Patent Grant
11310238
Embodiments of the disclosure relate to the field of network services. More specifically, one embodiment of the disclosure relates to a system configured to protect cloud-hosted resources.
In the past, businesses have relied on application software installed on one or more electronic device residing in close proximity to its user (hereinafter, “on-premises electronic devices”). Each on-premises electronic device may constitute a type of computer such as a personal computer, a locally maintained mainframe, or a local server for example. Recently, however, more businesses and individuals have begun to rely on public cloud networks for their data computing and storage needs.
In general, a “public cloud network” is a collection of data centers, where each data center includes numerous servers and is hosted by a service provider. The data centers offer resources, such as virtual compute engines (e.g., virtual machines), application instances, and virtual data stores for example, which are available to the general public over the Internet. These resources may be free to the public or may be offered on a pay-per-usage basis. For instance, payments for data processing resources may be based on hourly compute time while payments for data storage resources may be based on the amount of storage being used (e.g., per megabyte, per gigabyte, etc.).
As a result, for a public cloud deployment, individuals are able to remotely access and utilize numerous services offered by a plurality of resources, including virtual compute engines that execute different types of applications and virtual persistent data storage. Examples of current public cloud networks may include, but are not limited or restricted to Amazon Web Services®, Microsoft Azure®, Google Cloud®, or the like (collectively referred to as the “cloud”).
This growing migration to the cloud is due, in large part, to a number of advantages offered by the cloud. For instance, the cloud is a fully virtualized environment with a multi-tenant architecture that enables tenants (i.e., “customers”) to establish different cloud accounts but share computing and storage resources. Data within each customer's cloud account, however, remains isolated from other customers. Hence, cloud-based services are ideal for businesses with growing or fluctuating resource demands, as the cloud capacity for virtual resources (e.g., compute power, data storage, etc.) is scalable and the usage-based cost structure does not require an entity to invest a large amount of capital in requisite hardware and/or software.
Additionally, unlike on-premises deployments, software updates and modifications for a customer are routinely handled by the cloud service provider without customer involvement. As a result, customers may realize labor and cost savings on network support expenditures. However, the lack of customer involvement in evaluating software updates and modifications to the virtual resources (e.g., application instances, virtual stored data, virtual compute engines, etc.) may pose significant risks, such as an increased risk of the customer's cloud account becoming compromised and/or an increased risk of cloud account setting misconfigurations caused by accident due to the increased complexity of public cloud networks or caused by unexpected setting changes.
Stated differently, given the rapid migration to public cloud networks, which are accessible by multiple users, there is now a growing tendency of cloud accounts (user accounts within the public cloud network) being subjected to attack and compromise. One type of attack is referred to as a “cyberattack,” which constitutes a threat to the security and/or intended operability of a virtual resources offered as part of the cloud-host resources. The cyberattack may involve infiltration of content into data storage resources (e.g., a cloud storage service such as Amazon® S3), where the content may include one or more executables (e.g., scripts, one or more commands, programs, etc.) or one or more non-executables (e.g., modification of metrics or settings within stored files, etc.), each being designed to perpetrate unwanted, malicious or criminal activity. In addition to or in lieu of a cyberattack, cloud-hosted resources may experience certain operational issues that may occur through intentional or unintentional account misconfiguration, which may be caused by the user or the cloud service provider (e.g., abnormal configuration settings, unexpected transmission format setting changes such as disabling or enabling encryption, etc.).
Currently, there are no trusted third party schemes available for customers to effectively and easily analysis cloud accounts in efforts to detect whether cloud-hosted resources have been compromised or misconfigured accidentally or intentionally.
Embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example and not by way of limitation in the figures of the accompanying drawings, in which like references indicate similar elements and in which:
Embodiments of the present disclosure generally relate to a cloud resource monitoring system that is configured to protect customer cloud-hosted resources within a public cloud network. Herein, cloud visibility logic, operating as part of the cloud resource monitoring system, may be configured to gain access to, ingest, and perform analytics on data from cloud-hosted resources specific to one or more cloud accounts for targeted customer(s). This “account data” may include operational log data or other types of meta-information. The analytics are conducted in order to identify whether a cloud account has been potentially compromised (e.g., potential cybersecurity threat) as well as any cloud account misconfigurations, whether intentional or unintentional. As a result, administrators and analysts may access a single location (e.g., display generated by the cloud resource monitoring system, and in particular, the cloud visibility logic) to review the security status of all cloud services provided within the cloud accounts.
Herein, the operational log data may include information that pertains to an event performed by a customer's cloud-hosted virtual resources. The “event” may correspond to an operation or a collection of operations conducted by one or more virtual resources of a (customer) cloud account, where the operation(s) cause a change of state in the cloud account's infrastructure. As an illustrative example, an event may include an Application Programming Interface (API) call that is intended to create, modify, or read data, where information associated with the API call is recorded and stored within an entry of an API log stored within the cloud account. The information within entries of the API log constitutes one type of operational log data. As another illustrative example, an event may include an operation performed by a virtual compute engine, where information associated with that operation (e.g., identifier of virtual compute engine, processing time, type of operation performed, results of the operation, etc.) is recorded and stored in one or more entries within another operational (compute) log. This information constitutes another type of operational log data.
Besides operational log data, the account data collected from the cloud account may include flow data. The flow data may include meta-information associated with the interconnectivity between virtual resources or other types of meta-information such as information directed to the software infrastructure of the cloud account.
During or after analytics are conducted on the account data, the cloud visibility logic may be further configured to provide a visualization of the infrastructure of the cloud account, which may allow an administrator to identify changes to the cloud-hosted resources by visual inspection of the cloud account infrastructure. These changes may indicate that one or more virtual resources associated with the cloud account under analysis has been compromised or misconfigured. In some embodiments, the visualization may be based on a comparison of different snapshots of cloud-hosted resources securely maintained within a data store within the cloud account. The similarities and/or differences may be used to identify certain types of events (e.g., resource changes, configuration changes, etc.) and provide a timeline as to the occurrence of these changes.
As a result, upon detecting that a virtual resource has been compromised or misconfigured, the cloud resource monitoring system allows for a retrospective review of that virtual resource. In particular, as the operational log data may be maintained for a prolonged duration (e.g., one year) within cloud or local (e.g., on-premises) storage, administrators may be able to gather historical operational data associated with compromised or misconfigured cloud-based virtual resource (e.g., Critical configuration/policy changes and user identification associated with the changes, time the compromise or misconfiguration occurred, responsible party, compliance violations, administrator at time of the compromise/misconfiguration, alerts generated, any remediation attempts as well as the time and successfulness of the remediation, etc.).
Based on the results of the analytics, the cloud visibility logic may control the reporting of the analytic results, which may include one or more dashboards that provide an administrator (e.g., person responsible for managing the customer cloud-hosted resources or the public cloud network itself) access to alerts. Additionally, for compliance with certain cloud policies, upon detection of a potential cybersecurity threat and/or misconfiguration, the cloud visibility logic may initiate actions to remediate the detected cybersecurity threat and/or misconfiguration through blocking, resetting of configuration settings, or the like.
