System and method for interlocking a host and a gateway

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9413785
  • Patent Number
    9,413,785
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, May 15, 2014
    10 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, August 9, 2016
    8 years ago
Abstract
A method is described in example embodiments below that include receiving a content tag associated with transferring a file over a network connection. A session descriptor may also be received. The session descriptor and the content tag may be correlated with a network policy, which may be applied to the network connection. In some embodiments, the content tag may be received with the session descriptor. The file may be tainted by another file in some embodiments, and the content tag may be associated with other file.
Description
TECHNICAL FIELD

This disclosure relates in general to the field of network security, and more particularly, to a system and a method for interlocking a host and a gateway through information sharing.


BACKGROUND

The field of network security has become increasingly important in today's society. The Internet has enabled interconnection of different computer networks all over the world. However, the Internet has also presented many opportunities for malicious operators to exploit these networks. Once malicious software has infected a host computer, a malicious operator may issue commands from a remote computer to control the malicious software. The software can be instructed to perform any number of malicious actions, such as sending out spam or malicious emails from the host computer, stealing sensitive information from a business or individual associated with the host computer, propagating to other host computers, and/or assisting with distributed denial of service attacks. In addition, the malicious operator can sell or otherwise give access to other malicious operators, thereby escalating the exploitation of the host computers. Thus, the ability to effectively protect and maintain stable computers and systems continues to present significant challenges for component manufacturers, system designers, and network operators.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

To provide a more complete understanding of the present disclosure and features and advantages thereof, reference is made to the following description, taken in conjunction with the accompanying figures, wherein like reference numerals represent like parts, in which:



FIG. 1 is a simplified block diagram illustrating an example embodiment of a network environment in which information may be shared between a host and a network gateway for network protection in accordance with this specification;



FIG. 2 is a simplified block diagram illustrating additional details associated with one potential embodiment of the network environment, in accordance with this specification;



FIG. 3 is a simplified block diagram illustrating example operations associated with one embodiment of a network environment in accordance with this specification;



FIG. 4 is a simplified block diagram illustrating example operations associated with another embodiment of a network environment in accordance with this specification; and



FIG. 5 is a simplified block diagram illustrating additional details that may be associated with other embodiments of a network environment in accordance with this specification; and



FIG. 6 is a simplified block diagram illustrating additional details that may be associated with yet other embodiments of a network environment in accordance with this specification.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EXAMPLE EMBODIMENTS
Overview

A method is described in example embodiments below that include receiving a content tag associated with transferring a file over a network connection. A session descriptor may also be received. The session descriptor and the content tag may be correlated with a network policy, which may be applied to the network connection. In some embodiments, the content tag may be received with the session descriptor. The file may be tainted by another file in some embodiments, and the content tag may be associated with other file.


Example Embodiments

Turning to FIG. 1, FIG. 1 is a simplified block diagram of an example embodiment of a network environment 10 in which a host and a network gateway may be interlocked through information sharing. In the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 1, network environment 10 can include Internet 15, a user host 20, a network gateway 25, a policy server 30, a datacenter 35, a network data loss protection (NDLP) server 40, a mail server 45, and a web server 50. In general, user host 20 may be any type of termination point in a network connection, including but not limited to a desktop computer, a server, a laptop, a mobile telephone, or any other type of device that can receive or establish a connection with a remote node, such as mail server 45 or web server 50. Gateway 25 may control communications between user host 20 and other network nodes attached to Internet 15, and may be representative of or include a firewall, intrusion prevention system (IPS), or other security application to block unauthorized access while permitting authorized communications. Policy server 20 may be used to manage user hosts, including user host 20, and to administer and distribute network policies. Thus, in this example embodiment, user host 20 may communicate with servers attached to Internet 15, such as mail server 45 or web server 50, only by establishing a connection through network gateway 25 if permitted by policies implemented in gateway 25. Datacenter 35 is representative of any storage device or devices, or any virtualized storage device or devices, accessible to user host 20 over a network connection. NDLP 40 is representative of any server that can index content found at rest in network environment 10.


Each of the elements of FIG. 1 may couple to one another through simple interfaces or through any other suitable connection (wired or wireless), which provides a viable pathway for network communications. Additionally, any one or more of these elements may be combined or removed from the architecture based on particular configuration needs. Network environment 10 may include a configuration capable of transmission control protocol/Internet protocol (TCP/IP) communications for the transmission or reception of packets in a network. Network environment 10 may also operate in conjunction with a user datagram protocol/IP (UDP/IP) or any other suitable protocol where appropriate and based on particular needs.


For purposes of illustrating the techniques for providing network security in example embodiments, it is important to understand the activities occurring within a given network. The following foundational information may be viewed as a basis from which the present disclosure may be properly explained. Such information is offered earnestly for purposes of explanation only and, accordingly, should not be construed in any way to limit the broad scope of the present disclosure and its potential applications.


Typical network environments used in organizations and by individuals include the ability to communicate electronically with other networks using the Internet, for example, to access web pages hosted on servers connected to the Internet, to send or receive electronic mail (i.e., email) messages, or to exchange files. Malicious users are continuously developing new tactics for using the Internet to spread malware and to gain access to confidential information. Malware may subvert a host and use it for malicious activity, such as spamming or information theft. Of course, malware is not a prerequisite to information theft. Individuals can also be compromised and intentionally transmit (or attempt to transmit) information in violation of applicable laws and/or policies. Information may also be transmitted inadvertently in violation of such laws and policies.


In some instances, malware may be used to deceive a person by using a different network protocol exchange than the person expects. The malware may be packaged so as to convince the person to allow access to run it in some innocuous way, thus allowing it access to the network, which often may require passing through a firewall or other security measure. The malware may then exploit the access to engage in alternative or additional activities not contemplated by the person. For example, a game may send email messages or a word processor may open a web connection. At the same time, the malware may also use standard protocols to deceive the firewall into permitting the malware to establish remote connections.


Botnets, for example, use malware and are an increasing threat to computer security. In many cases they employ sophisticated attack schemes that include a combination of well-known and new vulnerabilities. Botnets generally use a client-server architecture where a type of malicious software (i.e., a bot) is placed on a host computer and communicates with a command and control (C&C) server, which may be controlled by a malicious user (e.g., a botnet operator). Usually, a botnet is composed of a large number of bots that are controlled by the operator using a C&C protocol through various channels, including Internet Relay Chat (IRC) and peer-to-peer (P2P) communication. The bot may receive commands from the C&C server to perform particular malicious activities and, accordingly, may execute such commands. The bot may also send any results or pilfered information back to the C&C server. A bot is often designed to initiate communication with the C&C server and to masquerade as normal web browser traffic. For example, a bot may use a port typically used to communicate with a web server. Such bots, therefore, may not be detected by existing technologies without performing more detailed packet inspection of the web traffic. Moreover, once a bot is discovered, the botnet operator may simply find another way to masquerade network traffic by the bot to continue to present as normal web traffic. More recently, botnet operators have crafted bots to use encryption protocols such as, for example, secure socket layer (SSL), thereby encrypting malicious network traffic. Such encrypted traffic may use a Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure (HTTPS) port such that only the endpoints involved in the encrypted session can decrypt the data. Thus, existing firewalls and other network intrusion prevention technologies may be unable to perform any meaningful inspection of the web traffic and bots continue to infect host computers within networks.


Other software security technology focused on preventing unauthorized program files from executing on a host computer may have undesirable side effects for end users or employees of a business or other organizational entity. Network or Information Technology (IT) administrators may be charged with crafting extensive policies relevant to all facets of the business entity to enable employees to exchange information with desirable and trusted network resources. Without extensive policies in place, employees may be prevented from downloading or sending data from network resources that are not specifically authorized, even if such software and other data facilitate legitimate and necessary business activities. Such systems may be so restrictive that if unauthorized software is found on a host computer, any host computer activities may be suspended pending network administrator intervention. Moreover, at the network level there may simply be too many applications to effectively track and incorporate into policies. Large whitelists or blacklists can be difficult to maintain and may degrade network performance, and some applications may not be susceptible to easy identification.


In accordance with one embodiment, network environment 10 can overcome these shortcomings (and others) by tagging files based on content and sharing content tags with a network gateway. In particular embodiments, data may be scanned and a classification policy may be applied to tag data based on content. The content tags may be shared with a network gateway, and the network gateway may filter network traffic based on the content tags. Session information may also be shared with the network gateway, which may further filter network traffic based on the session information. Information may be shared, for example, through an in-band or out-of-band protocol that allows a host agent to communicate with a network gateway to collectively and mutually achieve better security.


In some embodiments, a host agent may provide content tags to a network gateway, while in other embodiments content tags may be provided by an external source such as a data-at-rest (DAR) server. For example, in some embodiments, a DAR server such as NDLP 40 may periodically scan and index files in a datacenter, apply a classification policy to identify appropriate content tags for each files, and create a map between files and content tags. In other example embodiments, a host agent or DAR server may periodically scan and index files on a host, apply a classification policy, and map files to content tags. In still other embodiments, a host agent can scan a file as it is accessed to determine appropriate content tags. A gateway may receive content tags (e.g., from a DAR server, a host agent, or a content tag server) and filter a file transfer based on the content tag. A host agent or other server may also classify content associated with an in-bound transfer and provide a content tag to the gateway to filter in-bound transfers.


