System and method for developing a risk profile for an internet resource

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11489857
  • Patent Number
    11,489,857
  • Date Filed
    Monday, May 6, 2013
    11 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 1, 2022
    a year ago
  • CPC
  • Field of Search
    • US
    • NON E00000
  • International Classifications
    • G06N20/00
    • H04L9/40
    • Disclaimer
      This patent is subject to a terminal disclaimer.
Abstract
A method and system for controlling access to an Internet resource is disclosed herein. When a request for an Internet resource, such as a Web site, is transmitted by an end-user of a LAN, a security appliance for the LAN analyzes a reputation index for the Internet resource before transmitting the request over the Internet. The reputation index is based on a reputation vector which includes a plurality of factors for the Internet resource such as country of domain registration, country of service hosting, country of an internet protocol address block, age of a domain registration, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, to-level domain, a plurality of run-time behaviors, JavaScript block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency. If the reputation index for the Internet resource is at or above a threshold value established for the LAN, then access to the Internet resource is permitted. If the reputation index for the Internet resource is below a threshold value established for the LAN, then access to the Internet resource is denied.
Description
STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT

Not Applicable


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention


The present invention is related to assessing risk profiles of Internet resources. More specifically, the present invention is related to a system and method for developing a risk profile for an Internet resource by generating a reputation index, based on attributes of the resource collectively referred to as the reputation vector of the resource.


2. Description of the Related Art


Management of internet access, particularly to Web sites, has been accomplished in the past using “Content Filtering”, where Web sites are organized into categories and requests for Web content are matched against per-category policies and either allowed or blocked. This type of management focuses on the subject matter of a Web site, and provides visibility into, for example, how employees spend their time, and their company's network bandwidth usage, during the course of the day. These solutions also allow companies to enforce established internet usage policy (IUP) by blocking Web sites whose subject matter violates their IUP.


Security solutions, such as anti-virus products, examine file or Web page content to discover known patterns or signatures that represent security threats to users, computers, or corporate networks. These focus not on the subject matter of a site, but look for viruses and other ‘malware’ that are currently infecting the site. However, current solutions to management of Internet resources fail to measure the security risk associated with accessing an Internet resource in a more predictive way, before infections are isolated and signatures are identified and distributed.


A possible analogy to the reputation of an Internet resource is the credit score of an individual. A Web user would want to be informed of the reputation of a Web site before visiting it, just as a lender would want to know the reputation, the financial reputation at least, of a borrower of the lender's money.


A credit score is based on a variety of fairly tightly related factors, such as existing debt, available credit lines, on-time payments, existing credit balances, etc.


In the United States, a credit score is a number based on a statistical analysis of a person's credit files that represents the creditworthiness of that person, which is the likelihood that the person will pay their bills. A credit score is primarily based on credit information, typically from one of the three major credit agencies.


There are different methods of calculating credit scores. The best known one, FICO, is a credit score developed by the Fair Isaac Corporation. FICO is used by many mortgage lenders that use a risk-based system to determine the possibility that the borrower may default on financial obligations to the mortgage lender.


FICO® scores are provided to lenders by the three major credit reporting agencies: Equifax, Experian and TransUnion. When lenders order your credit report, they can also buy a FICO® score that is based on the information in the report. That FICO® score is calculated by a mathematical equation that evaluates many types of information from the borrower's credit report at that agency. In order for a FICO® score to be calculated on the borrower's credit report, the report must contain sufficient information—and sufficient recent information—on which to base a score. Generally, that means the borrower must have at least one account that has been open for six months or longer, and at least one account that has been reported to the credit reporting agency within the last six months.


FICO scores provide a reliable guide to future risk based solely on credit report data. FICO® scores have a 300-850® score range. The higher the score, the lower the risk. But no score says whether a specific individual rill be a “good” or “bad” customer. And while many lenders use FICO® scores to help them make lending decisions, each lender has its own strategy to determine if a potential borrower is a good customer. Although FICO won't reveal exactly how it determines a credit score, it considers the following factors: payment history (35%); outstanding debt (30%); length of credit history (15%); types of credit (10%); and new credit (10%).


Returning to Internet resources, attackers have been using the Internet to attack the computers and other devices of users of the Internet. Attackers continue to take advantage of flaws in traditional security measures and bypass reputation-based systems to increase attack effectiveness.


In 2008, massive attacks were conducted that compromised hundreds of thousands of legitimate Web sites with good reputations worldwide with data-stealing malicious code. The attacks included sites from MSNBC, ZDNet, Wired, the United Nations, a large UK government site, and more. In the attacks, when a user's browser opened one of the thousands of compromised sites, a carefully crafted iframe HTML tag redirected users to a malicious site rife with exploits. As a result, malicious code, designed to steal confidential information, was launched on vulnerable machines. In addition to Web exploits, email spammers are also taking advantage of the reputation of popular email services like Yahoo! and Gmail to bypass anti-spam systems.


Also, spammers use sophisticated tools and bots to break the “CAPTCHA-” systems that were developed to keep email and other services safe from spammers and other malicious activity. MICROSOFT Live Mail, GOOGLE's popular Gmail service and Yahoo! mail services were all compromised by this breakthrough method. Subsequently, spammers have been able to sign up for the free email accounts on a mass basis and send out spam from email accounts with good reputations. With a free signup process, access to a wide portfolio of services and domains that are unlikely to be blacklisted given their reputation, spammers have been able to launch attacks on millions of users worldwide while maintaining anonymity.


Thus, prior art solutions have focused on security when accessing known infected sites in the Internet from a network such as a local area network or a wide area network.


Hegli et al., U.S. Pat. No. 7,483,982 for Filtering Techniques For Managing Access To Internet Sites Or Other Software Applications discloses a system and method for controlling an end user's access to the Internet by blocking certain categorized sites or limiting access based on bandwidth usage.


Hegli et al., U.S. Pat. No. 6,606,659 for a System And Method For Controlling Access To Internet Sites discloses a system and method for controlling an end user's access to the Internet by blocking certain categorized sites or limiting the number of times the end user can access an Internet site.


Yavatkar et al., U.S. Pat. No. 6,973,488 for Providing Policy Information To A Remote Device discloses a method for distributing high level policy information to remote network devices using a low-level configuration.


Turley et al., U.S. Patent Publication Number 2005/0204050 for a Method And System For Controlling Network Access discloses a system and method for controlling access to a specific site by using a gateway that assigns incoming traffic to specific sections of the site.


Shull et al., U.S. Pat. No. 7,493,403 for Domain Name Validation discloses accessing domain name registries to determine the ownership of a domain and monitoring the domain and registry.


Roy et al., U.S. Pat. No. 7,406,466 for a Reputation Based Search discloses using a search engine to present search results associated with measures of reputation to overcome the problem of META tags skewing the search results.


Hailpern et al., U.S. Pat. No. 7,383,299 for a System And Method For Providing Service For Searching Web Site Addresses discloses


Moore et al., U.S. Pat. No. 7,467,206, for a Reputation System For Web Services discloses a system and method for selecting a Web service from a search engine list which is ranked based on reputation information for each Web service.


Definitions for various terms are set forth below.


FTP or File Transfer Protocol is a protocol for moving files over the Internet from one computer to another.


HyperText Markup Language (HTML) is a method of mixing text and other content with layout and appearance commands in a text file, so that a browser can generate a displayed image from the file.


Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is a set of conventions for controlling the transfer of information via the Internet from a Web server computer to a client computer, and also from a client computer to a Web server. Internet is the worldwide, decentralized totality of server computers and data-transmission paths which can supply information to a connected and browser-equipped client computer, and can receive and forward information entered from the client computer.


JavaScript is an object-based programming language. JavaScript is an interpreted language, not a compiled language. JavaScript is generally designed for writing software routines that operate within a client computer on the Internet. Generally, the software routines are downloaded to the client computer at the beginning of the interactive session, if they are not already cached on the client computer. JavaScript is discussed in greater detail below.


Parser is a component of a compiler that analyzes a sequence of tokens to determine its grammatical structure with respect to a given formal grammar. Parsing transforms input text into a data structure, usually a tree, which is suitable for later processing and which captures the implied hierarchy of the input. XML Parsers ensure that an XML document follows the rules of XML markup syntax correctly.


URL or Uniform Resource Locator is a address on the World Wide Web.


Web-Browser is a complex software program, resident in a client computer, that is capable of loading and displaying text and images and exhibiting behaviors as encoded in HTML (HyperText Markup Language) from the Internet, and also from the client computer's memory. Major browsers include MICROSOFT INTERNET EXPLORER, NETSCAPE, APPLE SAFARI, MOZILLA FIREFOX, and OPERA.


Web-Server is a computer able to simultaneously manage many Internet information-exchange processes at the same time. Normally, server computers are more powerful than client computers, and are administratively and/or geographically centralized. An interactive-form information-collection process generally is controlled from a server computer, to which the sponsor of the process has access. Servers usually contain one or more processors (CPUs), memories, storage devices and network interface cards. Servers typically store the HTML documents and/or execute code that generates Web-pages that are sent to clients upon request. An interactive-form information-collection process generally is controlled from a server computer, to which the sponsor of the process has access.


World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an unofficial standards body which creates and oversees the development of web technologies and the application of those technologies.


XHTML (Extensible Hypertext Markup Language) is a language for describing the content of hypertext documents intended to be viewed or read in a browser.


XML (Extensible Markup Language) is a W3C standard for text document markup, and it is not a language but a set of rules for creating other markup languages.


The prior art fails to provide solutions to the problems with accessing the Internet.


BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides a predictive approach based on a statistical model built on a broad sampling of Internet resources with varying degrees of risk. The present invention focuses on the reputation of a Web site, or any Internet-based service or resource. The reputation incorporates many factors that are relevant to the overall safety of visiting a site. The reputation assesses the over-time track record of the site and the provider that operates the web site, the current characteristics of the pages and related files composing the site, and reputations of sites linked to the site and of referrers to the site. The overall assessment is expressed as a score, not unlike a FICO score, that predicts the potential risk of visiting the site which can be used to protect users from inadvertently visiting or utilizing higher-risk sites or services within the Internet.


There are many components of reputation available within the Internet. Much like other scoring mechanisms, such as credit scoring, the factors to be considered must be decided upon, and the weight that each factor will have in the overall “score” must be determined.


The present invention provides a system and method for defining a reputation of an Internet service such as a Web site.


A basic element of reputation is how long a domain has been registered to a particular company/entity. In addition, a domain which frequently changes hands is also interesting in a negative way relative to reputation.


Preferred steps of the invention are: evaluation of the important features to be included in the collection of reputation-relevant features referred to as the reputation vector; collection of the reputation vectors for a large sample of Internet resource; training of a classifier based on training sets of known high and low reputation services/sites; testing of a model against a wide variety of random samples; run-time evaluation of requests for the Internet resource using the developed classifier and responding to reputation index information requests from clients which enforce network security policy.


The present invention preferably protects users against threats which are typically are not related to the subject matter of the service, or site. The present invention preferably protects users and networks from zero-day threats which have not been characterized or included in anti-virus signature files. The present invention preferably allows network managers to protect users and infrastructure without having to restrict access to particular categories of content. The present invention preferably allows higher security which is independent of cultural or moral biases related to many categories of content.


One aspect of the present invention is a method for controlling access to a Web site. The method includes transmitting a request for a Web site from a browser on a client-side device of a local area network. The Web site resides at a first server. The method also includes receiving the request for the Web site at a security appliance of the local area network prior to transmission of the request over the Internet. The method also includes analyzing a reputation vector for the Web site at the security appliance. The reputation vector includes a plurality of factors for the Web site comprising at least one or more of country of domain registration, country of service hosting, country of an internet protocol address block, age of a domain registration, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, top-level domain, a plurality of run-time behaviors, JavaScript block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency. The method also includes generating a reputation index for the Web site based on the analysis of the plurality of factors. The method also includes determining if the reputation index for the Web site is above a threshold value established for the local area network. The method also includes transmitting a decision transmission to the browser of the client-side device.


If the reputation index for the Web site is above the threshold value, the method further includes transmitting the request for the Web-site over the Internet to a server for the Web site and receiving a Web page for the Web site at the local area network. In this situation, the decision transmission is the Web page for the Web site. If the reputation index for the Web site is at or below the threshold value, the decision transmission is a Web page from the local area network


The method can further include obtaining the plurality of factors for the Web site. Obtaining the plurality of factors for the Web site comprises accessing the Web site, analyzing a plurality of HTML documents for the Web site by crawling the Web site. Accessing the Web site comprises rendering a page for the Web site. Analyzing the plurality of HTML documents comprises determining the JavaScript block count and the picture count of each of the HTML documents.


Another aspect of the present invention is a system for controlling access to a Web site. The system includes a network, a Web site and a local area network. The network is the Internet. The Web site is hosted at a first server and accessible over the Internet. The local area network includes a plurality of client-side devices and a security appliance. Each of the client side devices has a browser. The security appliance controls access to the Internet by each of the plurality of client-side devices. The security appliance has a service engine for analyzing a reputation vector for the Web site and generating a reputation index for the Web site from the reputation vector. The reputation vector is based on a plurality of factors for the Web site. The plurality of factors comprises at least one or more of country of domain registration, country of service hosting, country of an internet protocol address block, age of a domain registration, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, top-level domain, a plurality of run-time behaviors, JavaScript block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency. Access to the Web site by any of the plurality of client-side devices is determined on the reputation index exceeding a threshold value established for the local area network.


Another aspect of the present invention is a method for controlling access to an Internet resource utilizing a reputation generating site. The method includes transmitting a request for an Internet resource from a browser for a client-side device of a local area network. The Internet resource resides at a first server. The method also includes receiving the request for the Internet resource at reputation generating site prior to transmission of the request over the Internet to the first server. The method also includes analyzing a reputation vector for the Internet resource at the reputation generating site. The reputation vector includes a plurality of dimensions for the Internet resource comprising at least two of country of domain registration, country of service hosting, country of an internet protocol address block, age of a domain registration, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, to-level domain, a plurality of run-time behaviors, JavaScript block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency. The method also includes generating a reputation index for the Internet resource based on the analysis of the plurality of factors. The method also includes determining if the reputation index for the Internet resource is above a threshold value established for the local area network. The method also includes transmitting a decision transmission to the browser of the client-side device.


Another aspect of the present invention is a method for controlling access to an Internet resource. The method includes transmitting a request for an Internet resource from an Internet-enabled client application from a client-side device of a local area network. The Internet resource resides at a first server. The method also includes receiving the request for the Internet resource at a security appliance of the local area network prior to transmission of the request over the Internet. The method also includes determining if a reputation index for the Internet resource is at or above a threshold value established for the local area network. The reputation index is generated from a reputation vector for the Internet resource. The reputation vector comprises a plurality of factors for the Internet resource comprising security history, legitimacy, behavior, associations and location. The reputation index preferably resides in a database file at the security appliance, which is immediately accessible by the security appliance for determining whether or not to allow access to the Internet resource. Alternatively, the reputation index is generated in real-time at a data collection site accessible by the security appliance over the Internet, and the reputation index is forwarded to the security appliance from the data collection site upon request. The method also includes transmitting a decision transmission to the Internet-enabled client application of the client-side device. The decision transmission allows or denies access to the Internet resource.


Yet another aspect of the present invention is a method for controlling access to an Internet resource. The method includes transmitting a request for an Internet resource from a Web browser for a client-side device of a local area network. The Internet resource resides at a first server. The method also includes receiving the request for the Internet resource at a security appliance of the local area network prior to transmission of the request over the Internet. The method also includes constructing a reputation vector for the Internet resource at the security appliance. The reputation vector comprises a plurality of factors for the Internet resource comprising security history, legitimacy, behavior, associations and location. The method also includes analyzing the reputation vector to generate a reputation index for the Internet resource based on the analysis of the plurality of factors and the reputation classifier. The method also includes determining if the reputation index for the Internet resource is at or above a threshold value established for the local area network. The method also includes transmitting a decision transmission to the Web browser of the client-side device. The decision transmission allows or denies access to the Internet resource.


Yet another aspect of the present invention is a method for building a reputation database for Internet resources. The method includes collecting a plurality of factors for an Internet resource site to populate a reputation vector for the Internet resource to perform reputation analysis of the Internet resource. The method also includes receiving the plurality of factors for the Internet resource at a data collection site. The method also includes constructing a reputation vector for the Internet resource at the data collection site. The reputation vector comprises a plurality of factors for the Internet resource comprising security history, legitimacy, behavior, associations and location. The method also includes analyzing the reputation vector to generate a reputation index for the Internet resource based on the analysis of the plurality of factors and the reputation classifier. The method also includes storing the reputation index for the Internet resource at the data collection site. The method also includes transmitting the stored reputation index to a local area network upon request for managing access to the Internet resource.


The method further includes weighting each of the plurality of factors based on empirical knowledge of each of the plurality of factors. The method further includes obtaining the plurality of factors for the Internet resource using a crawler. Obtaining the plurality of factors for the Internet resource preferably comprises accessing the Internet service, analyzing a plurality of HTML documents for the Internet resource, and crawling a plurality of linked Internet resources of the plurality of HTML documents for Internet resource. Analyzing the plurality of HTML documents preferably comprises determining the JavaScript block count and the picture count of each of the HTML documents, browser hijacking, file downloads and a subject matter.


Yet another aspect of the present invention is a method for controlling access to an Internet resource. The method includes collecting a first plurality of Internet resource reputation vectors. The method also includes partitioning the first plurality of Internet resource reputation vectors into a plurality of training sets. The method also includes training a maximum entropy discrimination classifier with the plurality of training sets, the maximum entropy discrimination classifier trained for a specific local area network. The method also includes testing the trained maximum entropy discrimination classifier using a second plurality of Internet resource reputation vectors. Each of the second plurality of Internet resource reputation vectors is unknown to the trained maximum entropy discrimination classifier. The method also includes evaluating the tested maximum entropy discrimination classifier. The method also includes providing feedback to the evaluated maximum entropy discrimination classifier. The method also includes utilizing the reputation index at a local area network for managing access to an Internet resource.


Preferably, each of the first plurality of Internet resource reputation vectors comprises a plurality of dimensions for the Internet resource comprising security history, legitimacy, behavior, associations and location, and the method further comprises weighting each of the plurality of dimensions.


Yet another aspect of the present invention is a method for training a MED classifier for controlling access to an Internet resource. The method includes collecting a plurality of reputation vectors for Internet resources. The method also includes partitioning the plurality of reputation vectors into training sets. The method also includes training a MED classifier with the training sets. The method also includes testing the trained MED classifier against unknown Internet resources. The method also includes evaluating the trained MED classifier. The method also includes determining if the trained MED classifier has been adequately trained.


Having briefly described the present invention, the above and further objects, features and advantages thereof will be recognized by those skilled in the pertinent art from the following detailed description of the invention when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a system for controlling access to a Web site.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a system for controlling access to a Web site.



FIG. 3 is a flow chart of a method for controlling access to a Web site.



FIG. 4 is a Web page for a requested Web site.



FIG. 5 is a page for a local area network informing a requestor of the denial of access to a Web site.



