat landscape continues to evolve at an ever-increasing pace, the exploitation of basic input/output system (BIOS) boot processes remains a threat to enterprises around the world. BIOS exploitation may be accomplished by a threat actor using a “bootkit,” namely an advanced and specialized form of malware that misappropriates execution early in the boot process, making it difficult to identify within a network device. As a bootkit is designed to tamper with the boot process before operating system (OS) execution, this type of malware is often insidious within a network device, and in some cases, persists despite remediation attempts made by security administrators. Therefore, early detection of bootkit malware is essential in protecting a network device from harm.
Reliable and timely detection of bootkit malware for thousands of network devices operating as part of an enterprise network has been difficult for a variety of reasons, especially surrounding the unreliability and impracticality of reading boot records from computers and other network devices of the enterprise network. There are two types of boot records: a Master Boot Record (MBR) and multiple Volume Boot Records (VBRs). The MBR is the first boot sector located at a starting address of a partitioned, storage device such as a hard disk drive, solid-state component array, or a removable drive. The MBR tends to store (i) information associated with logical partitions of the storage device and (ii) executable boot code that functions as a first stage boot loader for the installed operating system. A VBR is a first boot sector stored at a particular partition on the storage device, which contains the necessary computer code to start the boot process. For example, the VBR may include executable boot code that is initialized by the MBR to begin the actual loading of the operating system.
With respect to the unreliability of reading boot records for malware detection, by their nature, bootkits are notorious for hooking legitimate Application Programming Interface (API) calls in an attempt to hide bytes overwritten in the boot code. As a result, collecting the bytes by reading a disk from user space is unreliable, as a bootkit may be intercepting the reads and returning code that appears to be (but is not) legitimate.
With respect to the impracticality of reading boot records from all network devices of the enterprise network for malware detection, given that compromised enterprise networks may support thousands of network devices and each network device includes multiple boot records, a determination as to whether each network device is infected with a bootkit is quite challenging. Currently, a malware analyst could acquire a disk image and then reverse engineer the boot bytes to determine if any malicious code is present in the boot chain. Performed manually, this analysis would require a large team of skilled analysts, which is not easily scalable and greatly increases the costs in supporting an enterprise network in protecting this network from a bootkit attack.
Ultimately, the problems associated with the conventional review of the boot records for bootkit malware are the following: (1) collection of boot records from the network devices is unreliable; (2) analysis of the boot records is manual only, and does not take into account any behavioral analyses; and (3) inability to analyze thousands or even tens of thousands of boot records in a timely manner without significant costs and resources.
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 software module installed to operate with (or as part of) a software agent to assist in the detection of malware and/or attempted cyberattacks on a network device (e.g., endpoint). According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the software module (referred to as a “data recovery module”) features a driver that is configured to extract raw data stored in a storage device (e.g., hard disk drive, solid-state component array, or a removable drive, etc.). Thereafter, the extracted raw data is evaluated, such as through simulated processing by emulator logic, and subsequently determined whether a portion of the extracted raw data corresponds to malicious bootstrapping code operating as a bootkit. Herein, the data recovery module may be implemented as code integrated as part of the software agent or may be implemented as software plug-in for the software agent, where the plug-in controls the data extraction from the storage device.
As described below, the data recovery module is configured to obtain information associated with a storage driver stack pertaining to an endpoint under analysis. As an illustrative example, the storage driver stack may correspond to a disk driver stack provided by an operating system (OS) of the endpoint, such as a Windows® OS. Based on this driver stack information, the data recovery module (i) determines a “lowest level” component within the storage driver stack and (ii) extracts data from the storage device via the lowest level component (referred to as “extracted data”).
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the “lowest level” component may correspond to the software driver in direct communication with a controller for the storage device (e.g., a memory controller such as a disk controller). As an illustrative example, the “lowest level” component may be a software driver that does not utilize any other software drivers in the storage (disk) driver stack before communications with a hardware abstraction layer for the storage (disk) device, such as an intermediary controller or the storage device itself.
As described below, the extracted data may include stored information read from at least one boot record maintained by the storage device, such as a Master Boot Record (MBR) and/or a Volume Boot Records (VBR) for example. For example, this read operation may be a single read operation or iterative read operations to extract data from multiple (two or more) or all of the boot records (e.g., MBR and all of the VBRs). The extracted data associated with each boot record may be referred to as a “boot sample.” For one embodiment of the disclosure, the boot sample may include the data extracted from the entire boot record. As another embodiment, however, the boot sample merely includes a portion of data within a particular boot record, such as one or more bytes of data that correspond to a piece of code accessed from the boot record.
By directly accessing the lowest level component, the data recovery module bypasses the rest of the storage driver stack, as well as various types of user space hooks, which improves the accuracy and trustworthiness in the boot samples provided for analysis. Alternatively, in lieu of the “lowest level” component, the data recovery module may be configured to access a “low-level” component, namely the lowest level component or a near lowest level component being a software component positioned in close proximity to the hardware to reduce the risk of hijacking and increase the trustworthiness of boot sector data. Hence, a first indicator of compromise (IOC) for detecting a compromised boot system may be based, at least in part, on logic within the software agent or a bootkit analysis system (described below) determining that a boot sample being part of the extracted data is different from data retrieved from the particular boot record via processes running in the user space (i.e., not through direct access via the lowest level component of the storage driver stack). The first IOC may be provided to the bootkit analysis system as metadata or other a separate communication channel (not shown).