In another particular example, session descriptors may be shared along with content tags. Session descriptors generally include information about a host and an application associated with a given network session. For example, a session descriptor may include a UUID associated with the host and the user credentials of a process owner. Since a user can run separate processes with different user credentials, such information may be particularly advantageous for Citrix and terminal services. A session descriptor may additionally include a filename, pathname or other unique identifier of an application file (e.g., C:\ . . . \WINWORD.EXE) that is running the process attempting to establish a network connection. For example, in some embodiments the application may be identified by a hash function of the application's executable file, so as to make it more difficult for a malicious user to spoof the application name. A gateway may correlate this information with an application identifier or protocol to ensure that the application is performing as expected.


In some instances, a process may be attempting to transfer information in or out of the network, and a session description may also include a unique identifier associated with the information (e.g., a hash of a file). A session descriptor may also contain information about the host environment, such as software installed on the host and the current configuration and state of the software, permitting the gateway to act as a network access control device. For example, a session descriptor may indicate whether the local anti-virus system is up to date and running. If host-based data loss prevention (HDLP) software is available, a session descriptor may also include file typing information for file transfer. HDLP normally determines the type of file being transmitted out of the network (e.g., PDF, Word, etc.). The gateway may have additional policies about certain file types being transmitted over particular protocols, which may not be visible directly to an HDLP program.


The host agent may understand an application on the host as an executable file that is running a process with specific authentication, for example, while the network gateway may understand the application as a protocol in a TCP connection, which may also be correlated to a particular user authentication. The host agent may share session descriptors with the network gateway, and the network gateway may share network policy with the host agent as needed to correlate application activities with expected network behavior. Network policy may include elements of security policy as well as other network specific parameters, such as quality of service (QoS) and routing. A host agent may also be associated with a universally unique identifier (UUID), which can be used to correlate connections and activities originating behind network address translators.


A host agent may also notify the gateway of additional network connections to the host. If a host has both wireless and wired connections active simultaneously, for example, there may be a risk of data received on one connection being transmitted on the other, so it may be desirable to restrict access to sensitive data. A host agent may also notify the gateway if the connection is associated with a virtual machine. A host agent may also notify the gateway if the host has mountable read/write media, such as a USB stick attached.


Dynamic information sharing may be provided in network environment 10. Communications between a user host and a network gateway may be encoded in routine network traffic (e.g., IP or TCP options fields, packet padding locations, or trailers on DNS packets), or transmitted in a separate network packet from the host to the network gateway as each connection starts. In some embodiments, a network gateway may send a UDP packet containing a randomly chosen sequence number or nonce to a user host on the user host's first egress. On each TCP open of a permitted connection, the user host agent may format a hash of the current nonce and sequence ID, place it in the packet along with other session descriptors. A hash of packet contents may also be included in certain embodiments. The network gateway may receive the UDP packet and save the session descriptors to use in applying network policy to the TCP stream. The network gateway may send a new nonce periodically to discourage replay attacks.


In some embodiments of network environment 10, user host 20 may include multiple attachment points, causing it to have multiple IP addresses. In other embodiments, user host 20 may use the IP version 6 (IPv6), perhaps including Privacy Extensions (RFC4941), causing it to have one or more registered and known IPv6 addresses and one or more hidden or private IPv6 addresses. In these embodiments, gateway 25 may readily use dynamic information sharing to discover the user to host mapping for all the addresses on user host 20.


This dynamic information sharing in network environment 10 may provide several benefits over conventional architectures. For example, by coordinating firewall policy with a host agent, a gateway can apply policy based on user identifier, content classification, application identifier, or any combination thereof. Moreover, only applications that need to be granularly controlled need to be controlled by the gateway. Thus, the gateway may control arbitrary or evasive applications, provide higher effective throughput, and control mobile-user traffic. In addition, traffic that does not need to be completely allowed or denied can be rate-limited. Arbitrary or evasive applications can also be rate-limited with process information available on a gateway, and differentiated services can be provided for managed and unmanaged hosts.


Turning to FIG. 2, FIG. 2 is a simplified block diagram illustrating additional details that may be associated with one potential embodiment of network environment 10. FIG. 2 includes Internet 15, user host 20, network gateway 25, policy server 30, datacenter 35, NDLP 40, and mail server 35. Each of user host 20, network gateway 25, policy server 30, datacenter 35, and NDLP 40 may include a respective processor 50a-50e and a respective memory element 55a-5e, and may additionally include various hardware, firmware, and/or software elements to facilitate operations described herein. More particularly, user host 20 may include a mail client 60, a network stack 65, a policy agent 70, a firewall agent 75, and an application 80. Gateway 25 may include a firewall module 85, and policy server 30 may include a firewall connector module 90. Datacenter 35 may also store and provide access to documents, files, and other data, such as document 95. NDLP 40 may include a scanning module 100, a content tag map 105, and a content tag server 110.


In general, scanning module 100 can scan data found at rest in network environment 10, particularly in datacenter 35, apply a content tagging policy to identify content for tagging, and index the content and associated tags in a repository, such as content tag map 105. A content tag may be any indicator reflective of content in a file, such as source code, trade secrets or other intellectual property, financial reports, or strategic business plans, for example. A “file” in this context refers broadly to any block of electronically stored data, including without limitation text documents, spreadsheets, images, databases, email messages, source code, and executable files. A content tag may additionally or alternatively be indicative of content sensitivity, such as public domain, confidential, proprietary, top secret, or export controlled, for example. Content tag server 110 is representative of any server that can process queries for content tags based on a hash or other unique identifier, retrieve the content tags from a content tag map, such as content tag map 105, and return the results. In some embodiments, as in FIG. 2, scanning module 100 and content tag server 110 may be co-located in a single element, but may be distributed in other embodiments.


In one example implementation, user host 20, network gateway 25, policy server 30, and/or NDLP 40 are network elements, which are meant to encompass network appliances, servers, routers, switches, gateways, bridges, loadbalancers, firewalls, processors, modules, or any other suitable device, component, element, or object operable to exchange information in a network environment. Network elements may include any suitable hardware, software, components, modules, interfaces, or objects that facilitate the operations thereof. This may be inclusive of appropriate algorithms and communication protocols that allow for the effective exchange of data or information. However, user host 20 may be distinguished from other network elements as it tends to serve as a terminal point for a network connection, in contrast to a gateway or router.


In regards to the internal structure associated with elements of network environment 10, each of user host 20, network gateway 25, policy server 30, datacenter 35, and/or NDLP 40 can include memory elements (e.g., as shown in FIG. 2) for storing information to be used in the operations outlined herein. Moreover, each element may include one or more interfaces, and such interfaces may also include appropriate memory elements. Each element may keep information in any suitable memory element (e.g., random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), erasable programmable ROM (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable ROM (EEPROM), application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), etc.), software, hardware, or in any other suitable component, device, element, or object where appropriate and based on particular needs. Any of the memory elements discussed herein should be construed as being encompassed within the broad term “memory element” or “memory.” Information being used, tracked, sent, or received could be provided in any database, register, queue, table, cache, control list, or other storage structure, all of which can be referenced at any suitable timeframe. Any such storage options may be included within the broad term “memory element” or “memory” as used herein.


In certain example implementations, the functions outlined herein may be implemented by logic encoded in one or more tangible media (e.g., embedded logic provided in an ASIC, digital signal processor (DSP) instructions, software (potentially inclusive of object code and source code) to be executed by a processor, or other similar machine, etc.), which may be inclusive of non-transitory media. In some of these instances, memory elements can store data used for the operations described herein. This includes the memory elements being able to store software, logic, code, or processor instructions that are executed to carry out the activities described herein.


In one example implementation, user host 20, network gateway 25, policy server 30, datacenter 35, and/or NDLP 40 may include firmware and/or software modules to achieve, or to foster, operations as outlined herein. In other embodiments, such operations may be carried out by hardware, implemented externally to these elements, or included in some other network device to achieve the intended functionality. Alternatively, these elements may include software (or reciprocating software) that can coordinate in order to achieve the operations, as outlined herein. In still other embodiments, one or all of these devices may include any suitable algorithms, hardware, firmware, software, components, modules, interfaces, or objects that facilitate the operations thereof.


Additionally, each of user host 20, network gateway 25, policy server 30, datacenter 35, and/or NDLP 40 may include one or more processors (or virtual processors) that can execute software or an algorithm to perform activities as discussed herein. A processor, virtual processor, logic unit, or other processing unit can execute any type of instructions associated with the data to achieve the operations detailed herein. In one example, a processor could transform an element or an article (e.g., data) from one state or thing to another state or thing. In another example, the activities outlined herein may be implemented with fixed logic or programmable logic (e.g., software/computer instructions executed by a processor) and the elements identified herein could be some type of a programmable processor, programmable digital logic (e.g., a field programmable gate array (FPGA), an EPROM, an EEPROM) or an ASIC that includes digital logic, software, code, electronic instructions, or any suitable combination thereof. Any of the potential processing elements, modules, and machines described herein should be construed as being encompassed within the broad term “processor.”