FIG. 6 is a block diagram of an Internet resource having a HTML document that is accessed by a crawler.



FIG. 7 is a flow chart of a method for generating a reputation index.



FIG. 8 is a flow chart of a method for controlling access to an Internet resource.



FIG. 9 is a flow chart of a method for utilizing a MED classifier for controlling access to an Internet resource.



FIG. 10 is flow chart of a method for controlling access to an Internet resource utilizing a MED classifier.



FIG. 11 is a block diagram of a system for utilizing a MED classifier for controlling access to an Internet resource.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Reputation is a qualitative assessment of the safety of a website, expressed as a quantitative value that can be used in managing internet usage. Internet resources, such as Web sites, are safe, or of high reputation, if the Internet resource preferably has: a reputable ownership and registration; a consistent history; had consistent content during that history; associated with other high reputation sites; from a geographically safe region; the Internet service provider (“ISP”) is well-known and reputable; not been known to be a source of malware infection; and worked cooperatively with the end-user and the end-user's Web browser application.


While security threats are transitory since they come up suddenly and are mitigated as quickly as possible, reputation is built up over a period of time and is a more enduring quality. Reputation can be lost, or become ‘bad’, over a period of time with repeated security events, bad associations, and bad behavior. For that reason, the occurrence of a single security breach (the site gets hacked and is a danger to visitors) does not dramatically lower the reputation of a site. Repeated occurrences over time, however, will destroy the reputation of the site.


Competitive reputation products include social considerations in their definitions, such that a highly reputable site, a site “held in high regard”, preferably has these characteristics: established record of Web presence; not a source of network security risk; no introduction of malware; no popup ads; no persistent ad infection; is not pornographic or obscene; and has no illegal content.


The reputation of an Internet resource is preferably determined by security, legitimacy, behavior, geographic location, associations and additional factors. Legitimacy is determined by the top-level domain, the investment in the Internet resource (virtual hosting with non-affiliated sites, multiple hosting and SSL security), the traffic volume, the category age and the popularity rank. Legitimacy is also preferably determined by any or all of the following: the consistency between the registering and hosting city region or country; and city, region or country associated with the IP address. Behaviors include the use of popup ads, browser hijacking and the use of auto-redirecting. Associations include the number of sites linking into the site, the reputations of the linked in sites and the reputations of the linked-to sites. The geographic location includes the hosting country, the registration country, the region and the city. The geographic location also preferably includes the consistency between the registering and hosting country and the country associated with the IP address.


In a most preferred embodiment discussed below, machine learning technologies are utilized for controlling access to an Internet resource. A variation on support vector machine techniques called Maximum Entropy Discrimination (“MED”) is a preferred machine learning technology. MED allows a computer to be trained to recognize the relative reputation of an Internet resource based on the features of the Internet resource. The set of features which characterize the reputation of the Internet resource is its reputation vector. Once trained, the computer uses the reputation vector for a requested Internet service to evaluate its reputation index, a score which can be used with empirically developed threshold values to block access where the reputation index is deemed to be too low to be safe.


A predictive security assessment for an Internet resource is provided based on known facts about the Internet resource, which is more secure than relying only on knowledge of previously experienced security attacks.


The system preferably provides classification of each Internet resource at run-time given a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) and the reputation vector of the Internet resource. The system returns a score, or index, expressing the results on a relative scale for use by requesting clients, typically a security product which integrates the reputation assessment as a service.


The reputation vector preferably comprises a combination of some or all of the following: country of domain registration; country of service hosting; country of IP Address block; age of domain registration; time known to the assessor site; subject matter; classification age (time since last re-categorization); rank (popularity); IP Address; virtual hosting; number of hosts; top-level domain (.com, .biz, .ru, etc); security history; run-time behaviors; popup ads; downloadable executables; virus-infected executables; JavaScript block count; picture count; immediate redirect; and response latency. These features are collected and evaluated for all model training samples and at run-time on a per-user-request basis. Those skilled in the pertinent art will recognize that other factors may be utilized which are relevant to the security as determined by an assessor.


As shown in FIG. 1, a system for controlling access to an Internet service is generally designated 20. The system 20 preferably comprises a local area network 30, the Internet 100 and an Internet service located at a remote server 60. The Internet resource is preferably a Web site. A local area network 30 preferably comprises a security appliance 50 and a plurality of client-side devices 55. The plurality of client-side devices preferably comprises desktop computers, laptop computers, personal digital assistants, smartphones and the like. Each of the client-side devices 55 preferably has a Web-browser for accessing the Internet from the client side device 55. The security appliance 50 preferably comprises a network access 51 for permitting access to the Internet from the local area network 30, and a service engine 52 for determining if a requested Internet resource has a reputation index that meets a threshold established for the local area network 30.


A method 1000 for controlling access to a Web site is shown in FIG. 3. At block 1001, a request for a Web site is transmitted from a browser for a client-side device of a local area network which is received at a security appliance of the local area network prior to transmission of the request over the Internet. At block 1002, a reputation index for the Web site is obtained at the security appliance. The reputation index is calculated from a reputation vector which preferably includes a plurality of factors for the Web site comprising country of domain registration, country of service hosting, country of an internet protocol address block, age of a domain registration, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, to-level domain, a plurality of run-time behaviors, JavaScript block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency. At block 1004, a determination is made if the reputation index for the Web site is above a threshold value established for the local area network. At decision 1005, if the reputation index is not above the threshold, then at block 1006 access to the Web site is denied and a transmission of the denial is sent to the client-side device, preferably as a page 500 as shown in FIG. 5. If at decision 1005 the reputation index for the Web site is above the threshold, then the access to the Web site by the client-side device is permitted by the security appliance, and preferably, as shown in FIG. 4, a Web page 400 is provided to the client-side device.


An alternative embodiment of the system 20 is illustrated in FIG. 2. The system 20 preferably comprises a local area network 30, the Internet 100, an Internet service located at a remote server 60 and a reputation generating site 70 preferably having a crawler 71 and a database 72. The Internet service is preferably a Web site. A local area network 30 preferably comprises a security appliance 50 and a plurality of client-side devices 55. Each of the client-side devices 55 preferably has a Web-browser for accessing the Internet from the client side device 55. The security appliance 50 preferably comprises a network access 51 for permitting access to the Internet from the local area network 30, and a service engine 52 for determining if a requested Internet service has a reputation index that meets a threshold establish for the local area network 30. The reputation generating site 70 provides reputation indices to service engine 52 of the security appliance 50. The reputation generating site 70 preferably utilizes the crawler 71 and other means to access Internet resources such as the Internet resource located at Web server 60. The other means preferably includes publicly available data feeds, purchased databases, proprietary database, zone files from WHOIS database.


A flow chart for a method 2000 for generating a reputation index is shown in FIG. 7. At block 2001, a HTTP request is transmitted from a reputation generating site 70 for an Internet resource. From the HTTP request, a crawler 71 of the reputation generating site accesses the Internet resource. In accessing the Internet resource, as shown in FIG. 6, the crawler 71 preferably accesses at least one HTML document 91 of a plurality of HTML documents of the Internet resource 90. At block 2003, from the HTML documents and links within the HTML documents, the crawler 71 obtains information concerning the Internet resource 90. The reputation vector for the Internet resource 90 is based on some of this information obtained by the crawler 71. At block 2004, the reputation vector for the Internet resource is analyzed at the reputation generating site 70. At block 2005, a reputation index for the Internet resource 90 is generated at the data collection site. At block 2006, the reputation index for the Internet resource 90 is stored in a database 72 of the reputation generating site 70. The reputation for the Internet resource is available to the security appliance as updates or individual requests. At block 2007, the reputation index for the Internet resource 90 is transmitted to a LAN 30 for storage in a service engine 52 of a security appliance 50.


A flow chart for a method 3000 for controlling access to an Internet resource is shown in FIG. 8. At block 3001, a request for an Internet resource is transmitted from an Internet-enabled client application for a client-side device 55 of a LAN 30. At block 3002, the request is received at a security appliance 50 of the LAN 30 prior to transmission of the request over the Internet 100. At block 3003, a reputation index for the Internet resource is accessed from a database of a service engine 52 of the security appliance 50. The reputation index is based on a reputation vector which includes a plurality of factors for the Internet resource comprising at least two or more of country of domain registration, country of service hosting, country of an internet protocol address block, age of a domain registration, security history, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, to-level domain, a plurality of run-time behaviors, JavaScript block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency. At block 3004, a determination is made if the reputation index for the Internet resource is at or above a threshold value established for the LAN 30. At decision 3005, if the reputation index is below the threshold value, then at block 3006 access to the Internet resource is denied and a transmission of the denial is sent to the client-side device 55. If at decision 3005 the reputation index for the Web site is at or above the threshold value, then the access to the Internet resource by the client-side device 55 is permitted by the security appliance 50.


Table One provides a list of the attributes for the reputation vector and a description of each of the attributes.










TABLE ONE





Attribute
Description







Country
2-letter code, 3-letter code or



full name of country based on IP block


Top-level
.com, .biz, .org, .gov, etc.


Domain


Domain Age
Number of months in existence on zone lists,



or no less than the classification age


Database Age
Months since Authority was entered into database


Classifi-
Months that the Authority has held its


cation Age
current classification


Hosts
Number of IP's associated with the Authority


Virtually
T/F if the other authorities share associated IP's


Hosted


Popups
T/F if the page opens new browser windows on its own


Hijack
T/F does the default page alter the browser configuration


JavaScript
Count of <SCRIPT> blocks in default pages


Executables
T/F does the authorities download executables to client


Pictures
Count of pictures on default page


Latency
Number of milliseconds to return default page


Rank
Numerical ranking, used as T if <2,000,000,



F otherwise in modeling


Infected
T/F were infected download files found by AV



tools during site analysis


Security Trend
Number of malware infections in past 12 months


Total Secu-
Total number of malware infections known


rity Count


Redirect
Authority redirects to another Authority


IP Address
Analysis of IP address for known threat sources,



reserved IP ranges, and legacy IP address assignments


ISP
Internet service provider


City


Region









Table Two is an example of a “good” Internet resource.












