Embodiments of the present invention relate to network security. More particularly, embodiments of the present invention relate to client management in networks organized using network access gateways.
The communication of data over networks has become an important, if not essential, way for many organizations and individuals to communicate. The Internet is a global network connecting millions of computers in which any computer connected to the Internet can potentially receive data from and send data to any other computer connected to the Internet. The Internet provides a variety of methods in which to communicate data, one of the most ubiquitous of which is the World Wide Web. Other methods for communicating data over the Internet include e-mail, usenet newsgroups, telnet, FTP, audio streams, and video streams.
Users typically access the Internet either through a computer connected to an Internet Service Provider (“ISP”) or computer connected to a local area network (“LAN”) provided by an organization, which is in turn, connected to the ISP. The ISP provides a point of presence to interface with the Internet backbone. Routers and switches in the backbone direct data traffic between the various ISPs.
To access a LAN and, in turn, the Internet, many organizations use a network access gateway to act as a consolidation point for traffic entering or leaving the LAN.
In this network topology, all of the clients using the same network access gateway share a common “backhaul” network connection to the ISP. Any network traffic traveling between a client computer on the LAN and the Internet must therefore pass through (i.e. be “routed” by) the network access gateway.
One common use of a network access gateway is to provide “NAT” (Network Address Translation) services to clients on the LAN. This function allows a single outward-facing IP address to be reused for some purposes by multiple clients inside the LAN. This feature is sometimes referred to as “IP masquerading”.
The routing nature and IP masquerading nature of network access gateways often prevent an upstream ISP from sufficiently observing the traffic on the LAN side of the gateway. Particularly when NAT is enabled, the ISP is often unable to correlate traffic on the backhaul to particular clients behind the gateway.
Computers sometimes fall victim to malicious software (“malware”) such as worms and viruses, which exploit vulnerabilities in the victim to gain control.
Once malware has infected a victim computer, a typical behavior is to attempt self-propagation. To propagate, the malware must find and infect other vulnerable computers. The search for additional victims is often conducted at a high rate of speed by means of network reconnaissance. The speed and intensity of the reconnaissance is often bound only by the available processor and network bandwidth resources.
Some types of malware are constructed so as to bombard a third-party victim with excessive network traffic. This case is sometimes referred to as a DoS (Denial of Service) attack. It may be referred to as a DDoS (Distributed Denial of Service) attack when there are many coordinated attackers.
Some types of malware do not produce persistent high volumes of network traffic. Clients infected with this type of malware are still at high risk because security measures have failed. These clients may also pose an additional threat to other LAN clients at any future time.
Yet another potential source of hostile network traffic is a user who intentionally operates a computer program that is designed to produce such traffic.
Whenever a LAN client or a number of LAN clients are subjected to traffic of sufficient volume and type, the LAN and/or the backhaul can become congested with the excessive traffic. This network congestion is a problem even for otherwise uninvolved LAN clients because of the reduction in the effective bandwidth of the shared backhaul. The congestion is a problem for the ISP because of bandwidth limitations and because of the costs associated with providing remediation and customer support. Furthermore, other computers both inside and outside of the LAN may become burdened by receiving excessive traffic.
Because of the inability of the ISP to observe or attribute LAN traffic behind a gateway to specific clients, it is difficult or impossible for the ISP to remotely assign responsibility or take corrective action against the infected clients or perpetrators.
One prior art method of finding the sources of network offenses is to take remote control of the gateway from upstream and to begin examining all of the LAN traffic manually. However, this scheme requires manual action, proper network observation tools on the gateway, and sufficient skill on the part of the analyst. This approach is also predicated on having enough remaining network capacity on the backhaul and enough remaining processing power on the gateway in order to successfully conduct the examination.
Another prior art method of finding the sources of network offenses is to physically or logically disconnect and reconnect clients while monitoring the network traffic on the gateway. However, this approach will disrupt the connectivity of innocent/uninfected clients. Further, it imposes requirements upon the LAN network architecture and typically requires human intervention throughout a potentially lengthy process.
Embodiments of the present invention provide a system and method of detecting aberrant network behavior by clients of a network access gateway that eliminates, or at least reduces, the shortcomings of prior art detection systems and methods. One embodiment of the present invention provides a system of detecting aberrant network behavior behind a network access gateway comprising a processor, a first network interface coupled to the processor, a second network interface coupled to the processor, a storage media accessible by the processor and a set of computer instructions stored on the storage media, executable by the processor. In one embodiment of the present invention, the computer instructions can be executable to observe network communications arriving at the first network interface from multiple clients and determine when the traffic of a particular client is indicative of malware infection or other hostile network activities. If any network communications are judged to be aberrant, the computer instructions can be executable to log such activity to storage media, or to notify an administrative entity via either the first network interface or second network interface, or to apply access controls upon particular clients' traffic.