Upon receipt of the boot samples from the storage device, the endpoint provides these boot samples to the bootkit analysis system. According to one embodiment, the bootkit analysis system may be implemented locally within the endpoint and is adapted to receive boot samples from one or more remote sources. Alternatively, according to another embodiment of the disclosure and described herein, the bootkit analysis system may be implemented remotely from the endpoint, where the bootkit analysis system may be implemented as (i) a separate, on-premises network device on the enterprise network or (ii) logic within a network device supporting a cloud service provided by a private or public cloud network. For the cloud service deployment, the bootkit analysis system may be adapted to receive the boot samples, and optionally metadata associated with the boot samples (e.g., name of the corresponding boot record, identifier of the software agent, and/or an identifier of the endpoint such as a media access control “MAC” address or an Internet Protocol “IP” address). Herein, for this embodiment, the bootkit analysis system may be further adapted to receive boot samples from multiple software agents installed on different endpoints for use in detecting a potential bootkit being installed in any of these endpoints as well.
Herein, the bootkit analysis system comprises emulator logic that simulates processing of each boot sample, namely data bytes corresponding to boot instructions maintained in the corresponding boot record (e.g., MBR, a particular VBR, etc.), to generate an execution hash associated with these boot instructions. More specifically, as soon as or after the boot samples are collected from the storage device, the software agent (or optionally the data recovery module) provides the boot samples to the emulator logic of the bootkit analysis system. The emulator logic captures the high-level functionality during simulated processing of each of the boot samples, where the high-level functionality includes behaviors such as memory reads, memory writes, and/or other interrupts. Each of these behaviors may be represented by one or more instructions, such as one or more assembly instructions. The assembly instructions may include but are not limited or restricted to mnemonics. A “mnemonic” is an abbreviation (symbol or name) used to specify an operation or function which, according to some embodiments, may be entered in the operation code field of an assembler instruction. Examples of certain mnemonics may include the following: AND (logical “and”), OR (logical “or”), SHL (logical “shift left”), SHR (logical “shift right”), and/or MOV (e.g., logical “move”).
During emulation, the emulator logic may be configured to perform a logical operation on the mnemonic of the instructions to produce a data representation, namely the emulator logic is configured to conduct a one-way hash operation on the mnemonic of the instructions, which produces a resultant hash value representative of the boot sample being executed during a boot cycle. The resultant hash value, referred to as an “execution hash,” is generated from continued hashing of mnemonics associated with the instructions being determined through the simulated processing of a boot sample by the emulator logic. Hence, according to one embodiment of the disclosure, each execution hash corresponds to a particular boot sample. However, as another embodiment, an execution hash may correspond to hash results of multiple (two or more) boot samples.
Besides the emulator logic, the bootkit analysis system further features de-duplicator logic and classifier logic. The de-duplicator logic receives a set (e.g., two or more) of execution hashes, which are generated by the emulator logic based on the received boot samples, and compares each of these execution hashes to a plurality of execution hashes associated with previously detected boot samples (referred to as “execution hash intelligence”). The execution hash intelligence may include a plurality of known benign execution hashes (referred to as a “white list” of execution hashes) and a plurality of known malicious execution hashes (referred to as a “black list” of execution hashes). Additionally, the execution hash intelligence may include execution hashes that are highly correlated (e.g., identical or substantially similar) to execution hashes associated with boot records being returned by the software agent.
More specifically, besides white list and black list review, the de-duplicator logic may be configured to identify and eliminate repetitive execution hashes associated with the received boot samples corresponding to boot records maintained at the endpoint of a customer network protected by the software agent. It is contemplated that a count may be maintained to monitor the number of repetitive execution hashes. Given the large volume of boot samples that may be analyzed by a centralized bootkit analysis system associated with an entire enterprise network, this deduplication operation is conducted to create a representative (reduced) set of execution hashes and avoid wasted resources in analyzing the number of identical execution hashes.
As a result, each “matching” execution hash (e.g., an execution hash that is identical to or has at least a prescribed level of correlation with another execution hash in the execution hash intelligence) is removed from the set of execution hashes thereby creating a reduced set of execution hashes. The prescribed level of correlation may be a static value or a programmable value to adjust for false-positives / false-negatives experienced by the cyberattack detection system. Also, the results of the comparisons performed by the emulator logic also may be used to update the execution hash intelligence (e.g., number of detections, type of execution hash, etc.).
Thereafter, each of the reduced set of execution hashes may be analyzed by the classifier logic, and based on such analysis, may be determined to be associated with one or more boot samples classified as malicious, suspicious or benign. For instance, a second IOC for detecting a compromised boot system may be determined by the de-duplicator and classifier logic in response to detecting one or more execution hashes within the enterprise network that are unique or uncommon (e.g., less than 5 prior detected hashes), where these execution hashes denote differences in boot instructions from recognized (and expected) execution hashes that may be due to the presence of a bootkit.
Additionally, during simulated processing of the boot samples by the emulator logic, resultant behaviors associated with such simulated processing are identified and logged. The classifier logic may compare the resultant behaviors to behaviors associated with normal or expected OS bootstrapping generated from prior analyses (human and machine) to identify any behavioral deviations. For example, detection of suspicious behaviors resulting from the simulated processing, such as overwriting critical data structures such as an interrupt vector table (IVT), decoding and executing data from disk, suspicious screen outputs from the boot code, and/or modifying certain files or data on the storage device, may be determined by the classifier as malicious behavior denoting a bootkit. The type and/or number of behavioral deviations may operate as a third IOC utilized by the classifier logic for detecting a compromised boot system.
Based on the IOCs described above, the classifier logic determines whether a boot sample is “malicious,” based on a weighting and scoring mechanism dependent on any combination of the above-described IOCs having been detected, and if so, the classifier logic signals the reporting logic to issue an alert. Similarly, upon determining that the IOCs identify a boot sample under analysis is benign (i.e., non-malicious), the classifier logic discontinues further analyses associated with the boot sample. However, where the classifier logic determines that the IOCs identify the boot sample as neither “malicious” nor “benign” (i.e., “suspicious”), further analyses may be performed on the boot sample by the classifier logic or other logic within or outside of the bootkit analysis system. Such further analyses may be automated and conducted by another analysis system or may be conducted by a security analyst. Additionally, execution hashes associated with malicious and/or benign boot samples may be stored in the black list and/or white list forming the execution hash intelligence described above. These lists may be utilized, at least in part, by the classifier logic as another IOC in detecting a bootkit, especially any execution hashes that represent boot instructions where such tampering of the instructions or the instruction sequence, by itself, identifies the boot sample as malicious.