FIG. 3 is a simplified block diagram illustrating example operations associated with one embodiment of network environment 10 that can use content tags and session information to filter traffic. As a preliminary matter or periodically, NDLP 40 may scan servers in datacenter 35 at 302 and apply classification policy to classify content in datacenter 35, including document 95. For example, NDLP 40 may scan data for keywords or other criteria to determine an appropriate content tag or tags. NDLP 40 may further calculate a hash for such data and link, map, relate, or otherwise associate content tags with hashes, for example in content tag map 105. Also preliminarily or periodically, firewall module 85 may request a key from firewall connector module 90 in policy server 30 at 304. For this particular example, user host 20 also retrieves document 95 from datacenter 35 at 306. At 308, firewall connector module 90 can generate a key, and send it to firewall module 85 and to all hosts, including policy agent 70 on user host 20.


At 310, an application such as mail client 60 may initiate a connection to a remote server such as mail server 45. Thus, for example, mail client 60 may attach document 95 to an e-mail message at 312 and initiate a connection to mail server 45 using simple mail transfer protocol (SMTP). Network stack 65 may then route the traffic through firewall module 85. At 314, firewall module 85 can then send a HELLO packet to firewall agent 75 on user host 20 as a request for a session descriptor. A HELLO packet may include, for example, a KEY value, a SEQNUM, and a HASH value. The SEQNUM may be used both as a nonce and a sequence number. The HASH value is generally a suitable crypto hash, such as SHA-1, on data in the message. Firewall agent 75 may then decrypt the request from firewall module 85, obtain information from network stack 65, and send a sequenced, hashed, encrypted packet containing a session descriptor to firewall module 80 at 316. For example, if a user has been authenticated with an identification of “auser” and is using Microsoft Outlook as a mail client, then the session descriptor may contain: auser, Outlook, session info. This may be encrypted and transmitted along with a sequence number and has, as Enc[KEY](SEQNUM++, session descriptor, HASH).


In the example embodiment of FIG. 3, firewall module 85 may analyze the connection and determine that it includes a document transfer, calculate a hash for document 95, and query NDLP 40 at 318 for a content tag based on the hash. Gateway 25 may also query a reputation service (not shown) that can provide a reputation score for the address of mail server 45, and possibly the location of mail server 45 based on its address. The document may be buffered until a response is received, or only the last bit may be held, for example. In other example embodiments, though, an agent on user host 20 (e.g., policy agent 70 or firewall agent 75) may calculate the hash and query NDLP 40. Firewall module 85 may apply network policies at 320, based on the session description, content tag(s) associated with document 95, reputation of mail server 45, and/or the country associated with the IP address of mail server 45, for example, to determine if the connection to mail server 45 should be allowed. Additional session descriptor packets may be sent at 322 without the need for firewall module 85 to send a HELLO packet, as in 314.



FIG. 4 is a simplified block diagram illustrating example operations associated with another embodiment of network environment 10. In FIG. 4, network environment 10 includes hosts 402a-402b, a network address translator 404, an intrusion prevention system (IPS) 406, and Internet 15. Host 402a is associated with a first UUID (UUID1) and host 402b is associated with a second UUID (UUID2). A session descriptor may be transmitted out-of-band or in-band through network address translator 404, or alternatively, a session identifier may be transmitted in-band, while a session descriptor is transmitted out-of-band. In such an embodiment, the session descriptor can also include the session identifier for correlating the in-band and out-of-band communication. Although network address translator 404 may alter the IP addresses of hosts 402a-402b, IPS 406 may use the UUIDs of hosts 402a-402b to correlate traffic so that network policy can be applied to a host based on all network addresses associated with the host.


Note further that host 402a may be used concurrently by multiple users in certain embodiments, as in a timesharing system, Microsoft Windows “Switch Users” capability, Citrix, or Microsoft Terminal Services. Firewall module 85 may use information in the session descriptor to pair each network connection with the user that established it, permitting policy to be implemented differently by user rather than singly for all users of host 402a.



FIG. 5 is a simplified block diagram illustrating additional details that may be associated with other embodiments of network environment 10. As a preliminary matter or periodically, NDLP 40 may scan servers in datacenter 35 at 502 and apply classification policy to classify (i.e., identify appropriate content tags) data in datacenter 35, including document 95. NDLP 40 may further calculate a hash for such data and map classifications with hashes, for example in content tag map 105. At 504, user host 20 may retrieve document 95 from datacenter 35. A agent running on user host 20, such as firewall agent 75, can detect the transfer of document 95 to user host 20 and calculate a hash of document 95 at 506, and query NDLP 40 at 508 for content tags associated with document 95 based on the hash. Modifications to document 95 may be monitored at 510. A transfer of the modified document 95 may be initiated at 512. In the example of FIG. 5, a transfer is initiated using a web distributed authoring and versioning (WebDAV) protocol, but any other suitable protocol may be used, including SMTP, a file transfer protocol (FTP), or a hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP), for example.


Firewall module 85 may exchange a session descriptor substantially as described above with reference to FIG. 3. Although a modified document 95 should no longer match a hash in hash classification map 105, modified document 95 is a “tainted” version of original document 95 and thus retains the same content tags. A tainted file generally includes modified versions of any file having a content tag, and it may also include any other files that are modified, copied, encrypted, transferred, or otherwise used during the same session in which a tagged file is opened, read, accessed, or otherwise used. The host agent (e.g., firewall agent 75) can detect the transfer of the tainted file and transfer the content tags associated with document 95 to gateway 25 at 514. In some embodiments, the content tags may be combined with the session descriptor. In FIG. 5, for instance, firewall module 85 may receive a session descriptor from user host 20 that identifies “Alice” as the user and WebDAV as the application, and may receive a content sensitivity tag of “Business_Confidential” for document 95 from firewall agent 75. Firewall module 85 further queries a reputation service (not shown) that indicates the WebDAV server is located in Switzerland (i.e., CZ) and has a reputation score of 35.


Firewall module 85 may apply network policies at 516, based on the session description, content tag associated with document 95, reputation of the WebDAV server, and/or the country associated with the IP address of the target, for example, to determine if the transfer should be allowed at 518.



FIG. 6 is a simplified block diagram illustrating additional details that may be associated with yet other embodiments of network environment 10. As a preliminary matter or periodically, NDLP 40 may scan servers in datacenter 35 at 602 and apply classification policy to identify appropriate content tags for data in datacenter 35, including document 95. NDLP 40 may further calculate a hash for such data and map classifications with hashes, for example in content tag map 105. At 604, user host 20 may retrieve document 95 from datacenter 35. A agent running on user host 20, such as firewall agent 75, can detect the transfer of document 95 to user host 20 and calculate a hash of document 95 at 606, and query NDLP 40 at 608 for content tags associated with document 95 based on the hash. Files tainted by document 95 may be monitored at 610a-610d. For example, application 80 may modify document 95 and save it as a document 95a on a file system 612, which may be monitored at 610a. An encryption application 614 may encrypt document 95a and save it as document 95b, which can be monitored at 610b. Yet another application, such as a secure copy program (SCP) 616 can then load document 95b, which may be monitored at 610c. This application (e.g., secure copy program 616) can initiate a transfer of document 95b over an encrypted connection at 618. Although the document being transferred is both a modified and encrypted version of document 95, it is a tainted version and firewall agent 75 can enforce the same classification (i.e., apply the same content tags). The host agent (e.g., firewall agent 75) can detect the transfer at 610d and transfer the content tags associated with document 95 to gateway 25 at 620. Firewall module 85 may apply network policies at 622, based on the session description, content tags associated with document 95, reputation of the target or destination server, or the country associated with the IP address of the target, for example, to determine if the document extrusion should be allowed at 624.


Note that with the examples provided above, as well as numerous other potential examples, interaction may be described in terms of two, three, or four network elements. However, this has been done for purposes of clarity and example only. In certain cases, it may be easier to describe one or more of the functionalities of a given set of operations by only referencing a limited number of network elements. It should be appreciated that network environment 10 is readily scalable and can accommodate a large number of components, as well as more complicated/sophisticated arrangements and configurations. Accordingly, the examples provided should not limit the scope or inhibit the broad teachings of network environment 10 as potentially applied to a myriad of other architectures. Additionally, although described with reference to particular scenarios, where a particular module, such as an analyzer module, is provided within a network element, these modules can be provided externally, or consolidated and/or combined in any suitable fashion. In certain instances, such modules may be provided in a single proprietary unit.


It is also important to note that the steps in the appended diagrams illustrate only some of the possible scenarios and patterns that may be executed by, or within, network environment 10. Some of these steps may be deleted or removed where appropriate, or these steps may be modified or changed considerably without departing from the scope of teachings provided herein. In addition, a number of these operations have been described as being executed concurrently with, or in parallel to, one or more additional operations. However, the timing of these operations may be altered considerably. The preceding operational flows have been offered for purposes of example and discussion. Substantial flexibility is provided by network environment 10 in that any suitable arrangements, chronologies, configurations, and timing mechanisms may be provided without departing from the teachings provided herein.