As a collective summary, the cloud resource monitoring system is responsible for monitoring and protecting the customer cloud account(s) against attack and/or misconfiguration. As described herein, the cloud resource monitoring system may be provided as (i) logic (e.g., a piece of software such as an instance) deployed within a protected customer cloud account (
In monitoring and protecting customer cloud account(s), the cloud resource monitoring system, in particular its cloud visibility logic, may be configured to (i) gain authorized access to a particular customer's cloud account; (ii) collect data (e.g., meta-information including operational log data) from virtual data stores pertaining to the accessed cloud account; (iii) generate a display that visualizes the infrastructure of the accessed cloud account with display elements corresponding to virtual resources within the accessed cloud account that, upon selection, may provide greater granularity as to the properties and operations associated with these virtual resources; (iv) perform analytics of the collected data to determine a presence of any cybersecurity threats or account misconfigurations; and/or (v) perform activities to alert one or more administrators of the analytic results and/or to conduct any remediation, if desired. Additionally, the cloud resource monitoring system may be configured to aggregate its analytic results with results from multiple (two or more) cloud accounts to generate a single display (dashboard) to visually depict the presence of any potential cybersecurity threats or misconfigurations for cloud accounts from multiple different public cloud networks. Additionally, or in the alternative, the cloud resource monitoring system may be configured to retrieve and aggregate data (e.g., operational log data) received from cloud accounts residing in different public cloud networks, perform analytics on the aggregated data, and generate a display (dashboard) to visually depict the presence of any potential cybersecurity threats or misconfigurations for any of these cloud accounts.
According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the cloud resource monitoring system may be configured to obtain authorized access to a particular customer's cloud account in a public cloud network using any of a number of authentication schemes. For example, one authentication scheme may feature a web user interface (UI) portal that is made available after selection by a customer of the cloud resource monitoring system offered by a public cloud network provider or a third party.
More specifically, the web UI portal or command line interface (CLI) is provided to receive credentials from the customer in order to get access token. The credentials are made available to the cloud visibility logic, which may be configured to communicate the customer credentials to access control logic for the public cloud network. Upon successful customer authentication, access token is returned to the cloud visibility logic. The access token enable the cloud visibility logic to commence a communication (monitoring) session to gain authorized access to content within the customer's cloud account(s). The access token may identify specific virtual resources to which the cloud visibility logic is provided access or may provide account-wide access to data therein. Alternatively, a Security Token Service (STS) may be deployed within the public cloud network to generate access token through a web service that generates, upon request, temporary, limited-privilege credentials (access tokens) for use by the cloud visibility logic managed by authenticated users (e.g. Amazon Web Service “AWS” Identity and Access Management “IAM” users) or other authorized users.
Once granted authorization, according to one embodiment of the disclosure, the cloud visibility logic may collect data (e.g., operational log data acquired and/or generated during the processing of software components by virtual compute engines allocated to the customer's cloud account) stored within one or more virtual data stores allocated to that cloud account. Alternatively, according to another embodiment of the disclosure, the cloud visibility logic may acquire the above-described collected data from the customer's cloud account, but the collected data may be stored within one or more virtual data stores assigned to a different cloud account.
As described above, the cloud visibility logic may perform analytics on the collected data to detect a cybersecurity threat and/or cloud account misconfiguration. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the analytics may involve one or more analyses of the collected data (e.g., operational log data, etc.), which are conducted in accordance with a plurality of rules that are chosen to identify an occurrence of one or more unexpected, abnormal or inconsistent events. The analyses may involve a matching of events associated with the collected data with patterns of known suspicious events such as patterns of known malicious events or patterns of events (e.g., activities) previously used by hackers to misconfigure and compromise a cloud account or services within the cloud account (hereinafter “compromising events), which may involve an initial temporal analysis being conducted to place these suspicious events in some sort of chronological order based on time of occurrence. Additionally, or in the alternative, the analyses may involve a comparison of the current snapshot of the state of the cloud account against the prior snapshots. Thereafter, an analysis is conducted on the differences between these snapshots to determine changes in the cloud account. For both of these analyses, the cloud visibility logic operates to determine potential issues, such as cybersecurity threats or misconfigurations, both intentional misconfigurations as part of a cybersecurity attack or accidental misconfigurations, that may be causing the virtual resources for an account to operate incorrectly, inconsistently, or in a less than optimal manner.
Besides detecting potential issues as described above, the cloud visibility logic is configured to analyze the collected data retrieved from operational logs by at least determining characteristics shared by different operational log data (e.g., common sources, activity or activities that caused generation of the operational logic data, etc.). The collected data is further analyzed to learn relationships amongst the operational log data, which may generate additional meta-information for use in the analytics of the collected operational log data. This additional meta-information may be aggregated and correlated with known patterns of malicious activity or compromising activity via configuration changes (e.g., settings, permissions, etc.) to further assist in determining a cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration.
Determination of a cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration may be further established by the cloud visibility logic correlating the collected data associated with the one or more cloud accounts with heuristic information such as cybersecurity threat information from other systems or third-party systems (e.g., machine generated intelligence, post-intrusion intelligence, pre-attack intelligence, etc.). Other examples of heuristic information may include, but is not limited or restricted to expected account configuration setting and/or configuration setting misconfigurations that have been determined to be more susceptible to cybersecurity attack or adversely affect operability of certain virtual resources.
The collective analytics on the heuristic information and the collected data, as described above, may generate a score that denotes a presence of a cybersecurity threat or an account misconfiguration. In some embodiments, known cybersecurity threats may be mitigated through a prescribed mitigation scheme.
If cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration is detected, an alert may be generated and issued to one or more administrators. If a prescribed mitigation scheme exists to remediate a detected cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration, the cloud management system may generate an alert for an administrator and provide the prescribed mitigation scheme, which may be triggered automatically or may be controlled by an administrator (e.g., selecting a radio button or link to provide further information of the threat/misconfiguration and potential mitigation processes available). The alerts and/or prescribed mitigation scheme may be configured in accordance with a set of regulatory compliance rules associated with, for example, regulatory compliance (e.g., Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), etc.).
In the following description, certain terminology is used to describe aspects of the invention. In certain situations, the terms “logic” and “engine” are representative of hardware, firmware, and/or software that is configured to perform one or more functions. As hardware, the logic (or engine) may include circuitry having data processing and/or storage functionality. Examples of such circuitry may include, but are not limited or restricted to a processor, a programmable gate array, a microcontroller, an application specific integrated circuit, wireless receiver, transmitter and/or transceiver circuitry, semiconductor memory, or combinatorial logic.
Alternatively, or in combination with the hardware circuitry described above, the logic (or engine) may be software in the form of one or more software modules. The software modules may include an executable application, a daemon application, an application programming interface (API), a subroutine, a function, a procedure, an applet, a servlet, a routine, source code, a shared library/dynamic load library, or even one or more instructions. The software module(s) may be stored in any type of a suitable non-transitory storage medium, or transitory storage medium (e.g., electrical, optical, acoustical or other form of propagated signals such as carrier waves, infrared signals, or digital signals). Examples of non-transitory storage medium may include, but are not limited or restricted to a programmable circuit; a semiconductor memory; non-persistent storage such as volatile memory (e.g., any type of random access memory “RAM”); persistent storage such as non-volatile memory (e.g., read-only memory “ROM”, power-backed RAM, flash memory, phase-change memory, etc.), a solid-state drive, hard disk drive, an optical disc drive, or a portable memory device. As firmware, the logic (or engine) may be stored in persistent storage.
The term “electronic device” should be generally construed as electronics with data processing capability and/or a capability of connecting to any type of network, such as a public cloud network (e.g., Amazon Web Service (AWS®), Microsoft Azure®, Google Cloud®, etc.), a private cloud network, or any other network type. Examples of an electronic device may include, but are not limited or restricted to, the following: a server, a mainframe, a firewall, a router or other intermediary communication device, or an endpoint device (e.g., a laptop, a smartphone, a tablet, a desktop computer, a netbook, gaming console, etc.).
The term “meta-information” generally refers to a collection of information that is descriptive of characteristics of a certain portion of information to which the meta-information pertains. For example, the meta-information may identify the portion of information for purposes of discovery and/or identification. As another example, the meta-information may identify structural or administrative characteristics for the portion of information such as (1) data type, (2) version, (3) relationships to other information, (4) access history or controls (e.g., permissions, access content directed to user/time/source, etc.), (5) creation or modification history (e.g., when portion of information created or modified, when/what processes created from the information, etc.), or the like.