Embodiments of the present invention provide an advantage over prior systems and methods of detecting aberrant network behavior by clients of a network access gateway by being able to operate without human intervention.
Embodiments of the present invention provide another advantage over prior systems and methods of detecting aberrant network behavior by clients of a network access gateway by requiring a lesser skill level when conducting manual traffic analysis.
Embodiments of the present invention provide another advantage over prior systems and methods of detecting aberrant network behavior by providing an observational approach that can continuously monitor all LAN traffic.
Embodiments of the present invention provide another advantage over prior systems and methods of detecting aberrant network behavior by providing an approach that does not require the disconnection of LAN clients to determine the source of the traffic in question.
Embodiments of the present invention provide another advantage over prior systems and methods of detecting aberrant network behavior by not requiring that a usable network connection exist between the network access gateway and the point of administrative control.
A more complete understanding of the present invention and the advantages thereof may be acquired by referring to the following description, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which like reference numbers indicate like features and wherein:
The following applications are hereby fully incorporated by reference herein in their entirety: U.S. application Ser. No. 10/683,317, filed Oct. 10, 2003 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING ACCESS CONTROL,” by Richard MacKinnon, Kelly Looney, and Eric White; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/551,698, filed Mar. 10, 2004 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BEHAVIOR-BASED FIREWALL MODELING,” by Patrick Turley which converted into U.S. application Ser. No. 11/076,719, filed Mar. 10, 2005 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BEHAVIOR-BASED FIREWALL MODELING,” by Richard MacKinnon, Kelly Looney, and Eric White; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/551,754, filed Mar. 10, 2004 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COMPREHENSIVE CODE GENERATION FOR SYSTEM MANAGEMENT,” by Keith Johnston which converted into U.S. application Ser. No. 11/078,223 filed Mar. 10, 2005 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COMPREHENSIVE CODE GENERATION FOR SYSTEM MANAGEMENT,” by Keith Johnston; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/551,703, filed Mar. 10, 2004 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING A CENTRALIZED DESCRIPTION/CONFIGURATION OF CLIENT DEVICES ON A NETWORK ACCESS GATEWAY,” by Patrick Turley and Keith Johnston; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/551,702, filed Mar. 10, 2004 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ACCESS SCOPE CONTROL (“WALLED GARDENS”) FOR CLIENTS OF A NETWORK ACCESS GATEWAY,” by Patrick Turley, Keith Johnston, and Steven D. Tonnesen which converted into U.S. application Ser. No. 11/076,591, filed Mar. 10, 2005 entitled “METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONTROLLING NETWORK ACCESS,” by Patrick Turley, Keith Johnston, and Steven D. Tonnesen; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/551,699, filed Mar. 10, 2004 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DYNAMIC BANDWIDTH CONTROL,” by Patrick Turley, et al.; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/551,697, filed Mar. 10, 2004 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTION OF ABERRANT NETWORK BEHAVIOR BY CLIENTS OF A NETWORK ACCESS GATEWAY,” by Steven D. Tonnesen which converted into U.S. application Ser. No. 11/076,652, filed Mar. 10, 2005 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTION OF ABERRANT NETWORK BEHAVIOR BY CLIENTS OF A NETWORK ACCESS GATEWAY,” by Steven D. Tonnesen; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/551,705, filed Mar. 10, 2004 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DOUBLE-CAPTURE/DOUBLE-REDIRECT TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION,” by Keith Johnston, et al. which converted into U.S. application Ser. No. 11/076,646 filed Mar. 10, 2005 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DOUBLE-CAPTURE/DOUBLE-REDIRECT TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION,” by Keith Johnston, et al.; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/551,704, filed Mar. 10, 2004 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR NETWORK MANAGEMENT XML ARCHITECTURAL ABSTRACTION,” by Keith Johnston and Mario Garcia which converted into U.S. application Ser. No. 11/076,672 filed Mar. 10, 2005 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR NETWORK MANAGEMENT XML ARCHITECTURAL ABSTRACTION,” by Keith Johnston and Mario Garcia; and U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/660,408, filed Mar. 10, 2005 entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING A CENTRALIZED DESCRIPTION/CONFIGURATION OF CLIENT DEVICES ON A NETWORK ACCESS GATEWORK,” by Patrick Turley, et al.