Numerous other changes, substitutions, variations, alterations, and modifications may be ascertained to one skilled in the art and it is intended that the present disclosure encompass all such changes, substitutions, variations, alterations, and modifications as falling within the scope of the appended claims. In order to assist the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and, additionally, any readers of any patent issued on this application in interpreting the claims appended hereto, Applicant wishes to note that the Applicant: (a) does not intend any of the appended claims to invoke paragraph six (6) of 35 U.S.C. section 112 as it exists on the date of the filing hereof unless the words “means for” or “step for” are specifically used in the particular claims; and (b) does not intend, by any statement in the specification, to limit this disclosure in any way that is not otherwise reflected in the appended claims.

Claims
  • 1. One or more non-transitory computer readable media that include code for execution and when executed by one or more processors is operable to perform operations comprising: receiving a content tag associated with transferring a first file over a network connection from a host, wherein the content tag indicates a classification of content in a second file, and wherein the first file and the second file were used on the host during a same session;correlating the content tag with a network policy; andapplying the network policy to the network connection.
  • 2. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 1, wherein the content tag is associated with the first file based on the first file and the second file being used on the host during the same session.
  • 3. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 1, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the code is operable to perform operations comprising: receiving a session descriptor associated with transferring the first file, wherein the session descriptor is correlated with the network policy.
  • 4. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 3, wherein the session descriptor includes at least one of: a user identifier associated with transferring the first file; oran identifier of an application associated with transferring the first file.
  • 5. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 3, wherein the session descriptor includes the content tag.
  • 6. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 1, wherein the content tag is a content sensitivity tag.
  • 7. An apparatus, comprising: a firewall module; andone or more processors configured to execute instructions associated with the firewall module such that the apparatus is configured to: receive a content tag associated with transferring a first file over a network connection, wherein the content tag indicates a classification of content in a second file, and wherein the first file and the second file were used on the host during a same session;correlate the content tag with a network policy; andapply the network policy to the network connection.
  • 8. The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the content tag is associated with the first file based on the first file and the second file being used on the host during the same session.
  • 9. The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the apparatus is further configured to: receive a session descriptor associated with transferring the first file, wherein the session descriptor is correlated with the network policy.
  • 10. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the session descriptor includes the content tag.
  • 11. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the apparatus is further configured to: receive a reputation score associated with a destination for the first file, wherein the reputation score is correlated with the network policy.
  • 12. One or more non-transitory computer readable media that include code for execution and when executed by one or more processors is operable to perform operations comprising: receiving a content tag that indicates a classification of content in a first file;associating the content tag with a second file based on the second file and the first file being used during a same session on a host;detecting a transfer of the second file to a network gateway; andsending the content tag to the network gateway.
  • 13. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 12, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the code is operable to perform operations comprising: monitoring one or more other files being used on the host during the same session as the first file to detect whether any of the one or more other files are transferred to the network gateway, wherein the second file is one of the one or more other files.
  • 14. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 12, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the code is operable to perform operations comprising: detecting a transfer of the first file to the host;calculating a hash of the first file; andquerying a content tag server with the hash to obtain the content tag.
  • 15. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 12, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the code is operable to perform operations comprising: monitoring the first file on the host to determine whether any modifications are made to the first file.
  • 16. One or more non-transitory computer readable media that include code for execution and when executed by one or more processors is operable to perform operations comprising: receiving a content tag that indicates a classification of content in a first file;associating the content tag with a second file when the second file is a modified version of the first file;detecting a transfer of the second file to a network gateway; andsending the content tag to the network gateway.
  • 17. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 16, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the code is operable to perform operations comprising: detecting a transfer of the first file to the host;calculating a hash of the first file; andquerying a content tag server with the hash to obtain the content tag.
  • 18. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 16, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the code is operable to perform operations comprising: monitoring the first file to determine whether any modifications are made to the first file.
  • 19. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 16, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the code is operable to perform operations comprising: monitoring the second file for modifications when the monitoring the first file indicates at least one modification was made to the first file to create the second file.
  • 20. The one or more non-transitory computer readable claim 16, wherein the second file is an encrypted version of the first file.
  • 21. An apparatus, comprising: one or more processors; anda firewall module including instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: receive a content tag that indicates a classification of content in a first file;associate the content tag with a second file based on the second file and the first file being used during a same session on a host;detect a transfer of the second file to a network gateway; andsend the content tag to the network gateway.
  • 22. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: detect a transfer of the first file to the host;calculate a hash of the first file; andquery a content tag server with the hash to obtain the content tag.
  • 23. An apparatus, comprising: one or more processors; anda firewall module including instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: receive a content tag that indicates a classification of content in a first file;associate the content tag with a second file if the second file is a modified version of the first file;detect a transfer of the second file to a network gateway; andsend the content tag to the network gateway.
  • 24. The apparatus of claim 23, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: monitor the first file to determine whether any modifications are made to the first file.
RELATED APPLICATION

This Application is a continuation (and claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. §120) of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/437,900, filed Apr. 2, 2012, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INTERLOCKING A HOST AND A GATEWAY,” Inventors Geoffrey Howard Cooper, et al. The disclosure of the prior application is considered part of (and is incorporated by reference in) the disclosure of this application.