The term “message” generally refers to signaling (wired or wireless) as either information placed in a prescribed format and transmitted in accordance with a suitable delivery protocol or information made accessible through a logical data structure such as an API. Examples of the delivery protocol include, but are not limited or restricted to HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol); HTTPS (HTTP Secure); Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP); File Transfer Protocol (FTP); iMES SAGE; Instant Message Access Protocol (IMAP); or the like. Hence, each message may be in the form of one or more packets, frames, or any other series of bits having the prescribed, structured format.
The term “computerized” generally represents that any corresponding operations are conducted by hardware in combination with software and/or firmware.
As described herein, a cloud management system may be deployed as a “cloud-based hosted service,” a “hosted service,” or a combination thereof, any of which operates to protect customer cloud-hosted resources maintained within a public cloud network. A cloud-based hosted service may be configured to operate as a multi-tenant service; namely a service made available to tenants (also referred to as “customers”) on demand via a public network (e.g., Internet). The multi-tenant service may feature virtual resources, such as virtual compute engines and/or virtual data stores for example, which are partitioned for use among the customers in accessing and/or analyzing data maintained within that customer's specific cloud account. The partitioning protect the security and privacy of the customer data. A “hosted service” may be configured as a single-tenant service provided by a customer's own on-premises server(s) to access and collect meta-information from that customer's cloud accounts(s). Examples of a hosted service may include, but is not limited or restricted to a Microsoft® Exchange® server, a file repository, or the like.
In certain instances, the terms “compare,” comparing,” “comparison,” or other tenses thereof generally mean determining if a match (e.g., identical or a prescribed level of correlation) is achieved between meta-information associated with two items under analysis.
The term “transmission medium” generally refers to a physical or logical communication link (or path) between two or more network devices. For instance, as a physical communication path, wired and/or wireless interconnects in the form of electrical wiring, optical fiber, cable, bus trace, or a wireless channel using infrared, radio frequency (RF), may be used.
Finally, the terms “or” and “and/or” as used herein are to be interpreted as inclusive or meaning any one or any combination. As an example, “A, B or C” or “A, B and/or C” mean “any of the following: A; B; C; A and B; A and C; B and C; A, B and C.” An exception to this definition will occur only when a combination of elements, functions, steps or acts are in some way inherently mutually exclusive.
As this invention is susceptible to embodiments of many different forms, it is intended that the present disclosure is to be considered as an example of the principles of the invention and not intended to limit the invention to the specific embodiments shown and described.
Referring to
Herein, the operations of the cloud resource monitoring system 100 (deployed within the first public cloud network 1101) are directed to gaining authorized access to information within a cloud account 130 associated with a specific tenant (hereinafter referred to as a “customer”), where the accessing entity is different than the customer. The cloud account 130 corresponds to a collection of virtual resources allocated to the customer, where the cloud account 130 is hosted at a public cloud network (e.g., the first public cloud network 1101).
It is contemplated that multiple (two or more) cloud accounts 130 and 132 for a particular customer may be hosted at different public cloud networks (e.g., the first public cloud network 1101 and Nth public cloud network 110N). For this deployment, the cloud resource monitoring system 100 is configured to monitor/protect customer cloud-hosted resources of and operate within the first public cloud network 1101 while another cloud resource monitoring system 102 may be configured to monitor/protect customer cloud-hosted resources of and operate within the Nth public cloud network 110N. For simplicity, the cloud resource monitoring management services described herein will focus on the operability of the cloud resource monitoring system 100 installed within the first public cloud network 1101.
After gaining access to the customer's cloud account 130, the cloud resource monitoring system 100 may be configured to collect account data 140 (referred to as “collected data 140”) from the accessed cloud account 130 (e.g., operational log data, meta-information directed to virtual resources being utilized within the cloud account 130 such as virtual compute engines or virtual data stores, etc.). According to one embodiment of the disclosure, a portion of the collected data 140 may be used in the generation of a display 150, which visualizes the infrastructure of the accessed cloud account 130. The visualized infrastructure may be represented by a plurality of display elements 155, each corresponding to a virtual resource within the accessed cloud account 130. In response to selection of one of the display elements 155, the cloud resource monitoring system 100 provides access to additional portions of the collected data 140 in order to provide greater granularity as to the properties of the virtual resources associated with the selected display element.
Besides visualization of the cloud account 130, the cloud resource monitoring system 100 may be configured to perform analytics on the collected data 140 to determine a presence of any cybersecurity threats and/or misconfigurations. Based on this determination, the cloud resource monitoring system 100 generates alerts 160 to one or more administrators. The alerts 160 may include a portion of the analytic results and/or logic to mitigate or remediate any cybersecurity threats and/or misconfigurations. Content 165 from the alerts 160 may be rendered for display and further evaluation by an administrator.
As further shown in
Referring now to
The cloud resource monitoring system 100 includes cloud visibility logic 200, namely logic that is configured to gain authorized access to the customer's cloud account 130, and once authorized access is secured, retrieve the collected data 140 (e.g., meta-information including operational log data) associated with the accessed cloud account 130 (operation A). Based on the collected data 140, the cloud visibility logic 200 is configured to (i) generate a representation 230 (operation B) that visualizes an infrastructure of the assessed cloud account 130 based on the collected data 140, (ii) perform analytics of the collected data 140 (operation C) to determine a presence of any cybersecurity threats or (setting) misconfigurations, and/or (iii) generate alerts 240 that are made available to one or more administrators of the analytic results (operation D). The alerts 240 may include messages with the analytic results and/or information for use in performing remediation activities including reverting a defined policy of operation for all or specific virtual resources utilized by the cloud account 130 under analysis, which is established through one or more settings or rules, to a default or predetermined configuration, if desired.
Herein, the cloud visibility logic 200 may be configured to secure authorized access to a particular customer's cloud account in a public cloud network using any of a number of authentication schemes. For example, one authentication scheme may feature a web user interface (Web UI) portal 300 of
As shown in
Referring still to
As described above, the cloud visibility logic 200 may perform analytics on the collected data 140 (e.g., operational log data, meta-information associated with certain virtual resources, etc.) to detect a cybersecurity threat and/or cloud account misconfiguration. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the analytics may involve one or more analyses of operational log data (e.g., content 280 from API logs, flow data 285 identifying which users are connecting to virtual private clouds being part of the cloud account 130, meta-information 290 directed to settings of the virtual compute engines within the virtual compute resources 260, etc.), which are conducted by one or more virtual compute engines 260 operating in accordance with a plurality of rules, such as correlation rules 295 that are configured to identify an occurrence of suspicious events (e.g., one or more unexpected, abnormal or inconsistent events) or regulatory compliance rules to verify compliance with governmental or other regulations regarding data acquisition and/or retention. The analyses may involve a matching of events associated with the collected data 140 with patterns of known suspicious events, which may involve an initial temporal analysis being conducted to order these events based on time of occurrence.
Additionally, or in the alternative, the analyses may involve a comparison of the current snapshot of the state of the cloud account 130 against prior snapshots. Thereafter, an analysis is conducted on the differences between these snapshots to determine changes in the cloud account 130. For both of these analyses, the cloud visibility logic 200 operates to determine potential issues, such as cybersecurity threats or misconfigurations that may be causing the virtual resources for the cloud account 130 to operate incorrectly, inconsistently, or in a less than optimal manner. As yet another analysis (or alternative analysis), although not shown, a determination of a cybersecurity threat may be further established by correlating additional meta-information collected by the cloud visibility logic 200 with other intelligence such as data pertaining to suspicious events associated with cybersecurity threats (malicious events) and/or account misconfigurations received from other sources (e.g., third party intelligence, post-intrusion intelligence, pre-attack intelligence). The correlation of the analytic results from one or more of these analyses may correspond to a threat/misconfiguration score that denotes a threat or misconfiguration upon exceeding a prescribed threshold.
If cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration is detected by the cloud visibility logic 200, the alert 240 may be generated and issued to one or more administrators. The alert 240 may include information that, once received and rendered in a displayable format, represents the events (e.g., activities) that led to the cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration. The alert 240 may allow for the customer's administrator to conduct a retrospective review of activities associated with a particular virtual resource or a particular group of virtual resources over a prescribed duration, based on historical operational data associated with compromised or misconfigured cloud-based virtual resource.
Additionally, the alert 240 may include a prescribed mitigation scheme to remediate the cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration, which may be triggered automatically or by the administrator (e.g., selecting a radio button or link to provide further information of the threat/misconfiguration and potential mitigation processes available). The alert 240 and/or prescribed mitigation scheme may be configured in accordance with a set of regulatory compliance rules associated with, for example, regulatory compliance (e.g., Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), etc.).
Referring to
Once authorized access is secured (e.g., in possession of valid access tokens 221 to specific virtual resources), the cloud visibility logic 200 is configured to retrieve account data, including meta-information such as operational log data associated with or maintained by those specific virtual resources. As shown, in lieu of providing access tokens 221 outside of the cloud account 130, for this embodiment, the access tokens 221 are maintained within the cloud account 130 based on communications initiated by the UI web portal 300 of
Operating in a manner similar to a deployment external to the cloud account 130 as illustrated in
Although not shown, the cloud visibility logic 200 may establish communications with other cloud accounts within the public cloud network 1101 in which cloud account 130 resides, or with other cloud accounts in a different public cloud network, such as cloud account 132 residing in public cloud network 110N of
Referring now to
Herein, when executed by one or more virtual compute engine 400 included as part of the virtual compute resources 260, the credential evaluation logic 450 is configured to determine whether the cloud visibility logic 200 is permitted access content from the cloud account 130. This determination may be based on an internal check as to whether the stored access token 221 is valid and may be used by the cloud visibility logic 200 to gain access to content within the cloud account 130. If the access token 221 is not valid (e.g., expired, revoked, etc.), the credential evaluation logic 450 is further configured to select a particular authentication operation to be performed to obtain the valid access token. For instance, a detected lack of a valid access token may prompt the credential evaluation logic 450 to provide a web UI portal 300 of
As shown in
As an illustrative example, an event may include an API call that is intended to create, modify, or read data, where information 280 associated with the API call may be stored within an entry of an API log being part of the account data 140, such as operational log data, within the assessed cloud account 130 of
Referring still to
The update logic 480 is configured to modify (e.g., add, change, or delete) any of the rules 490, any of the parameters associated with or utilized by the rules 490, and/or functional characteristics of one or more software components forming the cloud visibility logic 200. For example, the update logic 480 may be configured to perform modifications to the software components in a periodic or aperiodic manner based on modified information (e.g., software updates or patches, rule parameter changes, setting changes, etc.) from an external source. The source may include an entity in charge of maintaining the public cloud network 1101, a provider of the cloud visibility logic 200, a provider of a software component installed within the cloud visibility logic 200, or the like.
The analyses by the correlation logic 465 may involve a matching of events associated with the collected data 140 with patterns of known malicious or compromising events, which may involve an initial temporal analysis being conducted to order these events based on time of occurrence. Additionally, or in the alternative, the analyses by the correlation logic 465 may involve a comparison of the current snapshot of the state of the cloud account 130 against prior snapshots.
Optionally, when implemented, the virtualization logic 460 is configured to receive a portion of the collected data 140 and generate a visualization of the infrastructure of the cloud-hosted virtual resources allocated for the cloud account 130. The visualized infrastructure may be used to identify certain portions of these cloud-hosted virtual resources that may be compromised or misconfigured based on analyses of the collected data 140 by the correlation logic 465. More specifically, the virtualization logic 460 may highlight or visually enhance display elements associated with the compromised or misconfigured virtual resources to better identify virtual resources that may require a more detailed review as a part of a cybersecurity attack or a part of an account misconfiguration.
After the correlation logic 465 completes the above-described analytics, the reporting logic 470 may control the issuance of the alerts 440 to one or more administrators responsible for managing the customer cloud-hosted resources or one or more administrators of the public cloud network, especially upon detection of a cybersecurity threat. Prior to issuance of the alerts 440, the aggregation logic 485 may be configured to aggregate analytic results produced by the correlation logic 465 with results from another cloud visibility logic. Additionally, or in the alternative, the cloud resource monitoring system 100 may be configured to retrieve and aggregate data (e.g., operational log data) received from cloud accounts residing in different public cloud networks, perform analytics on the aggregated data, and generate a display (dashboard) to visually depict the presence of any potential cybersecurity threats or misconfigurations for any of these cloud accounts
Additionally, for compliance with certain cloud policies, upon detection of a potential threat and/or misconfiguration, the remediation logic 475 may initiate actions to remediate the detected threat and/or misconfiguration through blocking, reconfiguring settings, or the like.
Referring now to
For example, as shown in
Additionally, a second display element 541 may be directed to identifying a number of virtual data stores being allocated for and utilized by the cloud account 130. Upon further selection of the second display element 541, a listing of each of the virtual data store and its characteristics (e.g., name, storage capacity, unused storage capacity, etc.) may be generated for display as an overlaying window for example. Also, a third display element 542 may be directed to identifying a number of virtual private clouds (VPCs) utilized by the cloud account 130. Upon selection of the third display element 542, a listing of each the virtual private clouds and its properties (e.g., name, IP address, etc.) may be generated for display.
Referring now to
Referring now to
As shown, each of these malicious or compromising events 590 identified on the timeline may include an identifier of a virtual resource 591, date/time of detection 592, a name 593 of a detected activity associated with the virtual resource, an identifier 594 of an original source of content that causes the occurrence of the “malicious” event, or the like. Herein, the event timeline 590 may provide guidance for conducting an in-depth analysis of the cause of the malicious or compromising event by selection of the “more” data display element 595 that, when selected, provides for display additional details surrounding the activity (e.g., activity type, additional source details, etc.) as shown herein.
Referring to
Herein, as described above, the cloud visibility logic 200 may be configured to gain authorized access to the customer's cloud account 130 in the first public cloud network 1101 using a selected authentication scheme. Similar to the cloud-based hosted service operations illustrated in
As a first illustrative authentication scheme, upon receipt of the permission request message 610, the Web UI portal 300 is launched for display by the endpoint device 620. As set forth in
Alternatively, as a second illustrative example, the authentication scheme to securing an access token 652 may be conducted by the cloud visibility logic 200 through an OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework or a similar framework. For example, the cloud visibility logic 200 may be registered by an authorized administrator as logic permitted to operate as an agent for a customer in gaining access to stored data within the cloud account 132. During registration, in response to the permission request message 610, an administrator for the cloud visibility logic 200 may provide a second customer credential 650 (e.g., one or more network addresses), which may be different from the first customer credential 630 given communications are directed to a different type of public cloud network, for accessing stored content within the cloud account 132. Upon registration, based on the second customer credential 650, an access control logic 654 (residing in the public cloud network 110N) may return a result of an authentication of the customer credential (Success/Failure) and the access token 652 assigned to the customer for use in accessing the cloud account 130 for a prescribed period of time or until the token 652 is revoked.