Preferred embodiments of the invention are illustrated in the FIGURES, like numerals being used to refer to like and corresponding parts of the various drawings.
Embodiments of the present invention provide a system and method of detecting aberrant network behavior by clients of a network access gateway. According to one embodiment of the present invention, a control device can sit between two networks (e.g., an Internet, a LAN or other network) functioning as a network access gateway (or gateway). As used herein, a network access gateway means any device with one or more network interfaces (of any type) that employs some form of control instruction(s) to observe, route, switch, filter, monitor, transfer, or otherwise make determinations about network traffic between one or more logical or physical network divisions or devices. This can include both “one-armed” and “observational” cases where the device performing the functions of the invention (e.g., the network access gateway) is attached to a single observed network). It should be recognized that a network access gateway is only one embodiment for implementing the aberrant behavior detection of the present invention. The detection system can reside within the gateway and monitor all network traffic passing through the gateway. When clients of the gateway produce problematic or suspicious types of network traffic that are observable by the gateway, the detection system can accumulate statistical or summary information about such traffic. If over time, the volume, type and/or pattern of aberrant traffic meet configurable thresholds, the detection system can perform configurable actions in response. Example response actions could include logging data about the event to storage or alerting another entity of the event. The entity notified of the event could be another portion of the gateway or software module inside or outside of the network gateway, or it could be any computer or computers networked to the gateway. Examples of the latter could be an administrative console or a monitoring system operated by an ISP. As used herein, client(s) of the gateway, client(s) of the network gateway or simply client(s), mean network entities or devices (and components, software, etc. thereof) on a gateway connected network. A client can be any networked computing device (or even logical computing device that shares a connection).
It should be noted that
According to one embodiment of the present invention, client computer 13 can comprise any computing device known in the art (e.g., desktop, laptop, PDA, mobile phone or any other device capable of network communication) and can be connected to control device 11 in any manner known in the art (e.g., by LAN, wireless network, direct connection or other manner known in the art).
In this embodiment of the present invention, the suspicion accumulator 21 system collects and analyzes summary and statistical information about client traffic. Summary information can include, for example, packet header information (such as OSI layer 2 and layer 3 header information). For example, in a TCP/IP packet, header information can include source and destination MAC addresses, source and destination network addresses and ports, protocol number, etc. The accumulator 21 checks its collected data for each client, and applies instructions from the configuration 26 to determine if and when a particular client's traffic should be considered aberrant.
In this embodiment of the detection system within network access gateway 11, when the suspicion accumulator 21 determines that a particular client's traffic should be considered aberrant, the gateway 11 can perform response actions specified by the control instructions 22. Example response actions include: storing a record of the condition in the gateway's logs 24, notifying other portions of the instructions 22, or notifying an external entity via the LAN interface 15 or WAN interface 16. For the sake of example, such notifications could occur using an SNMP trap.
In the embodiment of the detection system exemplified in
It should be noted that in the embodiment depicted in
In one embodiment of the present invention, traffic observation rules can be implemented within a Linux system by using netfilter matches within iptables. As would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art, iptables allows construction of linked sequence of rules that can be used to discriminate, sort, test, alter, and otherwise act upon network traffic at the packet level.
In one embodiment of the present invention, the delivery mechanism from the network processing subsystem to the suspicion accumulator can be accomplished in a Linux system by using the “ULOG” netfilter action to transfer information about matched packets to the “ulogd” daemon. As would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art, ulogd allows customized packet decoding and delivery to additional entities such as the suspicion accumulator 21.
It should be noted that because of the ability to discriminate individual clients or client, the observation rules used by the detection system can be user-specific. Further, the observation rules and detection thresholds may be dynamically adjustable for reasons such as optimization of system performance or correction of sensitivity to certain types of traffic.
It should be further noted that the use of dynamic variations in detection system sensitivity or configuration can be implemented in any suitable manner, as would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art.
The second configuration section 33 defines a mapping table which ties observation rule tags (as used in rules 28 from
The third configuration section 34 in this embodiment of the present invention defines tests and threshold limits that are to be applied to the data contained in CHT structures in order to determine the presence of abnormal network behavior by a client. Each test will be applied to a single CHT row. Zero or more tests can be applied for any particular CHT row name.