Based on the foregoing, embodiments of the disclosure are designed to collect boot records from the network device via a low component to increase reliability of the boot record data. Furthermore, the analysis of the boot records take into account behavioral analyses and, with the emulation logic and de-duplicator logic, provide an ability to analyze thousands or even tens of thousands of boot records in a timely manner without significant costs and resources.
In the following description, certain terminology is used to describe aspects of the invention. For example, in certain situations, the terms “logic” and “component” are representative of hardware, firmware and/or software that is configured to perform one or more functions. As hardware, logic (or a component) 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 the following: a processor; one or more processor cores; a programmable gate array; a controller (network, memory, etc.); an application specific integrated circuit; receiver, transmitter and/or transceiver circuitry; semiconductor memory; combinatorial logic, or combinations of one or more of the above components.
Alternatively, the logic (or component) may be in the form of one or more software modules, such as executable code in the form of an operating system, an executable application, code representing a hardware I/O component, an application programming interface (API), a subroutine, a function, a procedure, an applet, a servlet, a plug-in, 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; mass storage that includes (a) non-persistent storage such as volatile memory (e.g., any type of random access memory “RAM”), or (b) 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 portable memory device; and/or a semiconductor memory. As firmware, the logic (or component) may be executable code is stored in persistent storage.
A “network device” may refer to a physical electronic device with network connectivity. Examples of a network device may include, but are not limited or restricted to the following: a server; a router or other signal propagation networking equipment (e.g., a wireless or wired access point); or an endpoint (e.g., a stationary or portable computer including a desktop computer, laptop, electronic reader, netbook or tablet; a smart phone; a video-game console; or wearable technology (e.g., watch phone, etc.)). Alternatively, the network device may refer to a virtual device being a collection of software operating as the network device in cooperation with an operating system (OS).
The “endpoint,” defined above, may be a physical or virtual network device equipped with at least an operating system (OS), one or more applications, and a software agent that, upon execution on the endpoint, may operate to identify malicious (or non-malicious) content for use in determining whether the endpoint has been compromised (e.g., currently subjected to a cybersecurity attack). The software agent may be configured to operate on a continuous basis when deployed as daemon software or operate on a noncontinuous basis (e.g., periodic or activated in response to detection of a triggering event). In particular, the “software agent” includes a software module, such as a plug-in for example, that extracts data from the storage device for bootkit analysis.
A “plug-in” generally refers to a software component designed to enhance (add, modify, tune or otherwise configure) a specific functionality or capability to logic such as, for example, the software agent. In one embodiment, the plug-in may be configured to communicate with the software agent through an application program interface (API). For this illustrative embodiment, the plug-in may be configured to collect and analyze information from one or more sources within the network device. This information may include raw data from a storage device, such as extracted data (e.g., bytes of code) from its MBR and/or one or more VBRs. The plug-in can be readily customized or updated without modifying the software agent.
As briefly described above, the term “malware” may be broadly construed as malicious software that can cause a malicious communication or activity that initiates or furthers an attack (hereinafter, “cyberattack”). Malware may prompt or cause unauthorized, unexpected, anomalous, unintended and/or unwanted behaviors (generally “attack-oriented behaviors”) or operations constituting a security compromise of information infrastructure. For instance, malware may correspond to a type of malicious computer code that, upon execution and as an illustrative example, takes advantage of a vulnerability in a network, network device or software, for example, to gain unauthorized access, harm or co-opt operation of a network device or misappropriate, modify or delete data. Alternatively, as another illustrative example, malware may correspond to information (e.g., executable code, script(s), data, command(s), etc.) that is designed to cause a network device to experience attack-oriented behaviors. The attack-oriented behaviors may include a communication-based anomaly or an execution-based anomaly, which, for example, could (1) alter the functionality of a network device in an atypical and unauthorized manner; and/or (2) provide unwanted functionality which may be generally acceptable in another context. A “bootkit” is a type of malware that initiates the cyberattack early in the boot cycle of an endpoint.
In certain instances, the terms “compare,” “comparing,” “comparison,” or other tenses thereof generally mean determining if a match (e.g., identical or at least having a prescribed level of correlation) is achieved between two items where one of the items may include a representation of instructions (e.g., a hash value) associated boot code under analysis.
The term “computerized” generally represents that any corresponding operations are conducted by hardware in combination with software and/or firmware. Also, the term “message” may be one or more packets or frames, a file, a command or series of commands, or any collection of bits having the prescribed format. The term “transmission medium” generally refers to a physical or logical communication link (or path) between two or more network devices. For instance, as a physical communication path, wired and/or wireless interconnects in the form of electrical wiring, optical fiber, cable, bus trace, or a wireless channel using infrared, radio frequency (RF), may be used.
Finally, the terms “or” and “and/or” as used herein are to be interpreted as inclusive or meaning any one or any combination. As an example, “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 is not intended to limit the invention to the specific embodiments shown and described.