Once a valid access token is available to the cloud visibility logic 200 (e.g., access token 632), the cloud visibility logic 200 may issue a communication session to access stored content within the cloud account 130. The communication session may include a scan request message 660, which includes the access token 632 and seeks authorization to access the stored content with the cloud account 130 in order to perform analytics to identify whether the cloud account 130 has been potentially compromised. The cloud visibility logic 200 may receive a returned response 662 to the scan request message 660, which may include meta-information 664, such as operational log data associated with the accessed cloud account 130. The meta-information 664 may be directed to software components forming an infrastructure of the access cloud account 130, such as information directed to the virtual compute engines 400 and/or virtual data stores 410 allocated to the customer's cloud account 130. Additionally, or in the alternative, the meta-information 664 may be associated with events acquired and/or generated through processing operations conducted by the virtual compute engines 400 allocated to the customer's cloud account 130.
In general, the meta-information 664 may be content associated with an operation or a collection of operations conducted by the virtual resources that represent an attempted change of state in the cloud account 130 or properties associated with virtual resource, or more restrictive as content directed to events that pertain to an operation or a collection of operations conducted by the virtual resources that is unexpected, abnormal or inconsistent with typical operations within the cloud account 130. Specifically, the events may include queries to permission restricted data stores to obtain sensitive information disability or enabling certain operability (e.g., encryption, change ciphers, etc.). Additionally, the events may include attempted accesses to cloud accounts in the same or other public cloud networks such as attempts to access the cloud account 132 residing in the public cloud network 110N.
The cloud visibility logic 200 may perform analytics on the collected meta-information 664 to detect a cybersecurity threat and/or cloud account misconfiguration. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the analytics may involve one or more analyses on a portion or portions of the meta-information 664 in accordance with a plurality of rules 670 that are configured to identify an occurrence of unexpected, abnormal or inconsistent events. As described above and illustrated in
If cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration is detected by the cloud visibility logic 200, an alert 680 may be generated by the cloud visibility logic 200 within the on-premises electronic device 600 for issuance to one or more administrators. The alert 680 may include information associated with the analytics, where these analytic results may be rendered in a display format to represent the particular events that led to the cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration. Additionally, the alert 680 may include a prescribed mitigation scheme to remediate the cybersecurity threat or account misconfiguration, which is in compliance with any regulatory requirements.
Although not shown in detail, the cloud visibility logic 200, with access to the valid access token 652, may issue a communication session to access stored content within the cloud account 132 in order to gain access to stored content (e.g., operational log data, meta-information, etc.) with the cloud account 132 in order to perform analytics to identify whether the cloud account 132 has been potentially compromised as well. The cloud visibility logic 200 provides a centralized analytic and alert scheme to allow administrator or analyst to review the security status of cloud resources for a customer, whether these cloud resources pertain to a single cloud account, multiple cloud accounts within the same public cloud network or multiple cloud accounts within different public cloud networks, a combination of cloud resources within cloud account(s) and resources within an enterprise network to which the electronic device 600 is connected. This review may be provided via the same dashboards as shown in
Referring now to
The cloud visibility analytic logic 720 processes and analyses the collected data 730 returned from the cloud visibility data collection logic 710 (operation D). The processes and analyses conducted by the cloud visibility analytic logic 720 involve the generation a graphical representation 740 to visualize an infrastructure of the cloud account 130 based on the collected data 730 (operations E&F) and the performance of analytics on the collected data 730 to determine a presence of any threats or misconfigurations. Based on these analytics, the cloud visibility analytic logic 720 may generate alerts 750 that are made available to one or more administrators of the analytic results (operation G). The alerts 750 may include messages with the analytic results and/information for use in performing remediation activities, as described above.
Referring now to
As an optional operation, based on the operational log data, a visual display of an infrastructure of the cloud account may be generated (block 820). According to one embodiment, the visual display may include a plurality of display elements corresponding to the virtual resources formulating the cloud account, where the positioning of these display elements (or generation of connectors between these display elements) identify relationships between the virtual resources. For changes in infrastructure that are unexpected, abnormal or inconsistent events, the display elements (or connectors) may be highlighted to identify an attempted cyberattack or account misconfiguration.
Thereafter, analytics are conducted on the recovered operational log data to determine whether a cyberattack has or is being attempted or a misconfiguration of the cloud account has occurred (blocks 830-850). When the analytic results identify that a cyberattack has or is being attempted on resources allocated to the cloud account and/or the cloud account has been misconfigured (e.g., unexpected setting change in the cloud account, abnormal setting, events occurring that are inconsistent with known (expected) patterns of events, etc.), one or more alerts may be generated and provided to administrators for the customer that is associated with the cloud account (block 860). The alerts may include a portion of the analytic results that are used in identifying the attempted cyberattack and/or account misconfiguration along with context information associated with the attempted cyberattack and/or account misconfiguration. Included as part of the alert, information directed to the remediation of the attempted cyberattack and/or account misconfiguration in compliance with any regulatory rules is provided (block 870).
In the foregoing description, the invention is described with reference to specific exemplary embodiments thereof. However, it will be evident that various modifications and changes may be made thereto without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims.
This application is based upon and claims the benefit of priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/824,300 filed Mar. 26, 2019, the entire contents of which are incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6898632 | Gordy et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6941348 | Petry et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 7080407 | Zhao et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7080408 | Pak et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
| 7243371 | Kasper et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
| 7308716 | Danford et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7448084 | Apap et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
| 7458098 | Judge et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
| 7467408 | O'Toole, Jr. | Dec 2008 | B1 |
| 7496961 | Zimmer et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7519990 | Xie | Apr 2009 | B1 |
| 7540025 | Tzadikario | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7639714 | Stolfo et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7698548 | Shelest et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7779463 | Stolfo et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7854007 | Sprosts et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7937387 | Frazier et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7949849 | Lowe et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
| 8006305 | Aziz | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8020206 | Hubbard et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8045458 | Alperovitch et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8069484 | McMillan et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8171553 | Aziz et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8201246 | Wu et al. | Jun 2012 | B1 |
| 8204984 | Aziz et al. | Jun 2012 | B1 |
| 8214905 | Doukhvalov et al. | Jul 2012 | B1 |
| 8291499 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8370938 | Daswani et al. | Feb 2013 | B1 |
| 8370939 | Zaitsev et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
| 8375444 | Aziz et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
| 8438644 | Watters et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
| 8464340 | Ahn et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8494974 | Watters et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8516593 | Aziz | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8528086 | Aziz | Sep 2013 | B1 |
| 8539582 | Aziz et al. | Sep 2013 | B1 |
| 8549638 | Aziz | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8561177 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
| 8566476 | Shiffer et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8566946 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
| 8584239 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
| 8635696 | Aziz | Jan 2014 | B1 |