US Referenced Citations (384)
Number Name Date Kind
4688169 Joshi Aug 1987 A
4982430 Frezza et al. Jan 1991 A
5155847 Kirouac et al. Oct 1992 A
5222134 Waite et al. Jun 1993 A
5390314 Swanson Feb 1995 A
5521849 Adelson et al. May 1996 A
5560008 Johnson et al. Sep 1996 A
5699513 Feigen et al. Dec 1997 A
5778226 Adams et al. Jul 1998 A
5778349 Okonogi Jul 1998 A
5787427 Benantar et al. Jul 1998 A
5842017 Hookway et al. Nov 1998 A
5873086 Fujii et al. Feb 1999 A
5884298 Smith, II et al. Mar 1999 A
5907709 Cantey et al. May 1999 A
5907860 Garibay et al. May 1999 A
5926832 Wing et al. Jul 1999 A
5944839 Isenberg Aug 1999 A
5974149 Leppek Oct 1999 A
5987557 Ebrahim Nov 1999 A
5987610 Franczek et al. Nov 1999 A
5987611 Freund Nov 1999 A
5991881 Conklin et al. Nov 1999 A
6064815 Hohensee et al. May 2000 A
6073142 Geiger et al. Jun 2000 A
6141698 Krishnan et al. Oct 2000 A
6182142 Win et al. Jan 2001 B1
6192401 Modiri et al. Feb 2001 B1
6192475 Wallace Feb 2001 B1
6256773 Bowman-Amuah Jul 2001 B1
6275938 Bond et al. Aug 2001 B1
6321267 Donaldson Nov 2001 B1
6338149 Ciccone, Jr. et al. Jan 2002 B1
6356957 Sanchez, II et al. Mar 2002 B2
6393465 Leeds May 2002 B2
6442686 McArdle et al. Aug 2002 B1
6449040 Fujita Sep 2002 B1
6453468 D'Souza Sep 2002 B1
6460050 Pace et al. Oct 2002 B1
6496477 Perkins et al. Dec 2002 B1
6587877 Douglis et al. Jul 2003 B1
6611925 Spear Aug 2003 B1
6658645 Akuta et al. Dec 2003 B1
6662219 Nishanov et al. Dec 2003 B1
6748534 Gryaznov et al. Jun 2004 B1
6769008 Kumar et al. Jul 2004 B1
6769115 Oldman Jul 2004 B1
6795966 Lim et al. Sep 2004 B1
6832227 Seki et al. Dec 2004 B2
6834301 Hanchett Dec 2004 B1
6847993 Novaes et al. Jan 2005 B1
6907600 Neiger et al. Jun 2005 B2
6918110 Hundt et al. Jul 2005 B2
6930985 Rathi et al. Aug 2005 B1
6934755 Saulpaugh et al. Aug 2005 B1
6941470 Jooste Sep 2005 B1
6988101 Ham et al. Jan 2006 B2
6988124 Douceur et al. Jan 2006 B2
7007302 Jagger et al. Feb 2006 B1
7010796 Strom et al. Mar 2006 B1
7024548 O'Toole, Jr. Apr 2006 B1
7039949 Cartmell et al. May 2006 B2
7054930 Cheriton May 2006 B1
7065767 Kambhammettu et al. Jun 2006 B2
7069330 McArdle et al. Jun 2006 B1
7082456 Mani-Meitav et al. Jul 2006 B2
7093239 van der Made Aug 2006 B1
7096500 Roberts et al. Aug 2006 B2
7124409 Davis et al. Oct 2006 B2
7139916 Billingsley et al. Nov 2006 B2
7152148 Williams et al. Dec 2006 B2
7159036 Hinchliffe et al. Jan 2007 B2
7177267 Oliver et al. Feb 2007 B2
7203864 Goin et al. Apr 2007 B2
7251655 Kaler et al. Jul 2007 B2
7290266 Gladstone et al. Oct 2007 B2
7302558 Campbell et al. Nov 2007 B2
7330849 Gerasoulis et al. Feb 2008 B2
7340684 Ramamoorthy et al. Mar 2008 B2
7346781 Cowle et al. Mar 2008 B2
7349931 Horne Mar 2008 B2
7350204 Lambert et al. Mar 2008 B2
7353501 Tang et al. Apr 2008 B2
7360097 Rothstein Apr 2008 B2
7363022 Whelan et al. Apr 2008 B2
7370360 van der Made May 2008 B2
7385938 Beckett et al. Jun 2008 B1
7406517 Hunt et al. Jul 2008 B2
7441265 Staamann et al. Oct 2008 B2
7463590 Mualem et al. Dec 2008 B2
7464408 Shah et al. Dec 2008 B1
7506155 Stewart et al. Mar 2009 B1
7506170 Finnegan Mar 2009 B2
7506364 Vayman Mar 2009 B2
7546333 Alon et al. Jun 2009 B2
7546594 McGuire et al. Jun 2009 B2
7552479 Conover et al. Jun 2009 B1
7577995 Chebolu et al. Aug 2009 B2
7603552 Sebes et al. Oct 2009 B1
7607170 Chesla Oct 2009 B2
7657599 Smith Feb 2010 B2
7669195 Qumei Feb 2010 B1
7685635 Vega et al. Mar 2010 B2
7694150 Kirby Apr 2010 B1
7698744 Fanton et al. Apr 2010 B2
7703090 Napier et al. Apr 2010 B2
7739497 Fink et al. Jun 2010 B1
7757269 Roy-Chowdhury et al. Jul 2010 B1
7765538 Zweifel et al. Jul 2010 B2
7783735 Sebes et al. Aug 2010 B1
7809704 Surendran et al. Oct 2010 B2
7814554 Ragner Oct 2010 B1
7818377 Whitney et al. Oct 2010 B2
7823148 Deshpande et al. Oct 2010 B2
7836504 Ray et al. Nov 2010 B2
7840968 Sharma et al. Nov 2010 B1
7849507 Bloch et al. Dec 2010 B1
7853643 Martinez et al. Dec 2010 B1
7856661 Sebes et al. Dec 2010 B1
7865931 Stone et al. Jan 2011 B1
7870387 Bhargava et al. Jan 2011 B1
7873955 Sebes et al. Jan 2011 B1
7895573 Bhargava et al. Feb 2011 B1
7908653 Brickell et al. Mar 2011 B2
7925722 Reed et al. Apr 2011 B1
7937455 Saha et al. May 2011 B2
7950056 Satish et al. May 2011 B1
7966659 Wilkinson et al. Jun 2011 B1
7996836 McCorkendale et al. Aug 2011 B1
8015388 Rihan et al. Sep 2011 B1
8015563 Araujo et al. Sep 2011 B2
8028340 Sebes et al. Sep 2011 B2
8055904 Cato et al. Nov 2011 B1
8166474 Delco Apr 2012 B1
8195931 Sharma et al. Jun 2012 B1
8205188 Ramamoorthy et al. Jun 2012 B2
8209680 Le et al. Jun 2012 B1
8234709 Viljoen et al. Jul 2012 B2
8234713 Roy-Chowdhury et al. Jul 2012 B2
8307437 Sebes et al. Nov 2012 B2
8321932 Bhargava et al. Nov 2012 B2
8332929 Bhargava et al. Dec 2012 B1
8352930 Sebes et al. Jan 2013 B1
8381284 Dang et al. Feb 2013 B2
8387046 Montague et al. Feb 2013 B1
8515075 Saraf et al. Aug 2013 B1
8539063 Sharma et al. Sep 2013 B1
8544003 Sawhney et al. Sep 2013 B1
8549003 Bhargava et al. Oct 2013 B1
8549546 Sharma et al. Oct 2013 B2
8555404 Sebes et al. Oct 2013 B1
8561051 Sebes et al. Oct 2013 B2
8561082 Sharma et al. Oct 2013 B2
8584199 Chen et al. Nov 2013 B1
8701182 Bhargava et al. Apr 2014 B2
8707422 Bhargava et al. Apr 2014 B2
8707446 Roy-Chowdhury et al. Apr 2014 B2
8713668 Cooper et al. Apr 2014 B2
8762928 Sharma et al. Jun 2014 B2
8763118 Sebes et al. Jun 2014 B2
8793489 Polunin et al. Jul 2014 B2
8800024 Cooper et al. Aug 2014 B2
8843903 Blaser et al. Sep 2014 B1
8869265 Dang et al. Oct 2014 B2
8904520 Nachenberg et al. Dec 2014 B1
8925101 Bhargava et al. Dec 2014 B2
8938800 Bhargava et al. Jan 2015 B2
8973146 Ramanan et al. Mar 2015 B2
9112830 Cooper et al. Aug 2015 B2
9134998 Roy-Chowdhury et al. Sep 2015 B2
20020056076 van der Made May 2002 A1
20020069367 Tindal et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020083175 Afek et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020099671 Mastin Crosbie et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020114319 Liu et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020118644 Moir Aug 2002 A1
20030014667 Kolichtchak Jan 2003 A1
20030023736 Abkemeier Jan 2003 A1
20030033510 Dice Feb 2003 A1
20030061506 Cooper Mar 2003 A1
20030065945 Lingafelt et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030073894 Chiang et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030074552 Olkin et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030088680 Nachenberg et al. May 2003 A1
20030115222 Oashi et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030120601 Ouye et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030120811 Hanson et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030120935 Teal et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030145232 Poletto et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030163718 Johnson et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030167292 Ross Sep 2003 A1
20030167399 Audebert et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030200332 Gupta et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030212902 van der Made Nov 2003 A1
20030220944 Schottland et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030221190 Deshpande et al. Nov 2003 A1
20040003258 Billingsley et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040015554 Wilson Jan 2004 A1
20040051736 Daniell Mar 2004 A1
20040054928 Hall Mar 2004 A1
20040057454 Hennegan et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040088398 Barlow May 2004 A1
20040139206 Claudatos et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040143749 Tajalli et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040153650 Hillmer Aug 2004 A1
20040167906 Smith et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040172551 Fielding et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040230963 Rothman et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040243678 Smith et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040255161 Cavanaugh Dec 2004 A1
20040268149 Aaron Dec 2004 A1
20050005006 Chauffour et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050018651 Yan et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050022014 Shipman Jan 2005 A1
20050071633 Rothstein Mar 2005 A1
20050086047 Uchimoto et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091321 Daniell et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091487 Cross et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050108516 Balzer et al. May 2005 A1
20050108562 Khazan et al. May 2005 A1
20050114672 Duncan et al. May 2005 A1
20050132346 Tsantilis Jun 2005 A1
20050198519 Tamura et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050228990 Kato et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050235360 Pearson Oct 2005 A1
20050256907 Novik et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050257207 Blumfield et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050257265 Cook et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050260996 Groenendaal Nov 2005 A1
20050262558 Usov Nov 2005 A1
20050273858 Zadok et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050283823 Okajo et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050289538 Black-Ziegelbein et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060004875 Baron et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015501 Sanamrad et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060037016 Saha et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060072451 Ross Apr 2006 A1
20060075299 Chandramouleeswaran et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060075478 Hyndman Apr 2006 A1
20060080656 Cain et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060085785 Garrett Apr 2006 A1
20060101277 Meenan et al. May 2006 A1
20060133223 Nakamura et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060136910 Brickell et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060136911 Robinson et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060143713 Challener et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060195906 Jin et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060200863 Ray et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060230314 Sanjar et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060236398 Trakic et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060259734 Sheu et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060277603 Kelso et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070011746 Malpani et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070028303 Brennan Feb 2007 A1
20070033645 Jones Feb 2007 A1
20070039049 Kupferman et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070050579 Hall et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070050764 Traut Mar 2007 A1
20070074199 Schoenberg Mar 2007 A1