TABLE TWO







Attribute
Value









Authority
USmoney.gov



Country
USA



Top Level Domain
Gov



Domain Age
18



Hosts
2



Virtual Hosts
0



Rank
1



Infected
0



Security Events
0



Recent Events
0



PublicCoIP
0



GovernmentIP
1



Hijack
0



JavaScript
0



Executables
0



Pictures
0



Latency
0



Redirect
0










Table Three is an example of a “bad” Internet resource.












TABLE THREE







Attribute
Value









Authority
www.c.reditcan.cn



Country
CN



Top Level Domain
CN



Domain Age
3



Hosts
1



Virtual Hosts
1



Rank
0



Infected
0



Security Events
1



Recent Events
1



PublicCoIP
0



GovernmentIP
0



Hijack
0



JavaScript
13



Executables
1



Pictures
14



Latency
826



Redirect
0










Depending on the threshold value established by the administrator of the LAN, the Internet resource of www.c.reditcan.cn with an reputation index value of 51, is not available for access by a user based on its reputation index, and the Internet resource of www.USmoney.GOV is available for access by a user based on its reputation index 95. Thus, even if the Internet resource of www.c.reditcan.cn is not a known source of malware or viruses, the present invention would prevent an end user client from accessing the Internet resource since its reputation index is deemed unsafe.


Another embodiment uses a MED algorithm to build a statistical model on a Web page based on good and bad Internet samples. This embodiment uses a unique optimization algorithm for training, as well as two other optimization steps for calibrating the outputs to be probabilities, in a process that tolerates some input errors while still yielding reliable outputs. Training process feedback loops guide the implementer to improve the model data through splitting data into sets for holdout, training, and testing guided by two criteria: most violating examples, and least understood examples. The implementer using the criteria iteratively improves the quality of the training set which also reduces classifier errors and is exponentially faster than having the implementer manually verify or check the example assignments to categories in random or haphazard order. The examples are randomly reassigned before every training iteration to improve generalization. Sparse matrix math during the classification process improves processing speeds to enable a modest computer to classify millions of URLs per day. The implementation allows for a multiple of dimensions, each representing a fact about the Internet resource, to be included in the reputation model, while classification speed of any particular Internet resource is independent of the number of total dimensions in its reputation vector.


This embodiment is preferred since classifying a large percentage of existing Web sites into reputation risk assessments quickly and efficiently requires an automated process because the number of humans required is too large to be practical or economical. Further, defining automated classification rules by hand is very hard and requires writing many thousands of extremely specific as well as vague rules. All of these rules will interact with each other in an exponential number of ways, making human-based rule construction a daunting effort as well. The machine learning approach of this embodiment solves the problem by having humans define “training sets” or examples of each topic for the classifier, which then “trains” by optimizing the weights each factor should have in order to reduce classification error the most.


In addition to providing a good implementation of the learning algorithm, this embodiment efficiently utilizes the human efforts in identifying examples of good and bad reputations.


This embodiment preferably applies an effective learning formulation based on the principles and theory of MED with an efficient optimization algorithm based on the principles of Platt's sequential minimization optimization (“SMO”), in conjunction with an overall optimization of tunable parameters and calibrated confidence scores, to solve the learning problem given proper examples of Web sites of good and bad reputation.


The process then involves having humans examine a list of “most violating” examples, the examples which were marked as being good reputations but received extremely low confidence scores from the classifier (and vice-versa), as well as “least understood” examples, the examples which receive a confidence score close to the prior probability of the reputation.


By spending human time examining these two classes of examples, the classifier benefits from having egregiously misclassified examples being put into the proper reputation (good or bad) as well as providing the classifier with the largest amount of new information as quickly as possible. This combination improves the classifier's real-world effectiveness very quickly with minimal human effort. Thus, this embodiment efficiently combines human and automated work to solve the problem of automated reputation classification of Internet resources.


In one method, an evaluation of multiple factors (such as discussed above) is included in determining a reputation vector for an Internet resource. This process is done for multiple Internet resources. Next, reputation vectors for a large sample of Internet resources are collected at a data collection site. Next, a MED classifier is trained using the collection of reputation vectors based on training sets of known high reputation Internet resources and low reputation Internet resources. Next, a MED-based model for classification is tested against a wide variety of random samples of Internet resources. Next, a security appliance is deployed at a LAN. Next, a run-time evaluation of Internet resource requests is performed in using the developed MED classifier for responding to reputation index information requests from clients based on a LAN security policy. The MED-based model for classification is preferably utilized at run-time to calculate a reputation index. In this manner, this embodiment provides a predictive security assessment based on known facts about an Internet resource, which is more secure than relying only on knowledge of previously experienced security attacks. This embodiment provides a LAN real-time updates, real-time classification of non-cached URLs and a real-time feedback loop.


A flow chart of a method 4000 for utilizing a MED classifier for controlling access to an Internet resource is shown in FIG. 9. At block 4001, multiple reputation vectors for a large sample of Internet resources are collected preferably at a reputation generating site. The reputation vectors for the Internet resources are previously generated as discussed above. At block 4002, the reputation vectors are partitioned into multiple training sets. The training sets comprise at least two training sets divided into high reputation Internet resources and low reputation Internet resources. At block 4003, a MED classifier is trained using the training sets of high reputation Internet resources and low reputation Internet resources to create a trained MED classifier. At block 4004, the trained MED classifier is tested against a wide variety of Internet resources which are not grouped into training sets and the reputation index is unknown to the trained MED classifier. At block 4005, the tested MED classifier is evaluated to determine the accuracy of the tested MED classifier and to determine the most violating examples of either a wrongly categorized high reputation Internet resource or low reputation Internet resource, and the least understood Internet resources. At decision block 4006, an evaluation of the testing is performed. If the testing was performed correctly, then at block 4007 the MED classifier is considered trained and ready for operations. If the testing was inadequate feedback is provided to the MED classifier concerning the wrongly categorized high reputation Internet resources or low reputation Internet resources, and the least understood Internet resources. The process is continued at block 4003 again until the MED classifier is properly trained.


In another embodiment, a reputation index is returned immediately from a stored set of reputation indexes calculated prior to the user's request. As shown in FIG. 10, a method for controlling access to an Internet resource utilizing a MED classifier is generally designated 5000. At block 5001, a request for an Internet resource is transmitted from an Internet-enabled client application for a client-side device 55 of a LAN 30. At block 5002, a reputation vector for the Internet resource is analyzed preferably at a MED classifier or at a security appliance for the LAN. At block 5003, a reputation index for the Internet resource is accessed/generated from a database of a service engine 52 of the security appliance 50. The reputation index is preferably based on a reputation vector which includes a plurality of factors for the Internet resource comprising at least two or more of country of domain registration, country of service hosting, country of an internet protocol address block, age of a domain registration, security history, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, to-level domain, a plurality of run-time behaviors, JavaScript block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency. At block 5004, a determination is made if the reputation index for the Internet resource is at or above a threshold value established for the LAN 30. At decision 5005, if the reputation index is below the threshold value, then at block 5006 access to the Internet resource is denied and a transmission of the denial is sent to the client-side device 55. If at decision 5005 the reputation index for the Web site is at or above the threshold value, then the access to the Internet resource by the client-side device 55 is permitted by the security appliance 50. In such an embodiment, a pre-calculated reputation index residing on the LAN or quickly available to the security appliance of the LAN provides for a much faster response (if not immediate response) as to the accessibility of the Internet resource.



FIG. 11 illustrates a system 20 for controlling access to an Internet resource utilizing a MED classifier site 77. The system 20 preferably comprises a local area network 30, the Internet 100, a MED classifier site 77, and an Internet service located at a remote server 60. The Internet resource is preferably a Web site. A local area network 30 preferably comprises a security appliance 50 and a plurality of client-side devices 55. Each of the client-side devices 55 preferably has a Web-browser for accessing the Internet from the client side device 55. The security appliance 50 preferably comprises a network access 51 for permitting access to the Internet from the local area network 30, based on data from the MED classifier site 77, which determines if a requested Internet resource has a reputation index that meets a threshold establish for the local area network 30.


Table Four provides an example of some dimensions and the sorted model weights of the MED classifier.











TABLE FOUR





Identification
Dimension
Sorted Model weights

















1966272070
Domain age
3.785360


2307717
gov
1.969750


1906396306
paris
0.647784


1477426223
Hijack
−19.887100









From the foregoing it is believed that those skilled in the pertinent art will recognize the meritorious advancement of this invention and will readily understand that while the present invention has been described in association with a preferred embodiment thereof, and other embodiments illustrated in the accompanying drawings, numerous changes modification and substitutions of equivalents may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of this invention which is intended to be unlimited by the foregoing except as may appear in the following appended claim. Therefore, the embodiments of the invention in which an exclusive property or privilege is claimed are defined in the following appended claims.