| 8689333 | Aziz | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8713681 | Silberman et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8776229 | Aziz | Jul 2014 | B1 |
| 8793278 | Frazier et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8793787 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8813050 | Watters et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8832829 | Manni et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8850571 | Staniford et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8881271 | Butler, II | Nov 2014 | B2 |
| 8881282 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
| 8898788 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
| 8935779 | Manni et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
| 8949257 | Shiffer et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
| 8984638 | Aziz et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
| 8990939 | Staniford et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 8990944 | Singh et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
| 8997219 | Staniford et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 9009822 | Ismael et al. | Apr 2015 | B1 |
| 9009823 | Ismael et al. | Apr 2015 | B1 |
| 9015846 | Watters et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
| 9027135 | Aziz | May 2015 | B1 |
| 9071638 | Aziz et al. | Jun 2015 | B1 |
| 9104867 | Thioux et al. | Aug 2015 | B1 |
| 9106630 | Frazier et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9106694 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9118715 | Staniford et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
| 9159035 | Ismael et al. | Oct 2015 | B1 |
| 9171160 | Vincent et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
| 9176843 | Ismael et al. | Nov 2015 | B1 |
| 9189627 | Islam | Nov 2015 | B1 |
| 9195829 | Goradia et al. | Nov 2015 | B1 |
| 9197664 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2015 | B1 |
| 9223972 | Vincent et al. | Dec 2015 | B1 |
| 9225740 | Ismael et al. | Dec 2015 | B1 |
| 9241010 | Bennett et al. | Jan 2016 | B1 |
| 9251343 | Vincent et al. | Feb 2016 | B1 |
| 9262635 | Paithane et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
| 9268936 | Butler | Feb 2016 | B2 |
| 9275229 | LeMasters | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9282109 | Aziz et al. | Mar 2016 | B1 |
| 9292686 | Ismael et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9294501 | Mesdaq et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9300686 | Pidathala et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9306906 | Fry | Apr 2016 | B2 |
| 9306960 | Aziz | Apr 2016 | B1 |
| 9306974 | Aziz et al. | Apr 2016 | B1 |
| 9311479 | Manni et al. | Apr 2016 | B1 |
| 9355247 | Thioux et al. | May 2016 | B1 |
| 9356944 | Aziz | May 2016 | B1 |
| 9363280 | Rivlin et al. | Jun 2016 | B1 |
| 9367681 | Ismael et al. | Jun 2016 | B1 |
| 9398028 | Karandikar et al. | Jul 2016 | B1 |
| 9413781 | Cunningham et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
| 9426071 | Caldejon et al. | Aug 2016 | B1 |
| 9430646 | Mushtaq et al. | Aug 2016 | B1 |
| 9432389 | Khalid et al. | Aug 2016 | B1 |
| 9438613 | Paithane et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
| 9438622 | Staniford et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
| 9438623 | Thioux et al. | Sep 2016 | B1 |
| 9459901 | Jung et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
| 9467460 | Otvagin et al. | Oct 2016 | B1 |
| 9483644 | Paithane et al. | Nov 2016 | B1 |
| 9495180 | Ismael | Nov 2016 | B2 |
| 9497213 | Thompson et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
| 9507935 | Ismael et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
| 9516057 | Aziz | Dec 2016 | B2 |
| 9519782 | Aziz et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
| 9536091 | Paithane et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9537972 | Edwards et al. | Jan 2017 | B1 |
| 9560059 | Islam | Jan 2017 | B1 |
| 9565202 | Kindlund et al. | Feb 2017 | B1 |
| 9591015 | Amin et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
| 9591020 | Aziz | Mar 2017 | B1 |
| 9594904 | Jain et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
| 9594905 | Ismael et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
| 9594912 | Thioux et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
| 9609007 | Rivlin et al. | Mar 2017 | B1 |
| 9626509 | Khalid et al. | Apr 2017 | B1 |
| 9628498 | Aziz et al. | Apr 2017 | B1 |
| 9628507 | Haq et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
| 9633134 | Ross | Apr 2017 | B2 |
| 9635039 | Islam et al. | Apr 2017 | B1 |
| 9641546 | Manni et al. | May 2017 | B1 |
| 9654485 | Neumann | May 2017 | B1 |
| 9661009 | Karandikar et al. | May 2017 | B1 |
| 9661018 | Aziz | May 2017 | B1 |
| 9674298 | Edwards et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
| 9680862 | Ismael et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
| 9690606 | Ha et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
| 9690933 | Singh et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
| 9690935 | Shiffer et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
| 9690936 | Malik et al. | Jun 2017 | B1 |
| 9736179 | Ismael | Aug 2017 | B2 |
| 9740857 | Ismael et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
| 9747446 | Pidathala et al. | Aug 2017 | B1 |
| 9749343 | Watters et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
| 9749344 | Watters et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
| 9756074 | Aziz et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
| 9773112 | Rathor et al. | Sep 2017 | B1 |
| 9781144 | Otvagin et al. | Oct 2017 | B1 |
| 9787700 | Amin et al. | Oct 2017 | B1 |
| 9787706 | Otvagin et al. | Oct 2017 | B1 |
| 9792196 | Ismael et al. | Oct 2017 | B1 |
| 9824209 | Ismael et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
| 9824211 | Wilson | Nov 2017 | B2 |
| 9824216 | Khalid et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
| 9825976 | Gomez et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
| 9825989 | Mehra et al. | Nov 2017 | B1 |
| 9838408 | Karandikar et al. | Dec 2017 | B1 |
| 9838411 | Aziz | Dec 2017 | B1 |
| 9838416 | Aziz | Dec 2017 | B1 |
| 9838417 | Khalid et al. | Dec 2017 | B1 |
| 9846776 | Paithane et al. | Dec 2017 | B1 |
| 9876701 | Caldejon et al. | Jan 2018 | B1 |
| 9888016 | Amin et al. | Feb 2018 | B1 |
| 9888019 | Pidathala et al. | Feb 2018 | B1 |
| 9892261 | Joram et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
| 9904955 | Watters et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
| 9910988 | Vincent et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
| 9912644 | Cunningham | Mar 2018 | B2 |
| 9912681 | Ismael et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
| 9912684 | Aziz et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
| 9912691 | Mesdaq et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
| 9912698 | Thioux et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
| 9916440 | Paithane et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
| 9921978 | Chan et al. | Mar 2018 | B1 |
| 9934376 | Ismael | Apr 2018 | B1 |
| 9934381 | Kindlund et al. | Apr 2018 | B1 |
| 9946568 | Ismael et al. | Apr 2018 | B1 |
| 9954890 | Staniford et al. | Apr 2018 | B1 |
| 9973531 | Thioux | May 2018 | B1 |
| 10002252 | Ismael et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
| 10019338 | Goradia et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10019573 | Silberman et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
| 10025691 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10025927 | Khalid et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10027689 | Rathor et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10027690 | Aziz et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
| 10027696 | Rivlin et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10033747 | Paithane et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10033748 | Cunningham et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10033753 | Islam et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10033759 | Kabra et al. | Jul 2018 | B1 |
| 10050998 | Singh | Aug 2018 | B1 |
| 10063583 | Watters et al. | Aug 2018 | B2 |
| 10068091 | Aziz et al. | Sep 2018 | B1 |
| 10075455 | Zafar et al. | Sep 2018 | B2 |
| 10083302 | Paithane et al. | Sep 2018 | B1 |
| 10084813 | Eyada | Sep 2018 | B2 |
| 10089461 | Ha et al. | Oct 2018 | B1 |
| 10097573 | Aziz | Oct 2018 | B1 |
| 10104102 | Neumann | Oct 2018 | B1 |
| 10108446 | Steinberg et al. | Oct 2018 | B1 |
| 10121000 | Rivlin et al. | Nov 2018 | B1 |
| 10122746 | Manni et al. | Nov 2018 | B1 |
| 10133863 | Bu et al. | Nov 2018 | B2 |
| 10133866 | Kumar et al. | Nov 2018 | B1 |
| 10146810 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
| 10148693 | Singh et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
| 10165000 | Aziz et al. | Dec 2018 | B1 |
| 10169585 | Pilipenko et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
| 10176321 | Abbasi et al. | Jan 2019 | B2 |
| 10181029 | Ismael et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
| 10191861 | Steinberg et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
| 10192052 | Singh et al. | Jan 2019 | B1 |
| 10198574 | Thioux et al. | Feb 2019 | B1 |
| 10200384 | Mushtaq et al. | Feb 2019 | B1 |
| 10210329 | Malik et al. | Feb 2019 | B1 |
| 10216927 | Steinberg | Feb 2019 | B1 |
| 10218740 | Mesdaq et al. | Feb 2019 | B1 |
| 10242185 | Goradia | Mar 2019 | B1 |
| 10282548 | Aziz et al. | May 2019 | B1 |
| 10284574 | Aziz et al. | May 2019 | B1 |
| 10284575 | Paithane et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
| 10296437 | Ismael et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
| 10335738 | Paithane et al. | Jul 2019 | B1 |
| 10341363 | Vincent et al. | Jul 2019 | B1 |
| 10341365 | Ha | Jul 2019 | B1 |
| 10366231 | Singh et al. | Jul 2019 | B1 |
| 10380343 | Jung et al. | Aug 2019 | B1 |
| 10395029 | Steinberg | Aug 2019 | B1 |
| 10404725 | Rivlin et al. | Sep 2019 | B1 |
| 10417031 | Paithane et al. | Sep 2019 | B2 |
| 10430586 | Paithane et al. | Oct 2019 | B1 |
| 10432649 | Bennett et al. | Oct 2019 | B1 |
| 10445502 | Desphande et al. | Oct 2019 | B1 |