The test descriptions in configuration section 34 are intended to illustrate for the sake of example the basic types of mathematical or algorithmic tests that can be applied to historical observations tracked on a per-client basis by this embodiment of the system. As would be obvious to any practitioner of the art, there are numerous possible ways to represent, define, declare, or specify these operations. Further, it should be anticipated that more sophisticated mathematical operations than shown in the figures (such as correlation and predictive extrapolation) will be useful in the accurate detection of aberrant network behavior.
In one embodiment of the present invention, a lookup table (for example a hash table) is maintained to enable the rapid location of a particular client's corresponding CHT structure when given the client's identity information (source IP address for example).
The CHT structure depicted in
Continuing with the main thread of control in the example embodiment, at step 45 the system determines whether enough time has elapsed since the last consolidation processing occurred. If so, consolidation processing 46 is conducted or repeated. The consolidation operation applies configured changes to the in-use CHT structures. Examples of consolidation operations are a time series decay algorithm, other aggregation algorithm or mathematical function, or re-initialization of a cell or cells. These consolidation instructions are expressed or defined within the configuration section 32. It should be noted that a practitioner skilled in the art could reasonably be expected to use any of several means of expressing, defining, or representing consolidation algorithm instructions within the configuration or the operating instructions.
At step 47, the main thread of control in the example embodiment checks whether any new packet notices 31 have become available at the input of the suspicion accumulator 21. If so, in steps 49-51 a CHT structure corresponding to the client is located. At step 52, the rule tag is read from the packet notice and compared to the mappings in configuration section 33. For each match, the corresponding CHT row data is updated according to the scaling factor and the instructions expressed in configuration section 32.
At step 60, a new thread of control is executing in the example embodiment. This thread is created for the periodic testing of CHT data. Whenever a check is due at step 61, the system applies the tests configured in section 34 to eligible in-use CHT structures. Whenever the test conditions are satisfied and indicate the detection of aberrant network behavior by a client, alerts are sent to internal or external entities in step 65.
It should be noted that the polling nature and iterative operational nature expressed in the example embodiment and depicted in the flowchart of
Although shown as an internal portion of a network access gateway 11 in
Additionally, suspicion accumulator 21 can be executed by multiple processors. One example of an exemplary suspicion accumulator is the Rocksteady NSA Server, from Rocksteady Networks, Inc. of Austin, Tex.
While the present invention has been described with reference to particular embodiments, it should be understood that the embodiments are illustrative and that the scope of the invention is not limited to these embodiments. Many variations, modifications, additions and improvements to the embodiments described above are possible. It is contemplated that these variations, modifications, additions and improvements fall within the scope of the invention as detailed in the following claims.
This application is a continuation of and claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §120 to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/076,652, filed Mar. 10, 2005, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTION OF ABERRANT NETWORK BEHAVIOR BY CLIENTS OF A NETWORK ACCESS GATEWAY”, by Steven D. Tonnesen, which in claims priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/551,697, filed Mar. 10, 2004, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTION OF ABERRANT NETWORK BEHAVIOR BY CLIENTS OF A NETWORK ACCESS GATEWAY” by Steven D. Tonnesen, which is hereby fully incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5673393 | Marshall et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5706427 | Tabuki | Jan 1998 | A |
5748901 | Afek et al. | May 1998 | A |
5878231 | Baehr et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5896499 | McKelvey | Apr 1999 | A |
5901148 | Bowen et al. | May 1999 | A |
5936542 | Kleinrock et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5953506 | Kalra et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5987134 | Shin et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5996013 | Delp et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6085241 | Otis | Jul 2000 | A |
6088451 | He et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6092200 | Muniyappa et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6108782 | Fletcher et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6130892 | Short et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6131116 | Riggins et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6157953 | Chang et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6173331 | Shimonishi | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6176883 | Holloway et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6185567 | Ratnaraj et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6194992 | Short et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6199113 | Alegre et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6205552 | Fudge | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212558 | Antur et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6219706 | Fan et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6233607 | Taylor et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6243815 | Antur et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6275693 | Lin et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6295294 | Odlyzko | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6321339 | French et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6324648 | Grantges, Jr. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6336133 | Morris et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6404743 | Meandzija | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6421319 | Iwasaki | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6463474 | Fuh et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6473793 | Dillon et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6473801 | Basel | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6477143 | Ginossar | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6502131 | Vaid et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6516417 | Pegrum et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6535879 | Behera | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6539431 | Sitaraman et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6636894 | Short et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6678733 | Brown et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6708212 | Porras et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6732179 | Brown et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6735691 | Capps et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6757740 | Parekh et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6785252 | Zimmerman et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6789110 | Short et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6804783 | Wesinger et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6823385 | McKinnon et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6917622 | McKinnon et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
7013331 | Das | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7120934 | Ishikawa | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7143283 | Chen et al. | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7146639 | Bartal et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7181017 | Nagel et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7185368 | Copeland, III | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7266754 | Shah | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7272646 | Cooper et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7324947 | Jordan et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7325042 | Soscia et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