Claims
  • 1. A method for classifying an Internet resource, the method comprising: receiving a plurality of reputation vectors for a plurality of Internet resources, each reputation vector comprising a plurality of reputation factors for an associated Internet resource, the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource including a virtual hosting factor for the associated Internet resource, an assessor site time known for the associated Internet resource and a classification age for the associated Internet resource, the virtual hosting factor for the associated Internet resource indicating whether other authorities than a first authority associated with the associated Internet resource share an IP address associated with the first authority, the assessor site time known for the associated Internet resource indicating how long the associated Internet resource has been known to an assessor site and the classification age indicating how long the associated Internet resource has held a reputation classification;partitioning the plurality of reputation vectors into one or more training sets;training a classifier using the one or more training sets;performing a predictive security assessment of a first Internet resource, by a reputation generating site, based on known facts about the first Internet resource, the performing the predictive security assessment further comprising: accessing, at the reputation generating site, one or more HyperText Markup Language (HTML) documents of the first Internet resource;obtaining a plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents of the first Internet resource, the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents including a virtual hosting factor for the first Internet resource, a classification age of the first Internet resource and an assessor site time known for the first Internet resource, the virtual hosting factor for the first Internet resource indicating whether other authorities than a second authority associated with the first Internet resource share an IP address associated with the second authority;weighting each of the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents based on empirical knowledge of each of the plurality of reputation factors;analyzing, at the reputation generating site, a reputation vector of the first Internet resource, the reputation vector based on the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents;calculating, at the reputation generating site, using the classifier, a calculated reputation index score for the first Internet resource in real-time using, as input to the classifier, the reputation vector based on the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents, including the virtual hosting factor for the first Internet resource, the classification age for the first Internet resource and the assessor site time known for the first Internet resource; andstoring, in a data store at the reputation generating site, the calculated reputation index score for the first Internet resource;transmitting the calculated reputation index score to a local area network of a security appliance;at the local area network, controlling access to the first Internet resource, the controlling access further comprising: receiving, by the security appliance, a request for the first Internet resource from a client device over the local area network;accessing, by the security appliance, the calculated reputation index score;comparing the calculated reputation index score to a security policy of the local area network, wherein the security policy comprises a threshold reputation index score established for the local area network for denying access to the plurality of the Internet resources; andwhen the calculated reputation index score for the first Internet resource is less than the threshold reputation index score, denying access to the first Internet resource.
  • 2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises one or more of a security history factor, a legitimacy factor, a behavior factor, an association factor, and a location factor.
  • 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the location factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: country of domain registration, country of service hosting and country of an internet protocol address block; and wherein the legitimacy factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: age of a domain registration, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, top-level domain; andwherein the behavior factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: plurality of run-time behaviors, script block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the first Internet resource comprises a Uniform Resource Identifier.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting the calculated reputation index score to the security appliance.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises a number of hosts factor for the associated Internet resource and the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents comprises a number of hosts factor for the first Internet resource.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises a latency factor for the associated Internet resource and the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents comprises a latency factor for the first Internet resource.
  • 8. A method for classifying an Internet resource, the method comprising: receiving a plurality of reputation vectors for a plurality of Internet resources, each reputation vector comprising a plurality of reputation factors for an associated Internet resource from the plurality of Internet resources, the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource including a virtual hosting factor for the associated Internet resource, the virtual hosting factor for the associated Internet resource indicating whether other authorities than a first authority associated with the associated Internet resource share an IP address associated with the first authority, the assessor site time known for the associated Internet resource and a classification age for the associated Internet resource, an assessor site time known for the associated Internet resource indicating how long the associated Internet resource has been known to an assessor site and the classification age indicating how long the associated Internet resource has held a reputation classification;partitioning the plurality of reputation vectors into one or more training sets, the one or more training sets comprising one or more of high reputation Internet resources and low reputation Internet resources;training a maximum entropy discrimination (MED) classifier with the one or more training sets;performing a predictive security assessment of a first Internet resource, by a reputation generating site, based on known facts about the first Internet resource, the performing the predictive security assessment further comprising: accessing, at the reputation generating site, one or more HyperText Markup Language (HTML) documents of the first Internet resource;obtaining a plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents of the first Internet resource, the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents including a virtual hosting factor for the first Internet resource, a classification age of the first Internet resource and an assessor site time known for the first Internet resource, the virtual hosting factor for the first Internet resource indicating whether other authorities than a second authority associated with the first Internet resource share an IP address associated with the second authority;weighting each of the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents based on empirical knowledge of each of the plurality of reputation factors;analyzing, at the reputation generating site, a reputation vector of the first Internet resource, the reputation vector based on the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents;calculating, at the reputation generating site, using the MED classifier, a calculated reputation index score for the first Internet resource using, as input to the MED classifier, the reputation vector based on the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents, including the virtual hosting factor for the first Internet resource, the classification age for the first Internet resource and the assessor site time known for the first Internet resource;storing, in a data store at the reputation generating site, the calculated reputation index score for the first Internet resource; andtransmitting the calculated reputation index score to a local area network of a security appliance;at the local area network, controlling access to the first Internet resource, the controlling access further comprising: receiving, by the security appliance, a request for the first Internet resource from a client device over the local area network;accessing, by the security appliance, the calculated reputation index score;comparing the calculated reputation index score to a security policy of the local area network, wherein the security policy comprises a threshold reputation index score established for the local area network for denying access to the plurality of the Internet resources; andwhen the calculated reputation index score for the first Internet resource is less than the threshold reputation index score, denying access to the first Internet resource.
  • 9. The method according to claim 8, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises one or more of a security history factor, a legitimacy factor, a behavior factor, an association factor, and a location factor.
  • 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the location factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: country of domain registration, country of service hosting and country of an internet protocol address block; and wherein the legitimacy factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: age of a domain registration, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, top-level domain; andwherein the behavior factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: plurality of run-time behaviors, script block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency.
  • 11. The method of claim 8, wherein the MED classifier is created for the local area network.
  • 12. The method of claim 8, wherein the first Internet resource comprises a Uniform Resource Identifier.
  • 13. The method according to claim 8, wherein the MED classifier is trained to classify Internet resources based on a plurality of reputations, the plurality of reputations including a high reputation and a low reputation and wherein training the MED classifier further comprises: identifying a first set of Internet resources that are marked as high reputation Internet resources, but received confidence scores by the MED classifier that were below a confidence score threshold;identifying a second set of Internet resources that are marked as low reputation Internet resources, but received confidence scores by the MED classifier that were below the confidence score threshold; andexamining the first and second sets of Internet resources to reclassify the first and second sets of Internet resources into proper reputation classifications.
  • 14. The method according to claim 13, wherein training the MED classifier further comprises: identifying a third set of Internet resources based on a confidence score received by each from the MED classifier and a prior probability of a reputation from the plurality of reputations; andexamining the third set of Internet resources.
  • 15. The method according to claim 13, wherein examining the first and second sets of Internet resources is performed using human intervention.
  • 16. The method of claim 8, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises a number of hosts factor for the associated Internet resource and the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents comprises a number of hosts factor for the first Internet resource.
  • 17. The method of claim 8, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises a latency factor for the associated Internet resource and the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents comprises a latency factor for the first Internet resource.
  • 18. A system for classifying an Internet resource, the system comprising: a reputation site including one or more servers; anda maximum entropy discrimination (MED) classifier, the MED classifier comprising instructions that when executed by the one or more servers, cause the MED classifier to perform operations comprising: receive a plurality of reputation vectors for a plurality of Internet resources, each reputation vector comprising a plurality of reputation factors for an associated Internet resource from the plurality of Internet resources, the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource including a virtual hosting factor for the associated Internet resource, a reputation site time known for the associated Internet resource and a classification age for the associated Internet resource, the virtual hosting factor for the associated Internet resource indicating whether other authorities than a first authority associated with the associated Internet resource share an IP address associated with the first authority, the reputation site time known for the associated Internet resource indicating how long the associated Internet resource has been known to the reputation site and the classification age indicating how long the associated Internet resource has held a classification assigned by the reputation site;partition the plurality of reputation vectors into one or more training sets, the one or more training sets comprising one or more of high reputation Internet resources and low reputation Internet resources; andtrain the maximum entropy discrimination (MED) classifier with the one or more training sets; andwherein the one or more servers of the reputation site are configured to perform a predictive security assessment of a first Internet resource based on known facts about the first Internet resource, the predictive security assessment further comprising: receive a reputation vector comprising a plurality of obtained factors for the first Internet resource, the plurality of obtained factors including a virtual hosting factor for the first Internet resource, a classification age of the first Internet resource and a reputation site time known for the first Internet resource, the virtual hosting factor for the first Internet resource indicating whether other authorities than a second authority associated with the first Internet resource share an IP address associated with the second authority;calculate a calculated reputation index score for the internet resource based on the reputation vector using the MED classifier, andstore, in a data store at the reputation site, the calculated reputation index score for the first Internet resource; andtransmit the calculated reputation index score to a local area network of a security appliance;at the local area network, control access to the first Internet resource, the controlling access further comprising: receive, by the security appliance, a request for the first Internet resource from a client device over the local area network;access, by the security appliance, the calculated reputation index score; anddetermine denial of access to the Internet resource based on a comparison of the calculated reputation index score and a security policy of the local area network, wherein the security policy comprises a threshold reputation index score established for the local area network for denying access to the plurality of the Internet resources.
  • 19. The system of claim 18, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises one or more of a security history factor, a legitimacy factor, a behavior factor, an association factor, and a location factor.
  • 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the location factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: country of domain registration, country of service hosting and country of an internet protocol address block; and wherein the legitimacy factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: age of a domain registration, popularity rank, internet protocol address, number of hosts, top-level domain; andwherein the behavior factor of the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises at least one of: plurality of run-time behaviors, script block count, picture count, immediate redirect and response latency.
  • 21. The system of claim 18, further comprising: weighting each of the plurality of reputation factors.
  • 22. The system of claim 18, wherein the MED classifier is created for the local area network.
  • 23. The system of claim 18, wherein the first Internet resource comprises a Uniform Resource Identifier.
  • 24. The system of claim 18, further comprising transmitting the calculated reputation index score to the security appliance that is part of the local area network.
  • 25. The system of claim 18, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises a number of hosts factor for the associated Internet resource and the plurality of obtained factors for the first Internet resource comprises a number of hosts factor for the first Internet resource.
  • 26. The system of claim 18, wherein the plurality of reputation factors for the associated Internet resource comprises a latency factor for the associated Internet resource and the plurality of obtained factors for the first Internet resource comprises a latency factor for the first Internet resource.
  • 27. A method for classifying an Internet resource, the method comprising: performing a predictive security assessment of an internet resource, by a reputation generating site, based on known facts about the Internet resource, the performing the predictive security assessment further comprising: accessing, at the reputation generating site, one or more HyperText Markup Language (HTML) documents of the Internet resource;obtaining a plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents of the Internet resource, the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents including a virtual hosting factor for the Internet resource, a time known for the Internet resource and a classification age of the Internet resource, the virtual hosting factor for the Internet resource indicating whether other authorities than a first authority associated with the Internet resource share an IP address associated with the first authority, the time known for the Internet resource indicating how long the Internet resource has been known to the reputation generating site and the classification age indicating how long the Internet resource has held a reputation classification assigned by the reputation generating site;weighting each of the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents based on empirical knowledge of each of the plurality of reputation factors;analyzing, at the reputation generating site, a reputation vector of the Internet resource, the reputation vector based on the plurality of reputation factors;using a trained classifier to calculate, at the reputation generating site, a calculated reputation index score for the Internet resource using, as input to the trained classifier, the reputation vector based on the plurality of reputation factors, including the virtual hosting factor for the Internet resource, the time known for the Internet resource and the classification age of the Internet resource; andstoring, in a data store at the reputation generating site, the calculated reputation index score for the Internet resource;transmitting the calculated reputation index score to a local area network of a security appliance;at the local area network, controlling access to the internet resource, the controlling access further comprising: receiving, by the security appliance, a request for the Internet resource from a client device over the local area network;accessing, by the security appliance, the calculated reputation index score;comparing the calculated reputation index score to a security policy of the local area network, wherein the security policy comprises a threshold reputation index score for denying access to Internet resources established for the local area network; andbased on results of the comparison, either permitting or denying access to the Internet resource.
  • 28. The method of claim 27, wherein the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents comprises a number of hosts factor for the Internet resource.
  • 29. The method of claim 27, wherein the plurality of reputation factors of the one or more HTML documents comprises a latency factor for the Internet resource.
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/709,504, filed on Feb. 21, 2010, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,438,386, which claims the benefits of and priority, under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e), to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/241389, filed on Sep. 10, 2009 and U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/171,264, filed on Apr. 21, 2009, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entireties for all that they teach and for all purposes.