| 10447728 | Steinberg | Oct 2019 | B1 |
| 10454950 | Aziz | Oct 2019 | B1 |
| 10454953 | Amin et al. | Oct 2019 | B1 |
| 10462173 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2019 | B1 |
| 10467411 | Pidathala et al. | Nov 2019 | B1 |
| 10467414 | Kindlund et al. | Nov 2019 | B1 |
| 10469512 | Ismael | Nov 2019 | B1 |
| 10474813 | Ismael | Nov 2019 | B1 |
| 10476906 | Siddiqui | Nov 2019 | B1 |
| 10476909 | Aziz et al. | Nov 2019 | B1 |
| 10491627 | Su | Nov 2019 | B1 |
| 10503904 | Singh et al. | Dec 2019 | B1 |
| 10505956 | Pidathala et al. | Dec 2019 | B1 |
| 10511614 | Aziz | Dec 2019 | B1 |
| 10515214 | Vincent et al. | Dec 2019 | B1 |
| 10523609 | Subramanian | Dec 2019 | B1 |
| 10528726 | Ismael | Jan 2020 | B1 |
| 10534906 | Paithane et al. | Jan 2020 | B1 |
| 10552610 | Vashisht et al. | Feb 2020 | B1 |
| 10554507 | Siddiqui et al. | Feb 2020 | B1 |
| 10565378 | Vincent et al. | Feb 2020 | B1 |
| 10567405 | Aziz | Feb 2020 | B1 |
| 10572665 | Jung et al. | Feb 2020 | B2 |
| 10581874 | Khalid et al. | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10581879 | Paithane et al. | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10581898 | Singh | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10587636 | Aziz et al. | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10587647 | Khalid et al. | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10592678 | Ismael et al. | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10601848 | Jeyaraman et al. | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10601863 | Siddiqui | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10601865 | Mesdaq et al. | Mar 2020 | B1 |
| 10616266 | Otvagin | Apr 2020 | B1 |
| 10621338 | Pfoh et al. | Apr 2020 | B1 |
| 10623434 | Aziz et al. | Apr 2020 | B1 |
| 10637880 | Islam et al. | Apr 2020 | B1 |
| 10642753 | Steinberg | May 2020 | B1 |
| 10657251 | Malik et al. | May 2020 | B1 |
| 10666686 | Singh et al. | May 2020 | B1 |
| 10671721 | Otvagin et al. | Jun 2020 | B1 |
| 10671726 | Paithane et al. | Jun 2020 | B1 |
| 10701091 | Cunningham et al. | Jun 2020 | B1 |
| 10706149 | Vincent | Jul 2020 | B1 |
| 10713358 | Sikorski et al. | Jul 2020 | B2 |
| 10713362 | Vincent et al. | Jul 2020 | B1 |
| 10715542 | Wei et al. | Jul 2020 | B1 |
| 10726127 | Steinberg | Jul 2020 | B1 |
| 10728263 | Neumann | Jul 2020 | B1 |
| 10735458 | Haq et al. | Aug 2020 | B1 |
| 10740456 | Ismael et al. | Aug 2020 | B1 |
| 10747872 | Ha et al. | Aug 2020 | B1 |
| 10757120 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2020 | B1 |
| 10757134 | Eyada | Aug 2020 | B1 |
| 10785255 | Otvagin et al. | Sep 2020 | B1 |
| 10791138 | Siddiqui et al. | Sep 2020 | B1 |
| 10795991 | Ross et al. | Oct 2020 | B1 |
| 10798112 | Siddiqui et al. | Oct 2020 | B2 |
| 10798121 | Khalid et al. | Oct 2020 | B1 |
| 10805340 | Goradia | Oct 2020 | B1 |
| 10805346 | Kumar et al. | Oct 2020 | B2 |
| 10812513 | Manni et al. | Oct 2020 | B1 |
| 10817606 | Vincent | Oct 2020 | B1 |
| 10826931 | Quan et al. | Nov 2020 | B1 |
| 10826933 | Ismael et al. | Nov 2020 | B1 |
| 10834107 | Paithane et al. | Nov 2020 | B1 |
| 10846117 | Steinberg | Nov 2020 | B1 |
| 10848397 | Siddiqui et al. | Nov 2020 | B1 |
| 10848521 | Thioux et al. | Nov 2020 | B1 |
| 10855700 | Jeyaraman et al. | Dec 2020 | B1 |
| 10868818 | Rathor et al. | Dec 2020 | B1 |
| 10872151 | Kumar et al. | Dec 2020 | B1 |
| 10873597 | Mehra et al. | Dec 2020 | B1 |
| 10887328 | Paithane et al. | Jan 2021 | B1 |
| 10893059 | Aziz et al. | Jan 2021 | B1 |
| 10893068 | Khalid et al. | Jan 2021 | B1 |
| 10902117 | Singh et al. | Jan 2021 | B1 |
| 10902119 | Vashisht et al. | Jan 2021 | B1 |
| 10904286 | Liu | Jan 2021 | B1 |
| 10929266 | Goradia et al. | Feb 2021 | B1 |
| 20020038430 | Edwards et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020091819 | Melchione et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020095607 | Lin-Hendel | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020169952 | DiSanto et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184528 | Shevenell et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188887 | Largman et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030084318 | Schertz | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030188190 | Aaron et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030191957 | Hypponen et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20040015712 | Szor | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040019832 | Arnold et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040117478 | Triulzi et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040117624 | Brandt et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040236963 | Danford et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040255161 | Cavanaugh | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040268147 | Wiederin et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050021740 | Bar et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050086523 | Zimmer et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091513 | Mitomo et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050108562 | Khazan et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050125195 | Brendel | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050149726 | Joshi et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050157662 | Bingham et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050238005 | Chen et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050262562 | Gassoway | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050283839 | Cowbum | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060010495 | Cohen et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060015715 | Anderson | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060015747 | Van de Ven | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060021029 | Brickell et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060031476 | Mathes et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060070130 | Costea et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060117385 | Mester et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060123477 | Raghavan et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060150249 | Gassen et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060161987 | Levy-Yurista | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060173992 | Weber et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060191010 | Benjamin | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060242709 | Seinfeld et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060251104 | Koga | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060288417 | Bookbinder et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070006288 | Mayfield et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070006313 | Porras et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070011174 | Takaragi et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070016951 | Piccard et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070064689 | Shin et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070143827 | Nicodemus et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070157306 | Elrod et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070192858 | Lum | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070208822 | Wang et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070240218 | Fuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070240220 | Fuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070240222 | Fuvell et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20070250930 | Aziz et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20080005782 | Aziz | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080040710 | Chiriac | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080072326 | Danford et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080077793 | Fan et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080134334 | Kim et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080141376 | Clausen et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080184367 | McMillan et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080189787 | Arnold et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080307524 | Singh et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20080320594 | Jiang | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090003317 | Kasralikar et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090064332 | Porras et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090083855 | Apap et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090125976 | Wassermann et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090126015 | Monastyrsky et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090144823 | Lamastra et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090158430 | Borders | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090172815 | Gu et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090198651 | Shiffer et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090198670 | Shiffer et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090198689 | Frazier et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090199274 | Frazier et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090241190 | Todd et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090300589 | Watters et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100017546 | Poo et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100030996 | Butler, II | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100058474 | Hicks | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100077481 | Polyakov et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100115621 | Staniford et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100132038 | Zaitsev | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100154056 | Smith et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100192223 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100281542 | Stolfo et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20110078794 | Manni et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110093951 | Aziz | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110099633 | Aziz | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110099635 | Silberman et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110167493 | Song et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110173213 | Frazier et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110178942 | Watters et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110219450 | McDougal et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110225624 | Sawhney et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110247072 | Staniford et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110307954 | Melnik et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110307955 | Kaplan et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110307956 | Yermakov et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20110314546 | Aziz et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20120117652 | Manni et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120174186 | Aziz et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120174218 | McCoy et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120210423 | Friedrichs et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120222121 | Staniford et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120233698 | Watters et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