Referring to
As further shown in
More specifically, the driver 150 is configured to directly access the low (e.g., lowest) level software driver 160 within the storage driver stack, such as a software driver in direct communications with the memory controller 165. Via the lowest level software driver 160, the driver 150 may be configured to access stored information (content) within one or more of the boot records 1701-170M (M≥1) maintained by the storage device 130. For example, the driver 150 may conduct one or more read queries to extract data from “M” boot records 1701-170m, which may include a Master Boot Record (MBR) 172 and/or one or more Volume Boot Records (VBRs) 174. The extracted data associated with each boot record 1701-170M is referred to as a “boot sample” 1571-157M, respectively. By directly accessing the lowest level software driver 160 within the storage driver stack, the driver 150 is able to bypass a remainder of the software drivers forming the storage driver stack (see
Upon receipt of the extracted data 155 corresponding to the boot samples 1571-157M from the storage device 130, the software agent 120 provides the boot samples 1571-157M to a bootkit analysis system 180. Herein, for this embodiment of the disclosure, the bootkit analysis system 180 may be implemented as a centralized bootkit analysis system (BAS) as shown. In particular, the bootkit analysis system 180 is configured to receive the boot samples 1571-157M from the network device 1101 for analysis as to whether any of the boot samples 1571-157M includes bootkit malware. Additionally, the bootkit analysis system 180 may receive boot samples from other network devices (e.g., network devices 1102-110N, where N≥2) that may be utilized to determine IOCs associated with an incoming boot sample (e.g., boot 1571) identifying that the boot sample 1571 potentially includes bootkit malware.
Herein, the bootkit analysis system 180 may be deployed as (i) a separate, on-premises network device on the enterprise network or (ii) logic within a network device supporting a cloud service provided by a cloud network 190, such as a private cloud network or a public cloud network as shown. Software may be deployed in network devices 1101-110N to extract and provide boot samples to the bootkit analysis system 180 for processing, such as the software agent 120 deployed in network device 1101 that, in combination with the data recovery module 140, provides the boot samples 1571-157M to the bootkit analysis system 180. The bootkit analysis system 180 operates to identify IOCs that may signify a presence of bootkit malware within boot records of a monitored network device, such as (1) one or more of the boot samples 1571-157M (e.g., boot record 1571) being different from the same data contained in the boot record 1701 retrieved from the user space; (2) unique execution hashes or uncommon execution hashes (e.g., execution hashes detected less than 5 times previously) denoting different boot instruction sequences among the network devices 1101-110N; and/or (3) behaviors conducted by a particular boot sample 1571... or 157M that deviate from normal (or expected) OS bootstrapping.
Referring now to
Referring now to
As shown, the software agent 120 and the data recovery module 140 are stored within the memory 130. The data recovery module 140 includes the driver 150, referred to as the “boot data collection driver” 150, which is configured to extract (raw) data from the storage device 130 while bypassing one or more drivers within the storage driver stack 270 made available by the operating system (OS) 260.
The processor 210 is a multi-purpose, processing component that is configured to execute logic maintained within the memory 230, namely non-transitory storage medium. One example of processor 210 includes an Intel® (x86) central processing unit (CPU) with an instruction set architecture. Alternatively, processor 210 may include another type of CPU, a digital signal processor, an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC), a field-programmable gate array, or any other hardware component with data processing capability.
The memory 230 may be implemented as a persistent storage, including the software agent 120 with additional functionality provided by the data recovery module 140. The software agent 120, upon execution on the processor 210, operates as a daemon software application by conducting operations of retrieving stored contents within the storage device 130 in response to a triggering event as described above. More specifically, the data recovery module 140 includes the boot data collection driver 150, which is configured to recover the extracted data 155, namely boot samples 1571-157M. More specifically, the boot data collection driver 150 accesses the OS 260 of the endpoint 1101 to obtain the storage driver stack 270 and determines the lowest level component 160 associated with the stack 270. Thereafter, the boot data collection driver 150 initiates a message to the lowest level component 160 requesting data maintained in one or more storage locations within the storage device 130 that are identified in the query message. For example, the data collection driver 150 may initiate one or more READ messages for stored information within the MBR 172 and/or one or more VBRs 174. The stored information from each of the boot records 1701-170M, representing at least part of a corresponding boot sample 1571-157M, are subsequently provided from the endpoint 1101 to the bootkit analysis system 180.
Referring to
The processor 310 is a multi-purpose, processing component that is configured to execute logic maintained within the bootkit analysis system 180. During execution of certain logic, the bootkit analysis system 180 is configured to receive boot samples 1571-157M from the network device 1101, temporarily store the received boot samples 1571-157M in the boot sample data store 355, and modify data within each of the boot samples 1571-157M to produce representative data for analysis. The representative data, referred to as an execution hash (described below), may be used to determine whether a sequence of operations performed in accordance with each boot sample 1571... or 157M differs from “normal” bootstrapping operations. Stated differently, the detection of the presence of a bootkit may be based, at least in part, on detection of differences between sequence of operations to be performed in accordance with any of the boot samples 1571-157M and the sequence of operations performed in accordance with “normal” bootstrapping operations.
More specifically, the bootkit analysis system 180 includes the emulator logic 350 that simulates processing of each of the boot samples 1571-157M to determine high-level functionality of each of the boot samples 1571-157M. This functionality includes behaviors such as memory accesses, memory reads and writes, and other interrupts. Each of these behaviors may be represented by one or more instructions, such as one or more assembly instructions. The assembly instructions may include, but are not limited or restricted to the following mnemonics: AND (logical “and”), OR (logical “or”), SHL (logical “shift left”), SHR (logical “shift right”), and/or MOV (e.g., logical “move”).
During emulation, according to one embodiment of the disclosure, the emulator logic 350 performs a one-way hash operation on the mnemonics of the determined instructions associated with each boot sample (e.g., boot sample 1571). The resultant hash value, referred to as an “execution hash,” is generated from continued hashing of mnemonics associated with the instructions being determined through the simulated processing of the boot sample 1571 by the emulator logic 350. Hence, an execution hash may be generated for each boot sample 1571-157M provided to the bootkit analysis system 180.