US Referenced Citations (366)
Number Name Date Kind
5278901 Shieh et al. Jan 1994 A
5442669 Medin Aug 1995 A
5485575 Chess et al. Jan 1996 A
5537540 Miller et al. Jul 1996 A
5621889 Lermuzeaux et al. Apr 1997 A
5623600 Ji et al. Apr 1997 A
5684875 Ellenberger Nov 1997 A
5696822 Nachenberg Dec 1997 A
5715455 Macon et al. Feb 1998 A
5765030 Nachenberg et al. Jun 1998 A
5796825 McDonnal et al. Aug 1998 A
5802275 Blonder Sep 1998 A
5809138 Netiv Sep 1998 A
5826013 Nachenberg Oct 1998 A
5920696 Brandt et al. Jul 1999 A
5930467 Morita Jul 1999 A
5930828 Jensen et al. Jul 1999 A
5951698 Chen et al. Sep 1999 A
5974549 Golan Oct 1999 A
5987611 Freund Nov 1999 A
5996011 Humes Nov 1999 A
6006328 Drake Dec 1999 A
6009520 Gharda Dec 1999 A
6047319 Olson Apr 2000 A
6069628 Farry et al. May 2000 A
6070174 Starek et al. May 2000 A
6073241 Rosenberg et al. Jun 2000 A
6092194 Touboul Jul 2000 A
6118705 Gupta et al. Sep 2000 A
6141698 Krishnan et al. Oct 2000 A
6154844 Touboul Nov 2000 A
6167520 Touboul Dec 2000 A
6173291 Jenevein Jan 2001 B1
6192512 Chess Feb 2001 B1
6208999 Spilo et al. Mar 2001 B1
6240530 Togawa May 2001 B1
6253258 Cohen Jun 2001 B1
6272641 Ji Aug 2001 B1
6310630 Kulkarni et al. Oct 2001 B1
6347375 Reinert Feb 2002 B1
6357008 Nachenberg Mar 2002 B1
6374363 Wu et al. Apr 2002 B1
6397264 Stasnick et al. May 2002 B1
6397311 Capps May 2002 B1
6401210 Templeton Jun 2002 B1
6405316 Krishnan et al. Jun 2002 B1
6412071 Hollander Jun 2002 B1
6430561 Austel et al. Aug 2002 B1
6457174 Kuroda et al. Sep 2002 B1
6460060 Maddalozzo, Jr. et al. Oct 2002 B1
6473406 Coile et al. Oct 2002 B1
6480962 Touboul Nov 2002 B1
6487601 Hubacher et al. Nov 2002 B1
6496913 Taugher Dec 2002 B1
6535229 Kraft Mar 2003 B1
6535931 Celi, Jr. Mar 2003 B1
6606659 Hegli et al. Aug 2003 B1
6611878 De Armas et al. Aug 2003 B2
6633835 Moran et al. Oct 2003 B1
6667751 Wynn et al. Dec 2003 B1
6681972 Tapocik Jan 2004 B1
6701441 Balasubramaniam et al. Mar 2004 B1
6721721 Bates et al. Apr 2004 B1
6735703 Kilpatrick et al. May 2004 B1
6772345 Shetty Aug 2004 B1
6775780 Muttik Aug 2004 B1
6785732 Bates et al. Aug 2004 B1
6792543 Pak et al. Sep 2004 B2
6804780 Touboul Oct 2004 B1
6813711 Dimenstein Nov 2004 B1
6829654 Jungck Dec 2004 B1
6842748 Warner et al. Jan 2005 B1
6851057 Nachenberg Feb 2005 B1
6910134 Maher, III et al. Jun 2005 B1
6931540 Edwards et al. Aug 2005 B1
6959441 Moore et al. Oct 2005 B2
6965968 Touboul Nov 2005 B1
6971019 Nachenberg Nov 2005 B1
6973488 Yavatkar et al. Dec 2005 B1
6973577 Kouznetsov et al. Dec 2005 B1
6973578 McIchionc Dec 2005 B1
6996706 Madden et al. Feb 2006 B1
6996845 Hurst et al. Feb 2006 B1
7043634 Wolff et al. May 2006 B2
7055008 Niles et al. May 2006 B2
7058822 Edery et al. Jun 2006 B2
7058976 Dark Jun 2006 B1
7065790 Gryaznov Jun 2006 B1
7093239 van der Made Aug 2006 B1
7103913 Arnold et al. Sep 2006 B2
7107617 Hursey et al. Sep 2006 B2
7114185 Moore et al. Sep 2006 B2
7146429 Michel Dec 2006 B2
7150045 Koelle et al. Dec 2006 B2
7155742 Szor Dec 2006 B1
7171690 Kouznetsov Jan 2007 B2
7177937 Bates et al. Feb 2007 B2
7178166 Taylor et al. Feb 2007 B1
7210168 Hursey et al. Apr 2007 B2
7216367 Szor May 2007 B2
7246209 Tran et al. Jul 2007 B2
7257595 Verma et al. Aug 2007 B2
7266843 Tarbotton et al. Sep 2007 B2
7275215 Werndorfer et al. Sep 2007 B2
7284020 Shitomi et al. Oct 2007 B2
7284273 Szor Oct 2007 B1
7287279 Bertman et al. Oct 2007 B2
7302584 Tarbotton et al. Nov 2007 B2
7346611 Burtscher Mar 2008 B2
7380136 Zimmer et al. May 2008 B2
7380277 Szor May 2008 B2
7383299 Hailpern et al. Jun 2008 B1
7383581 Moore et al. Jun 2008 B1
7406466 Roy et al. Jul 2008 B2
7423995 Elliott et al. Sep 2008 B1
7461104 Nichols et al. Dec 2008 B2
7467206 Moore et al. Dec 2008 B2
7480683 Thomas Jan 2009 B2
7483982 Hegli et al. Jan 2009 B2
7484245 Friedman et al. Jan 2009 B1
7484247 Rozman et al. Jan 2009 B2
7490352 Kramer et al. Feb 2009 B2
7493403 Shull et al. Feb 2009 B2
7530106 Zaitsev et al. May 2009 B1
7533131 Thomas May 2009 B2
7565695 Burtscher Jul 2009 B2
7590707 McCloy, III et al. Sep 2009 B2
7591016 Horne Sep 2009 B2
7603440 Grabowski et al. Oct 2009 B1
7617534 Szor et al. Nov 2009 B1
7721333 Horne May 2010 B2
7738373 Lerner Jun 2010 B2
7769992 Wang Aug 2010 B2
7849185 Rockwood Dec 2010 B1
7996898 Mood et al. Aug 2011 B2
7996903 Sprowls Aug 2011 B2
8001582 Hulten et al. Aug 2011 B2
8065514 Wang Nov 2011 B2
8079032 Nichols Dec 2011 B2
8140839 Wang Mar 2012 B2
8181244 Boney May 2012 B2
8190868 Schneider May 2012 B2
8201243 Boney Jun 2012 B2
8312479 Boillot Nov 2012 B2
8321910 English et al. Nov 2012 B1
8381296 Sprowls Feb 2013 B2
8387147 Sprowls Feb 2013 B2
8438386 Hegli et al. May 2013 B2
8452744 Nichols et al. May 2013 B2
8635438 Wang Jan 2014 B2
8667586 Boney Mar 2014 B2
8856505 Schneider Oct 2014 B2
20010029511 Burda Oct 2001 A1
20010042213 Jemes Nov 2001 A1
20010044901 Grawrock Nov 2001 A1
20010047451 Noble Nov 2001 A1
20020052928 Stern et al. May 2002 A1
20020078381 Farley et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020083343 Crosbie et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020120871 Watkins et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020129277 Caccavale Sep 2002 A1
20020143984 Hudson Oct 2002 A1
20020162015 Tang Oct 2002 A1
20020162017 Sorkin Oct 2002 A1
20020166059 Rickey et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020166063 Lachman et al. Nov 2002 A1
20030005183 Burr et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030023865 Cowie et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030046558 Teblyashkin et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030051057 Garnett et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030065926 Schultz et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030065943 Geis et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030074573 Hursey et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030074581 Hursey et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030079145 Kouznetsov et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030084323 Gales May 2003 A1
20030097409 Tsai May 2003 A1
20030101381 Mateev et al. May 2003 A1
20030105973 Liang Jun 2003 A1
20030110391 Wolff et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030115479 Edwards et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030120947 Moore et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030120951 Gartside et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030120952 Tarbotton et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030135791 Natvig Jul 2003 A1
20030154399 Zuk et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030159070 Mayer et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030196103 Edwards et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030212902 Made Nov 2003 A1
20030212906 Arnold et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030217286 Carmona et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030217287 Kruglenko Nov 2003 A1
20030229801 Kouznetsov et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030233566 Kouznetsov et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030233574 Kouznetsov et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040003276 Kouznetsov et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040003290 Malcolm Jan 2004 A1
20040010703 Kouznetsov et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040015712 Szor Jan 2004 A1
20040015726 Szor Jan 2004 A1
20040024864 Porras et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040025042 Kouznetsov et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040030912 Merkle et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040030914 Kelley et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040034794 Mayer et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040064515 Hockey Apr 2004 A1
20040064736 Obrecht et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040068664 Nachenberg et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040080529 Wojcik Apr 2004 A1
20040088570 Roberts et al. May 2004 A1
20040122926 Moore et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040133790 Hensley Jul 2004 A1
20040143661 Higashi et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040143763 Radatti Jul 2004 A1
20040148281 Bates et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040172551 Fielding Sep 2004 A1
20040187023 Alagna et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040199763 Freund Oct 2004 A1
20040199827 Muttik et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040225877 Huang Nov 2004 A1
20040230530 Searl et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040243829 Jordan Dec 2004 A1
20040255165 Szor Dec 2004 A1
20040255167 Knight Dec 2004 A1
20040268315 Gouriou et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050005160 Bates Jan 2005 A1
20050021994 Barton et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050027686 Shipp Feb 2005 A1
20050033975 Lahti et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050038697 Aaron Feb 2005 A1
20050039029 Shipp Feb 2005 A1
20050055558 Carmona Mar 2005 A1
20050071624 Rothman et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050071649 Shipp Mar 2005 A1
20050081053 Aston et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050114687 Zimmer et al. May 2005 A1