20070083522 Nord et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070101435 Konanka et al. May 2007 A1
20070136579 Levy et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143851 Nicodemus et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070157303 Pankratov Jul 2007 A1
20070169079 Keller et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070192329 Croft et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070220061 Tirosh et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070220507 Back et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070253430 Minami et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070256138 Gadea et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070271561 Winner et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070297333 Zuk Dec 2007 A1
20070297396 Eldar et al. Dec 2007 A1
20070300215 Bardsley Dec 2007 A1
20080005737 Saha et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080005798 Ross Jan 2008 A1
20080010304 Vempala et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080022384 Yee et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080034416 Kumar et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080034418 Venkatraman et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080052468 Speirs et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080059123 Estberg et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080082662 Dandliker et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080082977 Araujo et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080086513 O'Brien Apr 2008 A1
20080115012 Jann et al. May 2008 A1
20080120499 Zimmer et al. May 2008 A1
20080141371 Bradicich et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080163207 Reumann et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080163210 Bowman et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080165952 Smith et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080184373 Traut et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080235534 Schunter et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080282080 Hyndman et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080294703 Craft et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080295173 Tsvetanov Nov 2008 A1
20080301770 Kinder Dec 2008 A1
20080307524 Singh et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090007100 Field et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090038017 Durham et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090043993 Ford et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090055693 Budko et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090063665 Bagepalli et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090113110 Chen et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090144300 Chatley et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090150639 Ohata Jun 2009 A1
20090178110 Higuchi Jul 2009 A1
20090220080 Herne et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090249053 Zimmer et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090249438 Litvin et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090320010 Chow et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090320133 Viljoen et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090320140 Sebes et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090328144 Sherlock et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090328185 van den Berg et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100049973 Chen Feb 2010 A1
20100071035 Budko et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100100970 Roy-Chowdhury et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100114825 Siddegowda May 2010 A1
20100138430 Gotou Jun 2010 A1
20100188976 Rahman et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100250895 Adams et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100281133 Brendel Nov 2010 A1
20100293225 Sebes et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100299277 Emelo et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100332910 Ali et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110029772 Fanton et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110035423 Kobayashi et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110047542 Dang et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110047543 Mohinder Feb 2011 A1
20110061092 Bailloeul Mar 2011 A1
20110077948 Sharma et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110078550 Nabutovsky Mar 2011 A1
20110093842 Sebes Apr 2011 A1
20110093950 Bhargava et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110113467 Agarwal et al. May 2011 A1
20110119760 Sebes et al. May 2011 A1
20110138461 Bhargava et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110246753 Thomas Oct 2011 A1
20110302647 Bhattacharya et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120030731 Bhargava et al. Feb 2012 A1
20120030750 Bhargava et al. Feb 2012 A1
20120110666 Ogilvie May 2012 A1
20120159631 Niemela et al. Jun 2012 A1
20120216271 Cooper et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120233611 Voccio Sep 2012 A1
20120278853 Roy-Chowdhury et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120290827 Bhargava et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120290828 Bhargava et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120297176 Bhargava et al. Nov 2012 A1
20130024934 Sebes et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130091318 Bhattacharjee et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130097355 Dang et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130097356 Dang et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130097658 Cooper et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130097692 Cooper et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130117823 Dang et al. May 2013 A1
20130179971 Harrison Jul 2013 A1
20130227683 Bettini et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130246044 Sharma et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130246393 Saraf et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130246423 Bhargava et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130246685 Bhargava et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247016 Sharma et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247027 Shah et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247032 Bhargava et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247181 Saraf et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247192 Krasser et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247201 Alperovitch et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247226 Sebes et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130268994 Cooper et al. Oct 2013 A1
20140090061 Avasarala et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140101783 Bhargava et al. Apr 2014 A1
20140189859 Ramanan et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140237584 Cooper et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140283065 Teddy et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140283066 Teddy et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140317592 Roy-Chowdhury et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140351895 Bhargava et al. Nov 2014 A1
20150121449 Cp Apr 2015 A1
20150180884 Bhargava et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150180997 Ramanan et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150200968 Bhargava et al. Jul 2015 A1
20150365380 Cooper et al. Dec 2015 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (35)
Number Date Country
1383295 Dec 2002 CN
101147379 Mar 2008 CN
101218568 Jul 2008 CN
101569129 Oct 2009 CN
101636998 Jan 2010 CN
103283202 Sep 2013 CN
1 482 394 Dec 2004 EP
2 037 657 Mar 2009 EP
2599026 Jun 2013 EP
2599276 Jun 2013 EP
2004524598 Aug 2004 JP
2005-275839 Jun 2005 JP
2005-202523 Jul 2005 JP
2006-59217 Mar 2006 JP
2006-302292 Nov 2006 JP
2007-500396 Jan 2007 JP
2008-506303 Feb 2008 JP
2008-217306 Sep 2008 JP
2009-510858 Mar 2009 JP
2010-16834 Jan 2010 JP
WO 9844404 Oct 1998 WO
WO 0184285 Nov 2001 WO
WO 2006012197 Feb 2006 WO
WO 2006124832 Nov 2006 WO
WO 2007016478 Feb 2007 WO
WO 2008054997 May 2008 WO
WO 2011003958 Jan 2011 WO
WO 2011059877 May 2011 WO
WO 2012015485 Feb 2012 WO
WO 2012015489 Feb 2012 WO
WO 2012116098 Aug 2012 WO
WO 2013058940 Apr 2013 WO
WO 2013058944 Apr 2013 WO
WO 2014105308 Jul 2014 WO
WO 2015060857 Apr 2015 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (159)
Entry
“Xen Architecture Overview,” Xen, dated Feb. 13, 2008, Version 1.2, http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenArchitecture?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=Xen+architecture—Q1+2008.pdf, printed Aug. 18, 2009 (9 pages).
Eli M. Dow, et al., “The Xen Hypervisor,” INFORMIT, dated Apr. 10, 2008, http://www.informit.com/articles/printerfriendly.aspx?p=1187966, printed Aug. 11, 2009 (13 pages).
Desktop Management and Control, Website: http://www.vmware.com/solutions/desktop/, printed Oct. 12, 2009, 1 page.
Secure Mobile Computing, Website: http://www.vmware.com/solutions/desktop/mobile.html, printed Oct. 12, 2009, 2 pages.
Barrantes et al., “Randomized Instruction Set Emulation to Dispurt Binary Code Injection Attacks,” Oct. 27-31, 2003, ACM, pp. 281-289.
Gaurav et al., “Countering Code-Injection Attacks with Instruction-Set Randomization,” Oct. 27-31, 2003, ACM, pp. 272-280.
Check Point Software Technologies Ltd.: “ZoneAlarm Security Software User Guide Version 9”, Aug. 24, 2009, XP002634548, 259 pages, retrieved from Internet: URL:http://download.zonealarm.com/bin/media/pdf/zaclient91—user—manual.pdf.
Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority (1 page), International Search Report (4 pages), and Written Opinion (3 pages), mailed Mar. 2, 2011, International Application No. PCT/US2010/055520.
Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration (1 page), International Search Report (6 pages), and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority (10 pages) for International Application No. PCT/US2011/020677 mailed Jul. 22, 2011.
Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration (1 page), International Search Report (3 pages), and Written Opinion of the International Search Authority (6 pages) for International Application No. PCT/US2011/024869 mailed Jul. 14, 2011.
Tal Garfinkel, et al., “Terra: A Virtual Machine-Based Platform for Trusted Computing,” XP-002340992, SOSP'03, Oct. 19-22, 2003, 14 pages.
IA-32 Intel® Architecture Software Developer's Manual, vol. 3B; Jun. 2006; pp. 13, 15, 22 and 145-146.
Notification of International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion mailed May 24, 2012 for International Application No. PCT/US2010/055520, 5 pages.