7406530 | Brown et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7420956 | Karaoguz et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7454792 | Cantrell et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7509625 | Johnston et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7587512 | Ta et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7590728 | Tonnesen et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7610621 | Turley et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7624438 | White | Nov 2009 | B2 |
20010038639 | McKinnon et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010038640 | McKinnon et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010038645 | McKinnin et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010039576 | Kanada | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010039582 | McKinnon et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020013844 | Garrett et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020021665 | Bhagavath et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020023160 | Garrett et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020029260 | Dobbins et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020035699 | Crosbie | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020042883 | Roux et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020046264 | Dillon et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020052950 | Pillai et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020055968 | Wishoff et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020059408 | Pattabhiraman et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020075844 | Hagen | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020085719 | Crosbie | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020087713 | Cunningham | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020090089 | Branigan et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020091944 | Anderson et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020112183 | Baird, III et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020112186 | Ford et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020120741 | Webb et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020123335 | Luna et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020124078 | Conrad | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020124103 | Maruyama et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020129143 | McKinnon, III et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020131404 | Mehta et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020133581 | Schwartz et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020133589 | Gubbi et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020136226 | Christoffel et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020138762 | Horne | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020138763 | Delany et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143964 | Guo et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020152284 | Cambray et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162030 | Brezak et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020164952 | Singhal et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020165990 | Singhal et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020169867 | Mann et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020174227 | Hartsell et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020178282 | Mysore et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020199007 | Clayton et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030041104 | Wingard et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030043846 | Purpura et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030046370 | Courtney | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055994 | Herrmann et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030059038 | Meyerson et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030061506 | Cooper | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030069956 | Gieseke et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030070170 | Lennon | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030078784 | Jordan et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030087629 | Juitt et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030126608 | Safadi et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030135753 | Batra et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030149751 | Bellinger et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030154399 | Zuk | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030159072 | Bellinger et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030163603 | Fry et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030172167 | Judge et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177477 | Fuchs | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030212800 | Jones et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030217126 | Polcha et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040015719 | Lee | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040047356 | Bauer | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040049586 | Ocepek et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040064836 | Ludvig et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040073941 | Ludvig et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040085906 | Ohtani | May 2004 | A1 |
20040093513 | Cantrell | May 2004 | A1 |
20040103426 | Ludvig et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040122956 | Myers et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040172557 | Nakae et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040177276 | MacKinnon et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040179822 | Tsumagari et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040181816 | Kim et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040199635 | Ta et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040210633 | Brown et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040268234 | Sampathkumar et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050021686 | Jai et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050044350 | White et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050044422 | Cantrell | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050091303 | Suzuki | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050138416 | Qian et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050149721 | Lu | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050193103 | Drabik | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050195854 | Agmon et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050204022 | Johnston et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050204031 | Johnston et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050204050 | Turley et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050204168 | Johnston et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050204169 | Tonnesen | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050204402 | Turley et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060036723 | Yip et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060168229 | Shim et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060173992 | Weber et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060184618 | Kurup et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070073718 | Ramer et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070186113 | Cuberson et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070208936 | Ramos Robles | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070268878 | Clements | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080066096 | Wollmershauser et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080120661 | Ludvig et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080147840 | Roelens et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080276305 | Chan et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0587522 | Jan 2000 | EP |
WO 0177787 | Oct 2001 | WO |
WO 0209458 | Jan 2002 | WO |
WO 0223825 | Mar 2002 | WO |
WO 0241587 | May 2002 | WO |
WO 02077820 | Oct 2002 | WO |
WO 03021890 | Mar 2003 | WO |
WO 03098461 | May 2003 | WO |
WO 2004034229 | Apr 2004 | WO |
WO 2004036371 | Apr 2004 | WO |
WO 2005020035 | Mar 2005 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090300177 A1 | Dec 2009 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60551697 | Mar 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11076652 | Mar 2005 | US |
Child | 12536700 | US |