As further shown in
Thereafter, each execution hash of the reduced set of execution hashes is analyzed by the classifier logic 370. Based, at least in part on such analysis, the classifier logic 370 determines whether data associated with the boot samples 1571-157M is malicious, suspicious or benign based on the presence or absence of notable distinctions between each execution hash from the reduced set of execution hashes and certain execution hashes within the execution hash intelligence 390 representative of normal (or expected) bootstrapping operations. The “malicious” or “benign” classification may be based on detected IOCs associated with one or more boot samples, such as matching between a certain execution hash and/or sequences of execution hashes within the reduced set of execution hashes to execution hash(es) within the execution hash intelligence 390 to identify the boot sample(s) 1571-157M. When the result is non-determinative, the execution hash is classified as “suspicious.
As described above, one (second) IOC for detecting a compromised boot system may be determined by the de-duplicator logic 360 and the classifier logic 370 in response to detecting one or more execution hashes are unique or uncommon (e.g., less than 5 prior detected hashes), where these execution hashes denote differences in boot instructions from recognized (and expected) execution hashes that may be due to the presence of a bootkit. Additionally, during simulated processing of the boot samples by the emulator logic, resultant behaviors associated with such simulated processing are identified and logged. The classifier logic 370 may compare the resultant behaviors to behaviors associated with normal or expected OS bootstrapping generated from prior analyses (human and machine) to identify any behavioral deviations. For example, overwriting certain data structures such as an interrupt vector table (IVT), decoding and executing data from disk, suspicious screen outputs from the boot code, and/or modifying certain files or data on the storage device, may be determined by the classifier logic 370 as malicious behavior denoting a bootkit. The type and/or number of behavioral deviations may operate as another (second) IOC utilized by the classifier logic for detecting a compromised boot system while deviation between raw boot record data depending on the retrieval path may constitute another (first) IOC that is provided to the classifier as metadata with the boot samples or via a separate communication path.
Where the execution hash is suspicious, where the level of correlation does not meet the correlation threshold in that there are deviations between the execution hash under analysis and the execution hashes within the execution hash intelligence 390, further (and more in-depth) analyses may be performed on the extracted data in contrast to discontinued processing of the benign execution hashes. Where the execution hash is determined to be malicious, however, the classifier logic 370 communicates with the reporting logic 380 to generate an alert that is provided to a security administrator. The “alert” may be a displayable image or other communication to advise the security administrator of a potential bootkit attack. Additionally, malicious execution hashes and/or benign execution hashes may be stored in a black list and/or white list, respectively. These lists may be utilized, at least in part, by the classifier logic 370.
Referring now to
Herein, based on the stack information 415, the boot data collection driver 150 determines a lowest level component associated with the storage driver stack 410, such as the lowest storage driver 420 as illustrated. It is contemplated, however, that a stack representation of other software components, besides software drivers per se, may be used in bypassing secondary software components for direct access to the storage device 130. In the Windows® OS architecture, information associated with the storage driver stack 410 is available through access via a published API.
Thereafter, the boot data collection driver 150 initiates a request 460 to the lowest storage driver 420. The request 460 may correspond to one or more READ request messages for data maintained in one or more selected storage locations within the storage device 130. For example, the boot data collection driver 150 may initiate a first READ request 460 for data bytes within the MBR 172 (e.g., boot sample 1571) via the memory controller 165 and/or other READ requests 460 for data bytes within the VBR(s) 174 (e.g., boot sample 1572...) maintained in the storage device 130. These data bytes, namely extracted data 470 including boot samples 1571-157M, are returned to the boot data collection driver 150 via the lowest storage driver 420. Thereafter, by the boot data collection driver 150 retrieving the boot samples 1571-157M directly via the lowest storage device 420 in lieu of the high-level storage device 440, the boot data collection driver 150 is able to bypass a remainder of the software drivers, including the malicious storage driver 430 configured to intercept data requests. Hence, this provides improved bootkit detection over conventional techniques.
Referring to
Thereafter, according to one embodiment of the disclosure, the emulator logic 350 performs a one-way hash operation 530 on the mnemonics 540 (e.g., AND, OR, SHL, SHR, MOV, etc.) associated with the series of instructions 520, which is representative of the ordered instructions executed during a boot cycle (see second operation 545). This ordered hashing operation of the mnemonics 540 for the series of instructions 520 being emulated continues for extracted data for the particular boot sample 1571. Upon completion of the emulation and hashing of the mnemonics 540 for the series of instructions 520 pertaining to the boot sample 1571, which may correspond to a particular boot record such as MBR 172 for example, the emulator logic 350 has produced the execution hash 500 for that particular boot record (see third operation 550).
Alternatively, in lieu of performing the one-way hash operation 530 on the mnemonics 540, it is contemplated that the emulator logic 350 may log the behaviors 510 and may perform a hash operation on the behaviors 510 themselves to produce the execution hash 500. In particular, the emulator logic 350 may perform hash operations on the series of behaviors 510 chronologically (i.e., in order of occurrence). As another example, some of the behaviors 510 may be excluded (filtered) from the hash operations (disregarded) where such behaviors are normally benign and their limited presence may lead to a greater result of false positive detections.
The de-duplicator logic 360 compares the execution hash 500 based on boot sample 1571 and other execution hashes based on boot samples 1572-157M generated by the emulator logic 350, namely a set of execution hashes 555, against a plurality of execution hashes associated with previously detected boot samples (e.g., malicious or benign execution hashes in the execution hash intelligence 390). Based on this comparison, the de-duplicator logic 360 eliminates repetitious execution hashes to formulate a reduced set of execution hashes 560 for analysis by the classifier logic 370. Hence, these unique or uncommon execution hashes are more manageable in identifying boot code that is potentially malicious, such as operating as a bootkit.