Sailer et al., sHype: Secure Hypervisor Approach to Trusted Virtualized Systems, IBM research Report, Feb. 2, 2005, 13 pages.
Kurt Gutzmann, “Access Control and Session Management in the HTTP Environment,” Jan./Feb. 2001, pp. 26-35, IEEE Internet Computing.
“Apache Hadoop Project,” http://hadoop.apache.org/, retrieved and printed Jan. 26, 2011, 3 pages.
“Cbl, composite blocking list,” http://cbl.abuseat.org, retrieved and printed Jan. 26, 2011, 8 pages.
A Tutorial on Clustering Algorithms, retrieved Sep. 10, 2010 from http://home.dei.polimi.it/matteucc/clustering/tutorial.html, 6 pages.
A. Pitsillidis, K. Levchenko, C. Kreibich, C. Kanich, G.M. Voelker, V. Pason, N. Weaver, and S. Savage, “Botnet Judo: Fighting Spam with Itself,” in Proceedings of the 17th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS'10), Feb. 2010, 19 pages.
A. Ramachandran, N. Feamster, and D. Dagon, “Revealing botnet membership using DNSBL counter-intelligence,” in Proceedings of the 2nd USENIX Steps to Reducing Unwanted Traffic on the Internet, 2006, 6 pages.
A. Ramachandran, N. Feamster, and S. Vempala, “Filtering Spam with Behavioral Blacklisting,” in Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Communications Security, 2007, 10 pages.
B. Stone-Gross, M. Cova, L. Cavallor, B. Gilbert, M. Szydlowski, R. Kemmerer, C. Kruegel, and G. Vigna, “Your Botnet is My Botnet: Analysis of a Botnet Takeover,” in Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Computer and Communicatinos Security, 2009, 13 pages.
C. Kanich, C. Kreibich, K. Levchenko, B. Enright, G.M. Voelker, V. Paxson, and S. Savage, “Spamalytics: An Empirical Analysis of Spam Marketing Conversion,” in Proceedings of the 15th ACM conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2008, 12 pages.
C.J. Burges, “A Tutorial on Support Vector Machines for Pattern Recognition,” in Journal of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 1998, 43 pages.
E-Mail Spamming Botnets: Signatures and Characteristics, Posted Sep. 22, 2008, http://www.protofilter.com/blog/email-spam-botnets-signatures.html, retrieved and printed Feb. 2, 2011, 4 pages.
G. Gu, J. Zhang, and W. Lee, “BotSniffer: Detecting Botnet Command and Control Channels in Network Traffic,” in Proceedings of the 15th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS'08), Feb. 2008, 24 pages.
G. Gu, P. Porras, V. Yegneswaran, M. Fong, and W. Lee, “BotHunter: Detecting Malware Infection Through IDS-Driven Dialog Correlation,” in Proceedings of the 16th USNIX Security Symposium, 2007, 34 pages.
G. Gu, R. Perdisci, J. Zhang, and W. Lee, “BotMiner: Clustering Analysis of Network Traffic for Protocol and Structure-Independent Botnet Detection,” in Proceedings of the 17th USENIX Security Symposium, 2008, 15 pages.
I. Jolliffe, “Principal Component Analysis,” in Springer Series in Statistics, Statistical Theory and Methods, 2nd ed.), 2002, 518 pages.
J. Dean and S. Ghemawat, “MapReduce: Simplified Data Processing on Large Clusters,” in Proceedings of Sixth Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation, OSDI, 2004, 13 pages.
J. Goebel and T. Holz, “Rishi: Identify Bot Contaminated Hosts by IRC Nickname Evaluation,” in Proceedings of the USENIX HotBots, 2007, 12 pages.
J.B. Grizzard, V. Sharma, C. Nunnery, B.B. Kang, and D. Dagon, “Peer-to-Peer Botnets: Overview and Case Study,” in Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Hot Topics in Understanding Botnets, Apr. 2007, 14 pages.
J.P. John, A. Moshchuk, S.D. Gribble, and A. Krishnamurthy, “Studying Spamming Botnets Using Botlab,” in Proceedings of the 6th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, 2009, 16 pages.
K. Li, Z. Zhong, and L. Ramaswamy, “Privacy-Aware Collaborative Spam Filtering,” in Journal of IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 29, No. 5, May 2009, pp. 725-739.
L. Zhuang, J. Dunagan, D.R. Simon, H.J. Wang, and J.D. Tygar, “Characterizing botnets from email spam records,” in Proceedings of the 1st Usenix Workshop on Large-Scale Exploits and Emergent Threats), 2008, 18 pages.
M. Frigo and S.G. Johnson, “The Design and Implementation of FFTW3,” in Proceedings of the IEEE 93(2), Invited paper, Special Issue on Program Generation, Optimization, and Platform Adaptation, 2005, 16 pages.
R. Perdisci, I. Corona, D. Dagon, and W. Lee, “Detecting Malicious Flux Service Networks through Passive Analysis of Recursive DNS Traces,” in Proceedings of the 25th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference (ACSAC 2009), Dec. 2009, 10 pages.
X. Jiang, D. Xu, and Y.-M. Wang, “Collapsar: A VM-Based Honeyfarm and Reverse Honeyfarm Architecture for Network Attack Capture and Detention,” in Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, Special Issue on Security in Grid and Distributed Systems, 2006, 16 pages.
Y. Tang, S. Krasser, P. Judge, and Y.-Q. Zhang, “Fast and Effective Spam Sender Detection with Granular SVM on Highly Imbalanced Mail Server Behavior Data,” in Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborativeCom), Nov. 2006, 6 pages.
Y. Zhao, Y. Xie, F. Yu, Q. Ke, Y. Yu, Y. Chen, and E. Gillum, “BotGraph: Large Scale Spamming Botnet Detection,” in Proceedings of the 6th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, 2009, 26 pages.
Yinglian Xie, Fang Yu, Kannan Achan, Rina Panigraphy, Geoff Hulten, and Ivan Osipkov, “Spamming Botnets: Signatures and Characteristics,” SIGCOMM '08, Aug. 17, 22, 2008, http://ccr.sigcomm.org/online/files/p171-xie.pdf, pp. 171-182.
Z. Li, A. Goyal, Y. Chen, and V. Paxson, “Automating Analysis of Large-Scale Botnet probing Events,” in Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Information, Computer and Communications Security (ASIACCS)), 2009, 12 pages.
Myung-Sup Kim et al., “A load cluster management system using SNMP and web”, [Online], May 2002, pp. 367-378, [Retrieved from Internet on Oct. 24, 2012], <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/nem.453/pdf>.
G. Pruett et al., “BladeCenter systems management software”, [Online], Nov. 2005, pp. 963-975, [Retrieved from Internet on Oct. 24, 2012], <http://citeseerx.lst.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.91.5091&rep=rep1&type=pdf>.
Philip M. Papadopoulos et al., “NPACI Rocks: tools and techniques for easily deploying manageable Linux clusters” [Online], Aug. 2002, pp. 707-725, [Retrieved from internet on Oct. 24, 2012], <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpe.722/pdf>.
Thomas Staub et al., “Secure Remote Management and Software Distribution for Wireless Mesh Networks”, [Online], Sep. 2007, pp. 1-8, [Retrieved from Internet on Oct. 24, 2012], <http://cds.unibe.ch/research/pub—files/B07.pdf>.
“What's New: McAfee VirusScan Enterprise, 8.8,” copyright 2010, retrieved on Nov. 23, 2012 at https://kc.mcafee.com/resources/sites/MCAFEE/content/live/PRODUCT—DOCUMENTATION/22000/PD22973/en—US/VSE%208.8%20-%20What's%20New.pdf, 4 pages.
“McAfee Management for Optimized Virtual Environments,” copyright 2012, retrieved on Nov. 26, 2012 at AntiVirushttp://www.mcafee.com/us/resources/data-sheets/ds-move-anti-virus.pdf, 2 pages.
Rivest, R., “The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm”, RFC 1321, Apr. 1992, retrieved on Dec. 14, 2012 from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1321.txt, 21 pages.
Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, “Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses”, RFC 4193, Oct. 2005, retrieved on Nov. 20, 2012 from http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc4193.pdf, 17 pages.
“Secure Hash Standard (SHS)”, Federal Information Processing Standards Publication, FIPS PUB 180-4, Mar. 2012, retrieved on Dec. 14, 2012 from http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips180-4/fips-180-4.pdf, 35 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/728,705, filed Dec. 27, 2012, entitled “Herd Based Scan Avoidance System in a Network Environment,” Inventors Venkata Ramanan, et al.
An Analysis of Address Space Layout Randomization on Windows Vista™, Symantec Advanced Threat Research, copyright 2007 Symantec Corporation, available at http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/reference/Address—Space—Layout—Randomization.pdf, 19 pages.
Bhatkar, et al., “Efficient Techniques for Comprehensive Protection from Memory Error Exploits,” USENIX Association, 14th USENIX Security Symposium, Aug. 1-5, 2005, Baltimore, MD, 16 pages.
Dewan, et al., “A Hypervisor-Based System for Protecting Software Runtime Memory and Persistent Storage,” Spring Simulation Multiconference 2008, Apr. 14-17, 2008, Ottawa, Canada, (available at website: www.vodun.org/papers/2008—secure—locker—submit—v1-1.pdf, printed Oct. 11, 2011), 8 pages.
Shacham, et al., “On the Effectiveness of Address-Space Randomization,” CCS'04, Oct. 25-29, 2004, Washington, D.C., Copyright 2004, 10 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Dec. 14, 2012 for International Application No. PCT/US2012/055674, 9 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion issued Jan. 29, 2013 for International Application No. PCT/US2011/020677 (9 pages).
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion issued Jan. 29, 2013 for International Application No. PCT/US2011/024869 (6 pages).
Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/844,892, mailed on Jan. 17, 2013, 29 pages.
Office Action received for U.S. Appl. No. 12/844,892, mailed on Sep. 6, 2012, 33 pages.
Datagram Transport Layer Security Request for Comments 4347, E. Rescorla, et al., Stanford University, Apr. 2006, retrieved and printed on Oct. 17, 2011 from http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc4347.pdf, 26 pages.
Internet Control Message Protocol Request for Comments 792, J. Postel, ISI, Sep. 1981, retrieved and printed on Oct. 17, 2011 from http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc792, 22 pages.
Mathew J. Schwartz, “Palo Alto Introduces Security for Cloud, Mobile Users,” retrieved Feb. 9, 2011 from http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/perimeter/showArticle.jhtml?articleID-22, 4 pages.
Requirements for IV Version 4 Routers Request for Comments 1812, F. Baker, Cisco Systems, Jun. 1995, retrieved and printed on Oct. 17, 2011 from http://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc1812.pdf, 176 pages.
The Keyed-Hash Message Authentication Code (HMAC), FIPS PUB 198, Issued Mar. 6, 2002, Federal Information Processing Standards Publication, retrieved and printed on Oct. 17, 2011 from http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips198/fips-198a.pdf, 20 pages.
Zhen Chen et al., “Application Level Network Access Control System Based on TNC Architecture for Enterprise Network,” in: Wireless communications Networking and Information Security (WCNIS), 2010 IEEE International Conference, Jun. 25-27, 2010 (5 pages).