20050120242 Mayer et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050125687 Townsend et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050132177 Challener et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050138433 Linetsky Jun 2005 A1
20050149726 Joshi Jul 2005 A1
20050154885 Viscomi et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050154900 Muttik Jul 2005 A1
20050155031 Wang et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050169282 Wittman Aug 2005 A1
20050172115 Bordorin Aug 2005 A1
20050172337 Bodorin et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050172338 Sandu et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050177868 Kwan Aug 2005 A1
20050188272 Bordorin et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050188423 Motsinger et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050204050 Turley et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050204205 Ring et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050216759 Rothman et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050223238 Schmid et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050229250 Ring et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050257266 Cook et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050262558 Usov Nov 2005 A1
20050262567 Carmona Nov 2005 A1
20050268112 Wang et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050268338 Made Dec 2005 A1
20050273858 Zadok et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050278783 Chien et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050278785 Lieberman Dec 2005 A1
20050283838 Saito Dec 2005 A1
20060010485 Gorman Jan 2006 A1
20060020779 Rothman et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060031667 Raghunandan Feb 2006 A1
20060031940 Rozman et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060041942 Edwards Feb 2006 A1
20060074896 Thomas et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060075468 Boney et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060075490 Boney et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060075494 Bertman et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060075501 Thomas et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060080637 Treit et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060085528 Thomas Apr 2006 A1
20060095967 Durham et al. May 2006 A1
20060101263 Costea et al. May 2006 A1
20060101264 Costea et al. May 2006 A1
20060101282 Costea et al. May 2006 A1
20060112235 Cabot May 2006 A1
20060123244 Gheorghescu et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060129744 Rothman et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060136720 Armstrong et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060143703 Hopen et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060150256 Fanton et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060161793 Orr Jul 2006 A1
20060161988 Costea et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060167948 Gian-Nicolas Jul 2006 A1
20060168165 Boss et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060184792 Berlin Aug 2006 A1
20060200863 Ray et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060218637 Thomas et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060230290 Burtscher Oct 2006 A1
20060230291 Burtscher Oct 2006 A1
20060236069 Kalach Oct 2006 A1
20060236389 Horne Oct 2006 A1
20060236396 Horne Oct 2006 A1
20060236397 Horne Oct 2006 A1
20060253578 Dixon et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060253581 Dixon et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060259974 Marinescu et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060265761 Rochette Nov 2006 A1
20060272021 Marinescu et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060277182 Nichols et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060277183 Nichols et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060288416 Costea et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060294590 Enstone et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070006310 Piccard Jan 2007 A1
20070006311 Barton et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070016914 Yeap Jan 2007 A1
20070039052 Chandnani Feb 2007 A1
20070050848 Khalid Mar 2007 A1
20070072678 Dagres Mar 2007 A1
20070074289 Maddaloni Mar 2007 A1
20070078675 Kaplan Apr 2007 A1
20070079379 Sprosts et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070094496 Burtscher Apr 2007 A1
20070094725 Borders Apr 2007 A1
20070094726 Wilson et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070094733 Wilson et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070101431 Clift May 2007 A1
20070130350 Alperovitch et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143843 Nason et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070168285 Girtakovskis et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070168694 Maddaloni et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070168982 Horne Jul 2007 A1
20070169191 Greene et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070169197 Horne Jul 2007 A1
20070169198 Maddaloni et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070174911 Kronenberg et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070179834 Carter et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070203884 Nichols et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070220043 Oliver et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070226445 Nichols et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070226704 Nichols Sep 2007 A1
20070226800 Nichols Sep 2007 A1
20070240222 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070250817 Boney Oct 2007 A1
20070261117 Boney Nov 2007 A1
20070283439 Ballard Dec 2007 A1
20080010326 Carpenter et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080015925 Sundaresan Jan 2008 A1
20080021958 Foote Jan 2008 A1
20080052758 Byrnes Feb 2008 A1
20080082352 Schmidtler Apr 2008 A1
20080082662 Dandliker Apr 2008 A1
20080097936 Schmidtler et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080235163 Balasubramanian et al. Sep 2008 A1
20090006569 Morss et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090063248 Chong et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090064337 Chien Mar 2009 A1
20090132689 Zaltzman May 2009 A1
20090178125 Barber et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090271428 Adelman et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090287641 Rahm Nov 2009 A1
20090299925 Ramaswamy et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090300720 Guo et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100184505 Bryson et al. Jul 2010 A1
20110040825 Ramzan et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110047076 Carlson et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110167050 Fanton et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110289587 Sprowls Nov 2011 A1
20120005752 Sprowls Jan 2012 A1
20150089648 Schneider Mar 2015 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (10)
Number Date Country
1315066 May 2003 EP
JP 2007-122692 May 2007 JP
WO 9325024 Dec 1993 WO
WO 9845778 Oct 1998 WO
WO 02084482 Oct 2002 WO
WO 2006039351 Apr 2006 WO
WO 2006077443 Jul 2006 WO
WO 2007050766 May 2007 WO
WO 2007084947 Jul 2007 WO
WO 2008008142 Jan 2008 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (87)
Entry
Jebara, Tony “Multi-Task Feature and Kernel Selection for SVMs” 21st International Conference on Machine Learning Banff, Canada 2004 [Online] Downloaded Feb. 8, 2015http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/1020000/1015426/p329-jebara.pdf?ip=151.207.250.51&id=1015426&acc=ACTIVE%20SERVICE&key=C15944E53D0ACA63%2E4D4702B0C3E38B35%2E4D4702B0C3E38B35%2E4D4702B0C3E38B.
Techterms “Vector” Nov. 7, 2007 [Online] Downloaded Feb. 18, 2015 http://techterms.com/definition/vector.
Techterms-2 “URI” Nov. 1, 2007 [Online] Downloaded Feb. 18, 2015 http://techterms.com/definition/uri.
Marcus Hutter “Introduction to Statistical Machine Learning” Mar. 2008 [Online] Downloaded May 1, 2019 https://web.archive.org/web/20080719014125/http://kioloa08.mlss.cc/files/hutter1.pdf (Year: 2008).
Bai et al. (2012) IET Information Security 8(2):140-151 “Approach for malware identification using dynamic behaviour and outcome triggering”.
Bontchev (1992) Virus Bulletin Conference 131-141 “Possible Virus Attacks Against Integrity Programs and How to Prevent Them”.
Bruschi et al. (2000) IEEE 188-195 “Less Harm, Less Worry or How to Improve Network Security by Bounding System Offensiveness”.
Clarke (2009) Department of Mathematics, University of London, Technical Report 178 pages “Fuzzing for Software Vulnerability Discovery”.
Codeguru (2003) Three Ways to Inject Your Code into Another Process by Robert Kuster, 22 pages.
Codeguru (2004) Managing Low-Level Keyboard Hooks with the Windows API for VB Net by Paul Kimmel, 10 pages.
Codeguru (2001) Hooking the Keyboard by Anoop Thomas, 6 pages.
The Computer Guy Magazine (2011) “Virus, Malware, Oh My?” 19 pages.
Erbschole (2005) Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann 185-189 “Trojans, Worms, and Spyware: A Computer Security Professional's Guide to Malicious Code”.
Fellows (2005) Digital Investigation 2:89-93 “The joys of complexity and the deleted file”.