As suspicious activity executed by bootkits can vary widely, instead of generating detection signatures for individual malware samples, the bootkit analysis system 180 is configured to identify deviations (in code structure and behavior) from normal OS bootstrapping as another IOC. To enable this analysis, the behaviors 510 produced during simulated processing of content within each of the boot samples 1571-157M may also be considered by the classifier 370 in classifying any of the reduced set of execution hashes 560 as malicious, benign or suspicious as described above. Also, as another IOC, information associated with one of the boot samples 1571-157M being different than data retrieved from the particular boot record via the user space (referred to as “extracted data differences 570 may be considered by the classifier 370. The classification result 580 may be provided to reporting logic (not shown) to issue an alert, as described above.
Referring now to
After receipt of the boot samples 1571-157M, the endpoint 1101 provides the boot samples 1571-157M to a cloud network 600 for bootkit analysis (operation B). As shown, the boot samples 1571-157M may be provided to an intermediary server 610 for record management and subsequent submission to the cloud network 600. Besides the boot samples 1571-157M, the intermediary server 610 may also receive metadata associated with the boot samples (e.g., name of the corresponding boot record, identifier of the software agent, and/or an identifier of the endpoint such as a media access control “MAC” address or an Internet Protocol “IP” address). According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the server 610 tracks such metadata items and sends only the boot samples 1571-157M to the cloud bootkit analysis system 180 According to another embodiment of the disclosure, the cloud bootkit analysis system 180 may receive the metadata of the boot samples 1571-157M to assist in enriching alerts with additional context information regarding a potential cyberattack based on prior analyses.
For boot record submission and analysis, each of the boot samples 1571-157M associated with each boot record maintained in the storage device 130 of the endpoint 1101 is provided to the bootkit analysis system 180 (operation C). As shown, the intermediary server 610 may access the bootkit analysis system 180 via a RESTful API interface 620. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, where the cloud network 600 may be an Amazon Web Service (AWS®), the RESTful API interface 620 is an AWS® API Gateway being a managed service that aids developers to create, publish, maintain, monitor and/or secure APIs, which is exposed and accessible to receive and validate the submitted boot samples 1571-157M.
Herein, the bootkit analysis system 180 is scalable and configured with the emulator logic 350 of
Herein, the emulator logic is configured to (i) simulate processing of each incoming boot sample received via AWS® API Gateway 620 to determine instructions associated with data forming that boot sample, and (ii) perform hash operations on information associated with the determined instructions, such as the mnemonics for example, to produce an execution hash for each targeted boot record. The analysis Lambda™ component 640 is further configured with the de-duplicator logic to group different boot samples together based on boot instruction sequencing and remove repetitive execution hashes to reduce a total number of execution hashes for classification. Hence, the unique or uncommon execution hashes are maintained for analysis by the classifier logic.
Thereafter, record metadata (e.g., execution hash, etc.) is generated, collected and stored in a database 650 being part of the cloud network 600 such as Dynamo dB for the AWS® architecture for example. The database 650 may be accessed by the classifier logic, deployed within the analysis Lambda™ component 640, in determining whether information within a boot record is malicious. Additionally, the analysis Lambda™ component 640 features the reporting logic, which generates reports for each boot record that is stored in a predetermined data store 660 within the cloud network 600 (represented as “S3” for the AWS® architecture).
The intermediary server 610 may issue a query request message 670 for reports associated with particular endpoints or particular boot samples via another AWS® RESTful API interface, referred to as API Gateway/Report 630. In response, reports 680 associated with such boot samples or endpoints are gathered from the data store (S3) 660 and returned to the intermediary server 610, where the reports are made available to one or more authorized sources that prompted the query request message 670.
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.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4292580 | Ott et al. | Sep 1981 | A |
5175732 | Hendel et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5319776 | Hile et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5440723 | Arnold et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5490249 | Miller | Feb 1996 | A |
5657473 | Killean et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5802277 | Cowlard | Sep 1998 | A |
5842002 | Schnurer et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5960170 | Chen et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5978917 | Chi | Nov 1999 | A |
5983348 | Ji | Nov 1999 | A |
6088803 | Tso et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6092194 | Touboul | Jul 2000 | A |
6094677 | Capek et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6108799 | Boulay et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6154844 | Touboul et al. | Nov 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 |
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 |
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 |
7007107 | Ivchenko et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7028179 | Anderson et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7043757 | Hoefelmeyer et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7058822 | Edery et al. | Jun 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 |
7546638 | Anderson et al. | Jun 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 |
7937387 | Frazier et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
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 |
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 |
8566476 | Shiffer et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
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 |
8793278 | Frazier 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 |
8881271 | Butler, II | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8881282 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8898788 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8935779 | Manni et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8949257 | Shiffer et al. | Feb 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 |
9106630 | Frazier et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9106694 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9118715 | Staniford et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9159035 | Ismael et al. | Oct 2015 | B1 |
9171160 | Vincent et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9176843 | Ismael et al. | Nov 2015 | B1 |
9189627 | Islam | Nov 2015 | B1 |
9195829 | Goradia et al. | Nov 2015 | B1 |
9197664 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2015 | B1 |
9223972 | Vincent et al. | Dec 2015 | B1 |
9225740 | Ismael et al. | Dec 2015 | B1 |
9241010 | Bennett et al. | Jan 2016 | B1 |
9251343 | Vincent et al. | Feb 2016 | B1 |
9262635 | Paithane et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9268936 | Butler | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9275229 | LeMasters | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9282109 | Aziz et al. | Mar 2016 | B1 |
9292686 | Ismael et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9294501 | Mesdaq et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9300686 | Pidathala et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9306960 | Aziz | Apr 2016 | B1 |
9306974 | Aziz et al. | Apr 2016 | B1 |
9311479 | Manni et al. | Apr 2016 | B1 |
9355247 | Thioux et al. | May 2016 | B1 |
9356944 | Aziz | May 2016 | B1 |
9363280 | Rivlin et al. | Jun 2016 | B1 |
9367681 | Ismael et al. | Jun 2016 | B1 |