USPTO Dec. 24, 2012 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/032,851.
USPTO Mar. 25, 2013 Response to Dec. 24, 2012 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/032,851.
USPTO Jul. 16, 2013 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/032,851.
International Search Report and Written Opinion, International Application No. PCT/US2012/026169, mailed Jun. 18, 2012, 11 pages.
USPTO Feb. 28, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,249.
USPTO May 13, 2013 Response to Feb. 28, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,249.
International Search Report and Written Opinion, International Application No. PCT/US2012/057312, mailed Jan. 31, 2013, 10 pages.
USPTO Mar. 1, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,196.
International Search Report and Written Opinion, International Application No. PCT/US2012/057153, mailed Dec. 26, 2012, 8 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/437,900, filed Apr. 2, 2012, entitled “System and Method for Interlocking a Host and a Gateway,” Inventors: Geoffrey Howard Cooper, et al.
USPTO Mar. 1, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/437,900.
USPTO Jun. 3, 2013 Response to Mar. 1, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/437,900.
USPTO Sep. 13, 2013 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,249, 21 pages.
Narten et al., RFC 4861, “Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)”, Sep. 2007, retrieved from http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4861, 194 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, International Application No. PCT/US2012/026169, mailed Aug. 27, 2013, 8 pages.
USPTO Oct. 2, 2013 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,196.
USPTO Oct. 4, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/844,892.
USPTO Oct. 25, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/844,964.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/045,208, filed Oct. 3, 2013, entitled “Execution Environment File Inventory,” Inventors: Rishi Bhargava, et al.
PCT Application Serial No. PCT/US13/66690, filed Oct. 24, 2013, entitled “Agent Assisted Malicious Application Blocking in a Network Environment,” 67 pages.
Patent Examination Report No. 1, Australian Application No. 2011283160, mailed Oct. 30, 2013.
USPTO Sep. 27, 2013, Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/437,900.
PCT Application Serial No. PCT/US13/71327, filed Nov. 21, 2013, entitled “Herd Based Scan Avoidance System in a Network Environment,” 46 pages.
USPTO Dec. 4, 2013 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/032,851.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/127,395, entitled “Agent Assisted Malicious Application Blocking in a Network Environment,” filed Dec. 18, 2013, Inventors: Chandan CP et al., 76 pages.
USPTO Dec. 26, 2013 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,249, 32 pages.
USPTO Dec. 16, 2013 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,196, 11 pages.
USPTO Jan. 13, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/437,900, 30 pages.
Patent Examination Report No. 1, Australian Application No. 2011283164, mailed Jan. 14, 2014, 6 pages.
USPTO Dec. 30, 2013 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/629,765, 9 pages.
USPTO Feb. 24, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/629,765, 8 pages.
USPTO Mar. 24, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,196, 9 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion, International Application No. PCT/US2013/071327, mailed Mar. 7, 2014, 12 pages.
USPTO Apr. 15, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/844,892, 9 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/257,770, entitled “Enforcing Alignment of Approved Changes and Deployed Changes in the Software Change Life-Cycle,” filed Apr. 21, 2014, Inventors: Rahul Roy-Chowdhury et al., 56 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability in International Application No. PCT/US2012/057312, mailed Apr. 22, 2014, 5 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability in International Application No. PCT/US2012/057153, mailed Apr. 22, 2014, 4 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/263,164, entitled “System and Method for Redirected Firewall Discovery in a Network Environment,” filed Apr. 28, 2014, Inventors: Geoffrey Cooper et al., 38 pages.
USPTO Jun. 6, 2014 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/844,964, 30 pages.
USPTO Jun. 4, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/032,851, 16 pages.
“Optical stateful security filtering approach based on code words,” Sliti, M.; Boudriga, N., 2013 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC), 10 pages.
Rothenberg, et al., “A Review of Policy-Based Resource and Admission Control Functions in Evolving Access and Next Generation Networks,” Journal of Network and Systems Management, 16.1 (2008: 14-45, 32 pages.
USPTO Jun. 4, 2014 Nonfinal Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/728,705, 16 pages.
Jun. 2, 2014 Office Action in Korean Patent Appln. No. 2013-7022241, [English translation], 6 pages.
USPTO Aug. 11, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/844,892, 8 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion in International Application No. PCT/US2013/066690, mailed Jul. 10, 2014, 12 pages.
Aug. 12, 2014 Office Action in Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-555531, English translation, 3 pages.
USPTO Sep. 10, 2014 Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/229,502, 18 pages.
USPTO Sep. 11, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/844,964, 10 pages.
USPTO Oct. 27, 2014 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/728,705, 25 pages.
Muttik, Igor, and Chris Barton, “Cloud security technologies,” Information security technical report 14.1 (2009), 1-6, 6 pages.
Nov. 13, 2014 Office Action in Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-521770, English translation, 2 pages.
Patent Examination Report No. 1, Australian Application No. 2012220642, mailed Nov. 5, 2014, 3 pages.
Notice of Allowance received for Korean Patent Application No. 10-2013-7022241, mailed on Dec. 12, 2014, 3 pages.
Extended European Search Report in Application No. 12842144.3-1853/2769509 PCT/US2012/057312, mailed Feb. 6, 2015, 6 pages.
Notice of Reasons for Refusal in Japanese Patent Application No. JP 2013-521767, mailed on Feb. 17, 2015, 5 pages of English language translation, 4 pages of Japanese language Office Action.
Baba, Tatsuya, et al., “A Proposal of an Integrated Worm Countermeasure System Based on Dynamic VLAN Control,” Journal of Information Processing Society of Japan, Japan, Information Processing Society of Japan, Aug. 15, 2006, vol. 47, No. 8, pp. 2449-2511, 14 pages, English language Abstract only.
Fujita, Keisuke, et al., “Proposal of DF system with boot control function against unauthorized programs,” Transactions of Computer Security Symposium 2007, Japan, Information Processing Society of Japan, Oct. 31, 2007, vol. 2007, No. 10, pp. 501-506, 7 pages, English language Abstract only.
Ashiwa, Takashi, “IT Keyword too late to ask: Bot,” Nikkei Computer, Japan, Nikkei Business Publications, Oct. 30, 2006, No. 664, pp. 244-249, 14 pages, 7 pages of English translation.
Feb. 27, 2015 Office Action in Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-521770, English translation, 3 pages.
Mar. 2, 2015 Office Action in Korean Patent Appln. No. 2014-7021824, English translation, 4 pages.
Oct. 27, 2014 Office Action in EP Application No. 11 703 741.6-1870, 6 pages.
Feb. 28, 2015 Office Action in CN Application No. 2011800469004, English translation, 29 pages.
Mar. 23, 2015 Office Action in CN Application No. 201180046850X, English translation, 38 pages.
USPTO May 28, 2015 Nonfinal Rejection from U.S. Appl. No. 14/583,509, 17 pages.
Apr. 20, 2015 Office Action in Japanese Patent Appln. No. 2013-555531, [English translation], 2 pages.
Apr. 29, 2015 Supplementary European Search Report in EP Application No. EP 12 84 1554, 7 pages.
Cheneau, Tony, et al., “Significantly improved performances of the cryptographically generated addresses thanks to ECC and GPGPU,” Computers & Security, vol. 29, No. 4, Jun. 2010, pp. 419-431, 13 pages.
USPTO Jul. 6, 2015 Nonfinal Rejection from U.S. Appl. No. 14/127,395, 32 pages.
USPTO Jul. 16, 2015 Corrected Notice of Allowability in U.S. Appl. No. 13/032,851, 3 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability, International Application No. PCT/US2013/071327, mailed Jul. 9, 2015, 11 pages.
USPTO Aug. 12, 2015 Nonfinal Rejection from U.S. Appl. No. 14/263,164, 33 pages.
USPTO Sep. 29, 2015 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/583,509, 31 pages.
USPTO Oct. 19, 2015 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/263,164, 13 pages.
Decision to Grant a Patent in Japanese Patent Application No. JP 2013-521767, mailed on Oct. 22, 2015, 3 pages of English language translation.
Sep. 8, 2015 Office Action in Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-555531, English translation, 2 pages.
Office Action in CN 201180046900.4, mailed on Nov. 3, 2015, English translation, 29 pages.
USPTO Nov. 23, 2015 Nonfinal Rejection from U.S. Appl. No. 14/599,811, 27 pages.
Nov. 20, 2015 Office Action in CN Application No. 201180046850X, English translation, 36 pages.
Nov. 20, 2015 Office Action in CN Application No. 201280050877.0, English translation, 5 pages.
Nov. 13, 2015 Office Action in CN Application No. 201280010062.X, English translation, 5 pages.
USPTO Dec. 2, 2015 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/127,395, 7 pages.
USPTO Feb. 2, 2016 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/263,164, 10 pages.
USPTO Feb. 17, 2016 Nonfinal Rejection from U.S. Appl. No. 14/635,096, 17 pages.
USPTO Mar. 11, 2016 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/583,509, 32 pages.
Mar. 9, 2016 Office Action in CN Application No. 201180046900.4, English translation, 11 pages.
Apr. 8, 2016 Office Action in EP Application No. 11 710 915.7, 5 pages.
Feb. 25, 2016 Office Action in CN Application No. 201280053580.X, English translation, 16 pages.
May 3, 2016 Office Action in CN Application No. 201180046850X, with English translation, 10 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/168,004, entitled “System and Method for Redirected Firewall Discovery in a Network Environment,” filed May 28, 2016, Inventors: Geoffrey Cooper et al., 39 pages.
USPTO Jun. 6, 2016 Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/127,395, 40 pages.
USPTO Jun. 6, 2016 Final Rejection from U.S. Appl. No. 14/599,811, 66 pages.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20140250492 A1 Sep 2014 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 13437900 Apr 2012 US
Child 14277954 US