Harley, et al. (2001) Osborne/McGraw-Hill 219-229 “Viruses Revealed”.
Hruska (1997) European Conference on Security and Detection 128-131 “Virus Detection”.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US05/34874, dated Jul. 5, 2006, 14 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from Application No. PCT/US2006/008882, dated Oct. 19, 2007, 5 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2006/008883, dated Oct. 19, 2007, 5 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from Application No. PCT/US2006/014003, dated Jul. 17, 2007, 6 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from Application No. PCT/US2006/014004, dated Jan. 22, 2007, 4 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from Application No. PCT/US2006/014405, dated Nov. 29, 2007, 5 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2006/025378, dated Sep. 18, 2007, 10 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2006/041798, dated Dec. 4, 2007, 8 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion, Application No. PCT/US2006/041799, dated Oct. 14, 2008, 5 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from Application No. PCT/US2007/062947, dated Jun. 29, 2007, 8 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from Application No. PCT/US2007/064487, dated Nov. 30, 2007, 8 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from Application No. PCT/US2007/064488, dated Sep. 9, 2007, 9 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2007/064489 dated Sep. 27, 2007, 8 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2007/064490, dated Jul. 23, 2007, 10 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2007/067076, dated Nov. 2, 2007, 10 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2007/067078, dated Nov. 2, 2007, 9 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2007/067082, dated Nov. 5, 2007, 8 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2007/067084, dated Nov. 5, 2007, 11 pages.
Japanese Patent Application No. 2015-101464, Office Action dated May 10, 2016, 9 pages.
Julisch, et al. (2005) DIMVA Second International Conference July 7-8 Vienna, Austria “Detection of Intrusions and Malware, and Vulnerability Assessment”.
Kim (2004) “Intercepting System API Calls” 6 pages Available at: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intercepting-system-api-calls.
Lin, et al. (2003) Database EPODOC “Method and System for Computing Fragment Rate of Magnetic Disc” XP002451265 Abstract Only.
Lin, et al. (2003) Database EPODOC “Method and System for Computing Fragment Rate of Disc” XP002451266 Abstract Only.
Linn, et al. (2003) “Obfuscation of Executable Code to Improve Resistance to Static Disassembly” ACM 290-299.
Marsh (1993) “Win32 Hooks” 15 pages Available at: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnwui/html/msdn_hooks32.asp/?frame=true.
Microsoft (2005) “How to Subclass a Window in Windows 95” 2 pages Available at: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q125680/.
Microsoft SysInternals (2006) “Rootkit Revealer 1.71” Online Available at: http://filehippo.com/download_rootkit_revealer/ Accessed on: Nov. 17, 2015.
Mikhaliov (2005) “NTFS file system” 8 pages Available at: http://www.digit-life.com/articles/ntfs/ Accessed on Jun. 18, 2007.
Milenković, et al. (2005) ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News 33(1):108-117 “Using Instruction Block Signatures to Counter Code Injection Attacks”.
Mookhey (2004) “Common Security Vulnerabilities in e-commerce Systems” Symantec 8 pages Available at: http://www.symantec.com/connect/articles/common-security-vulnerabilities-e-commerce-systems; Retrieved on Sep. 9, 2016.
Nachenberg (1997) Communications of the ACM 40(1):46-51 “Computer Virus—Coevolution: The battle to conquer computer viruses is far from won, but new and improved antidotes are controlling the field.”
OSDir.com (2004) “ntfsprogs-todo [Long]” Online Available at: http://osdir.com/ml/linux.file-systems.ntfs.devel/2004-08/msg00023.html; Retrieved on Nov. 13, 2015.
Rabek, et al. (2003) ACM 76-82 “Detection of Injected, Dynamically Generated, and Obfuscated Malicious Code”.
Roelker (2004) Sourcefire, Inc. “HTTP IDS Evasions Revisited” Online: Availabe at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/snort-org-site/production/document_files/files/000/000/031/original/sf_HTTP_IDS_evasions.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIXACIED2SPMSC7GA&Expires=1447872643&Signature=GITFKHYyb1mABkFA09oXzegOEkY%3D; Retrieved on Nov. 18, 2015.
Salomon (2010) Undergraduate Topics in Computer Science “Elements of Computer Society” 19 pages.
Singh, et al. (2002) ACM SIGPLAN Notices 37(2): 29-35 “Analysis and Detection of Computer Viruses and Worms: An Annotated Bibliography”.
Skoudis (2004) Malware: Fighting Malicious Code 590-618 “Chapter 11: Malware Analysis”.
Su, et al. (2006) POPL 372-382 “The Essence of Command Injection Attacks in Web Applications”.
Tittel (2005) PC Magazine 328-335 “Fighting Spyware, Viruses, and Malware”.
Unknown Author (2006) Illusive Society “Wolves in Sheep's Clothing: Malicious DLLs Injected into Trusted Host Applications” 13 pages Available from: http://home.arcor.de/scheinsicherheit/dll.htm.
Wang et al. (2005) IEEE, International Conference on Dependable Systems “Detecting Stealth Software with Strider GhostBuster” 10 pages.
Wen et al. (2008) IEEE, International Conference on Information Security and Assurance 150-155 “Implicit Detection of Hidden Processes with a Local-Booted Virtual Machine”.
Whittaker, et al. (2002) ACM 242-246 “Neutralizing Windows-Based Malicious Mobile Code”.
X-Ways Software Technology AG (2005) “X-Ways Forensics: Integrated Computer Forensics Software” 3 pages Available from: http://web.archive.org/web/20050829195657/http://www.x-ways.net/forensics/index-m.html.
Yurcik et al. (2001) IEEE IT Pro 41-44 “A Planning Framework for Implementing Virtual Private Networks”.
European Patent Application No. 05807741.3, Search Report dated Feb. 15, 2012, 2 pages.
European Patent Application No. 05807741.3, Communication dated Apr. 27, 2012, 6 pages.
Kan, et al. (Aug. 2005) NUS School of Computing “Fast webpage classification using URL features” [online] Available from: http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/˜kanmy/papers/nustrc8_05.pdf (Accessed on Jan. 28, 2015).
Great Britain Patent Application No. 1119949.4, Examination Report dated Nov. 8, 2013, 3 pages.
Great Britain Patent Application No. 1119949.4, Notification of Grant dated Jun. 17, 2014, 2 pages.
Great Britain Patent Application No. 1406624.5, First Examination Report dated Jul. 31, 2014, 8 pages.
Great Britain Patent Application No. 1406624.5, Second Examination Report dated Dec. 31, 2014, 3 pages.
Great Britain Patent Application No. 1406626.0, First Examination Report dated Jul. 31, 2014, 10 pages.
Great Britain Patent Application No. 1406626.0, Second Examination Report dated Dec. 31, 2014, 4 pages.
Great Britain Patent Application No. 1406624.5, Notification of Grant dated Jan. 27, 2015, 2 pages.
Great Britain Patent Application No. 1406626.0, Notification of Grant dated Jan. 27, 2015, 2 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US05/34873, dated Jun. 12, 2008, 2 pages.
International Search Report from Application No. PCT/US2010/025702, dated Sep. 17, 2010, 4 pages.
Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-507228, Office Action dated Feb. 21, 2014, 3 pages (English Translation).
Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-507228, Decision of Rejection dated Jan. 20, 2015, 3pages (English Translation).
Nguyen, et al. (Dec. 2006) Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Internet Information Retrieval, Korea 143-149 “A Maximum Entropy Model for Text Classification” Available from: http://www.uet.vnu.edu.vn/˜thuyhq/papers/06_NNH_International%20Conference%20on%20Internet%20Information%20Retrieval_IRC2006_143_149.pdf (Accessed on Jan. 28, 2015).
U.S. Appl. No. 10/956,274, Non-Final Rejection dated Jan. 27, 2006, 27 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/956,274, Amendment and Response filed Apr. 25, 2006, 15 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/956,274, Final Rejection dated Jul. 3, 2006, 28 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/956,274, Non-Final Rejection dated Jan. 5, 2007, 29 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/956,274, Amendment and Response filed Mar. 7, 2007, 15 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/956,274, Notice of Allowance dated May 1, 2007, 14 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/709,504, Non-final Office Action dated Apr. 12, 2012, 22 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/709,504, Amendment and Response filed Oct. 11, 2012, 18 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/709,504, Supplemental Amendment filed Nov. 2, 2012, 10 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/709,504, Notice of Allowance dated Jan. 10, 2013, 12 pages.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20140330759 A1 Nov 2014 US
Provisional Applications (2)
Number Date Country
61241389 Sep 2009 US
61171264 Apr 2009 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 12709504 Feb 2010 US
Child 13888341 US