9398028 | Karandikar et al. | Jul 2016 | B1 |
9413781 | Cunningham et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9426071 | Caldejon et al. | Aug 2016 | B1 |
9430646 | Mushtaq et al. | Aug 2016 | B1 |
9432389 | Khalid et al. | Aug 2016 | B1 |
9438613 | Paithane et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
9438622 | Staniford et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
9438623 | Thioux et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
9459901 | Jung et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9467460 | Otvagin et al. | Oct 2016 | B1 |
9483644 | Paithane et al. | Nov 2016 | B1 |
9495180 | Ismael | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9497213 | Thompson et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9507935 | Ismael et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9516057 | Aziz | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9519782 | Aziz et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9536091 | Paithane et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9537972 | Edwards et al. | Jan 2017 | B1 |
9560059 | Islam | Jan 2017 | B1 |
9565202 | Kindlund et al. | Feb 2017 | B1 |
9591015 | Amin et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9591020 | Aziz | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9594904 | Jain et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9594905 | Ismael et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9594912 | Thioux et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9609007 | Rivlin et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
9626509 | Khalid et al. | Apr 2017 | B1 |
9628498 | Aziz et al. | Apr 2017 | B1 |
9628507 | Haq et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9633134 | Ross | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9635039 | Islam et al. | Apr 2017 | B1 |
9641546 | Manni et al. | May 2017 | B1 |
9654485 | Neumann | May 2017 | B1 |
9661009 | Karandikar et al. | May 2017 | B1 |
9661018 | Aziz | May 2017 | B1 |
9674298 | Edwards et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
9680862 | Ismael et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9690606 | Ha et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
9690933 | Singh et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
9690935 | Shiffer et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9690936 | Malik et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
9736179 | Ismael | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9740857 | Ismael et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9747446 | Pidathala et al. | Aug 2017 | B1 |
9756074 | Aziz et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
9773112 | Rathor et al. | Sep 2017 | B1 |
9781144 | Otvagin et al. | Oct 2017 | B1 |
9787700 | Amin et al. | Oct 2017 | B1 |
9787706 | Otvagin et al. | Oct 2017 | B1 |
9792196 | Ismael et al. | Oct 2017 | B1 |
9824209 | Ismael et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
9824211 | Wilson | Nov 2017 | B2 |
9824216 | Khalid et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
9825976 | Gomez et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
9825989 | Mehra et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
9830478 | Hale | Nov 2017 | B1 |
9838408 | Karandikar et al. | Dec 2017 | B1 |
9838411 | Aziz | Dec 2017 | B1 |
9838416 | Aziz | Dec 2017 | B1 |
9838417 | Khalid et al. | Dec 2017 | B1 |
9846776 | Paithane et al. | Dec 2017 | B1 |
9876701 | Caldejon et al. | Jan 2018 | B1 |
9888016 | Amin et al. | Feb 2018 | B1 |
9888019 | Pidathala et al. | Feb 2018 | B1 |
9910988 | Vincent et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
9912644 | Cunningham | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9912681 | Ismael et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
9912684 | Aziz et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
9912691 | Mesdaq et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9912698 | Thioux et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
9916440 | Paithane et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
9921978 | Chan et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
9934376 | Ismael | Apr 2018 | B1 |
9934381 | Kindlund et al. | Apr 2018 | B1 |
9946568 | Ismael et al. | Apr 2018 | B1 |
9954890 | Staniford et al. | Apr 2018 | B1 |
9973531 | Thioux | May 2018 | B1 |
10002252 | Ismael et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
10019338 | Goradia et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10019573 | Silberman et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10025691 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10025927 | Khalid et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10027689 | Rathor et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10027690 | Aziz et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10027696 | Rivlin et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10033747 | Paithane et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10033748 | Cunningham et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10033753 | Islam et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10033759 | Kabra et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10050998 | Singh | Aug 2018 | B1 |
10068091 | Aziz et al. | Sep 2018 | B1 |
10075455 | Zafar et al. | Sep 2018 | B2 |
10083302 | Paithane et al. | Sep 2018 | B1 |
10084813 | Eyada | Sep 2018 | B2 |
10089461 | Ha et al. | Oct 2018 | B1 |
10097573 | Aziz | Oct 2018 | B1 |
10104102 | Neumann | Oct 2018 | B1 |
10108446 | Steinberg et al. | Oct 2018 | B1 |
10121000 | Rivlin et al. | Nov 2018 | B1 |
10122746 | Manni et al. | Nov 2018 | B1 |
10133863 | Bu et al. | Nov 2018 | B2 |
10133866 | Kumar et al. | Nov 2018 | B1 |
10146810 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
10148693 | Singh et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
10165000 | Aziz et al. | Dec 2018 | B1 |
10169585 | Pilipenko et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
10176321 | Abbasi et al. | Jan 2019 | B2 |
10181029 | Ismael et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
10191861 | Steinberg et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
10192052 | Singh et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
10198574 | Thioux et al. | Feb 2019 | B1 |
10200384 | Mushtaq et al. | Feb 2019 | B1 |
10210329 | Malik et al. | Feb 2019 | B1 |
10216927 | Steinberg | Feb 2019 | B1 |
10218740 | Mesdaq et al. | Feb 2019 | B1 |
10242185 | Goradia | Mar 2019 | B1 |
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, III | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162015 | Tang | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020166063 | Lachman, III 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 |
20030021728 | Sharpe, Jr. et al. | Jan 2003 | 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 |
20040006473 | Mills 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 |
20070019286 | Kikuchi | 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 |
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 |
20080018122 | Zierler et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080028463 | Dagon et al. | Jan 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 |
20080184367 | McMillan et al. | Jul 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 |
20090198651 | Shiffer et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090198670 | Shiffer et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090198689 | Frazier et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090199274 | Frazier et al. | Aug 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 |
20100030996 | Butler, II | Feb 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 |
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 |
20110093951 | Aziz | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099620 | Stavrou et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099633 | Aziz | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110099635 | Silberman et al. | 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 |
20110173213 | Frazier 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 | Niemelä 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 |
20120096553 | Srivastava 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 |
20120291126 | Lagar-Cavilla et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120297489 | Dequevy | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120330801 | McDougal et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120331553 | Aziz 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 |
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 |
20130247186 | LeMasters | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130263260 | Mahaffey et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130291109 | Staniford et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130298243 | Kumar et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130318038 | Shiffer et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130318073 | Shiffer et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130325791 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130325792 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130325871 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130325872 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140032875 | Butler | Jan 2014 | 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 |
20140181131 | Ross | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140189687 | Jung et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140189866 | Shiffer et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140189882 | Jung et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140237600 | Silberman et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140280245 | Wilson | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140283037 | Sikorski et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140283063 | Thompson et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140328204 | Klotsche et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140337836 | Ismael | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140344926 | Cunningham et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140351935 | Shao et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140380473 | Bu et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140380474 | Paithane et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150007312 | Pidathala et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150096022 | Vincent et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150096023 | Mesdaq et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150096024 | Haq et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150096025 | Ismael | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150180886 | Staniford et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150186645 | Aziz et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150199513 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150199531 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150199532 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150220735 | Paithane et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150372980 | Eyada | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160004869 | Ismael et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160006756 | Ismael et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160044000 | Cunningham | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160127393 | Aziz et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160191547 | Zafar et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160191550 | Ismael et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160196425 | Davidov et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160261612 | Mesdaq et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160285914 | Singh et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160301703 | Aziz | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160335110 | Paithane et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20170083703 | Abbasi et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20180013770 | Ismael | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180048660 | Paithane et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
20180121316 | Ismael et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
20180288077 | Siddiqui et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20190104147 | Rouatbi et al. | Apr 2019 | 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). |
“When Virtual is Better Than Real”, IEEEXplore Digital Library, available at, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.sp?reload=true&amumbe-r=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). |
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. |
Baecher, “The Nepenthes Platform: An Efficient Approach to collect Malware”, Springer-verlag Berlin Heidelberg, (2006), pp. 165-184. |
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. |
Chen, P. M. and Noble, B. D., “When Virtual is Better Than Real, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science”, University of Michigan (“Chen”) (2001). |
Cisco “Intrusion Prevention for the Cisco ASA 5500-x Series” Data Sheet (2012). |
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). |
Didier Stevens, “Malicious PDF Documents Explained”, Security & Privacy, IEEE, IEEE Service Center, Los Alamitos, CA, US, vol. 9, No. 1, Jan. 1, 2011, pp. 80-82, XP011329453, ISSN: 1540-7993, DOI: 10.1109/MSP.2011.14. |
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). |
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. |
Goel, et al., Reconstructing System State for Intrusion Analysis, Apr. 2008 SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, vol. 42 Issue 3, pp. 21-28. |
Heng Yin et al, Panorama: Capturing System-Wide Information Flow for Malware Detection and Analysis, Research Showcase @ CMU, Carnegie Mellon University, 2007. |
Hiroshi Shinotsuka, Malware Authors Using New Techniques to Evade Automated Threat Analysis Systems, Oct. 26, 2012, http://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/, pp. 1-4. |
Idika et al., A-Survey-of-Malware-Detection-Techniques, Feb. 2, 2007, Department of Computer Science, Purdue University. |
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, XP01950454 ISBN:978-3-642-15511-6. |
Khaled Salah et al.: “Using Cloud Computing to Implement a Security Overlay Network”, SECURITY & PRIVACY, IEEE, IEEE SERVICE CENTER, Los Alamitos, CA, US, vol. 11, No. 1, Jan. 1, 2013. |
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. |
King, Samuel T., et al., “Operating System Support for Virtual Machines”, (“King”), (2003). |
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. |
Lastline Labs, The Threat of Evasive Malware, Feb. 25, 2013, Lastline Labs, pp. 1-8. |
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. |
Lindorfer, Martina, Clemens Kolbitsch, and Paolo Milani Comparetti. “Detecting environment-sensitive malware.” Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011. |
Marchette, David J., “Computer Intrusion Detection and Network Monitoring: A Statistical Viewpoint”, (“Marchette”), (2001). |
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. |
Mori, 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). |
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. |
Reiner Sailer, Enriquillo Valdez, Trent Jaeger, Roonald Perez, Leendert van Doorn, John Linwood Griffin, Stefan Berger., sHype: Secure Hypervisor Appraoch 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). |
Thomas H. Ptacek, and Timothy N. Newsham, “Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection”, Secure Networks, (“Ptacek”), (Jan. 1998). |
Vladimir Getov: “Security as a Service in Smart Clouds ‒ Opportunities and Concerns”, COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND APPLICATIONS CONFERENCE (COMPSAC), 2012 IEEE 36TH annual, IEEE, Jul. 16, 2012. |
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, Matthew M., “Throttling Viruses: Restricting Propagation to Defeat Malicious Mobile Code”, ACSAC Conference, Las Vegas, NV, USA, (Dec. 2002), pp. 1-9. |
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. |
Venezia, Paul, “NetDetector Captures Intrusions”, InfoWorld Issue 27, (“Venezia”), (Jul. 14, 2003). |
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. |
“Mining Specification of Malicious Behavior”—Jha et al, UCSB, Sep. 2007 https://www.cs.ucsb.edu/.about.chris/research/doc/esec07.sub.-mining.pdf- . |
Gregg Keizer: “Microsoft’s HoneyMonkeys Show Patching Windows Works”, Aug. 8, 2005, XP055143386, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: http://www.informationweek.com/microsofts-honeymonkeys-show-patching-windows-works/d/d-d/1035069? [retrieved on Jun. 1, 2016]. |