| 20120278886 | Luna | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120331553 | Aziz et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
| 20130036472 | Aziz | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130047257 | Aziz | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130097706 | Titonis et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130185795 | Winn et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130227691 | Aziz et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130232577 | Watters et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130247186 | LeMasters | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130282426 | Watters et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130291109 | Staniford et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130318038 | Shiffer et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130318073 | Shiffer et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325791 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325792 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325871 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325872 | Shiffer et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140032875 | Butler | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140181131 | Ross | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20140189687 | Jung et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140189866 | Shiffer et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140189882 | Jung et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140237600 | Silberman et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
| 20140280245 | Wilson | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140283037 | Sikorski et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140283063 | Thompson et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140297494 | Watters et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
| 20140337836 | Ismael | Nov 2014 | A1 |
| 20140344926 | Cunningham et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
| 20140366118 | Yin | Dec 2014 | A1 |
| 20140380473 | Bu et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
| 20140380474 | Paithane et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
| 20150007312 | Pidathala et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150096022 | Vincent et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150096023 | Mesdaq et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150096024 | Haq et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150096025 | Ismael | Apr 2015 | A1 |
| 20150180886 | Staniford et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150186645 | Aziz et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150199513 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150199531 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150199532 | Ismael et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| 20150220735 | Paithane et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150372980 | Eyada | Dec 2015 | A1 |
| 20160004869 | Ismael et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160006756 | Ismael et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160044000 | Cunningham | Feb 2016 | A1 |
| 20160127393 | Aziz et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
| 20160191547 | Zafar et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160191550 | Ismael et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160241580 | Watters et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160241581 | Watters et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160261612 | Mesdaq et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
| 20160285914 | Singh et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
| 20160301703 | Aziz | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20160323295 | Joram et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
| 20160335110 | Paithane et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
| 20170083703 | Abbasi et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
| 20180013770 | Ismael | Jan 2018 | A1 |
| 20180048660 | Paithane et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
| 20180069891 | Watters et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
| 20180121316 | Ismael et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
| 20180288077 | Siddiqui et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
| 20190104154 | Kumar et al. | Apr 2019 | A1 |
| 20190132334 | Johns et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
| 20190207966 | Vashisht et al. | Jul 2019 | A1 |
| 20190207967 | Vashisht et al. | Jul 2019 | A1 |
| 20200184045 | Mills | Jun 2020 | A1 |
| 20200252428 | Gardezi et al. | Aug 2020 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2439806 | Jan 2008 | GB |
| 2490431 | Oct 2012 | GB |
| 0206928 | Jan 2002 | WO |
| 0223805 | Mar 2002 | WO |
| 2007117636 | Oct 2007 | WO |
| 2008041950 | Apr 2008 | WO |
| 2011084431 | Jul 2011 | WO |
| 2011112348 | Sep 2011 | WO |
| 2012075336 | Jun 2012 | WO |
| 2012145066 | Oct 2012 | WO |
| 2013067505 | May 2013 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| “Mining Specification of Malicious Behavior”—Jha et al., UCSB, Sep. 2007 https://www.cs.ucsb.edu/.about.chris/research/doc/esec07.sub.--mining.pdf-. |
| “Network Security: NetDetector—Network Intrusion Forensic System (NIFS) Whitepaper”, (“NetDetector Whitepaper”), (2003). |
| “When Virtual is Better Than Real”, IEEEXplore Digital Library, available at, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.sp?reload=true&arnumbe- r=990073, (Dec. 7, 2013). |
| Abdullah, et al., Visualizing Network Data for Intrusion Detection, 2005 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security, pp. 100-108. |
| Adetoye, Adedayo , et al., “Network Intrusion Detection & Response System”, (“Adetoye”), (Sep. 2003). |
| Apostolopoulos, George; hassapis, Constantinos; “V-eM: A cluster of Virtual Machines for Robust, Detailed, and High-Performance Network Emulation”, 14th IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, Sep. 11-14, 2006, pp. 117-126. |
| Aura, Tuomas, “Scanning electronic documents for personally identifiable information”, Proceedings of the 5th ACM workshop on Privacy in electronic society. ACM, 2006. |
| Baecher, “The Nepenthes Platform: An Efficient Approach to collect Malware”, Springer-verlag Berlin Heidelberg, (2006), pp. 165-184. |
| Bayer, et al., “Dynamic Analysis of Malicious Code”, J Comput Virol, Springer-Verlag, France., (2006), pp. 67-77. |
| Boubalos, Chris , “extracting syslog data out of raw pcap dumps, seclists.org, Honeypots mailing list archives”, available at http://seclists.org/honeypots/2003/q2/319 (“Boubalos”), (Jun. 5, 2003). |
| Chaudet, C., et al., “Optimal Positioning of Active and Passive Monitoring Devices”, International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Conference on Emerging Network Experiment and Technology, CoNEXT '05, Toulousse, France, (Oct. 2005), pp. 71-82. |
| Chen, P. M. and Noble, B. D., “When Virtual is Better Than Real, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science”, University of Michigan (“Chen”) (2001). |
| Cisco “Intrusion Prevention for the Cisco ASA 5500-x Series” Data Sheet (2012). |
| Cohen, M.I. , “PyFlag—An advanced network forensic framework”, Digital investigation 5, Elsevier, (2008), pp. S112-S120. |
| Costa, M. , et al., “Vigilante: End-to-End Containment of Internet Worms”, SOSP '05, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., Brighton U.K., (Oct. 23-26, 2005). |
| Didier Stevens, “Malicious PDF Documents Explained”, Security & Privacy, IEEE, IEEE Service Center, Los Alamitos, CA, US, vol. 9, No. 1, Jan. 1, 2011, pp. 80-82, XP011329453, ISSN: 1540-7993, DOI: 10 1109/MSP.2011.14. |
| Distler, “Malware Analysis: An Introduction”, SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room, SANS Institute, (2007). |
| Dunlap, George W., et al., “ReVirt: Enabling Intrusion Analysis through Virtual-Machine Logging and Replay”, Proceeding of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX Association, (“Dunlap”), (Dec. 9, 2002). |
| FireEye Malware Analysis & Exchange Network, Malware Protection System, FireEye Inc., 2010. |
| FireEye Malware Analysis, Modern Malware Forensics, FireEye Inc., 2010. |
| FireEye v.6.0 Security Target, pp. 1-35, Version 1.1, FireEye Inc., May 2011. |
| Goel, et al., Reconstructing System State for Intrusion Analysis, Apr. 2008 SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, vol. 42 Issue 3, pp. 21-28. |
| Gregg Keizer: “Microsoft's HoneyMonkeys Show Patching Windows Works”, Aug. 8, 2005, XP055143386, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://www.informationweek.com/microsofts-honeymonkeys-show-patching-windows-works/d/d-id/1035069? [retrieved on Jun. 1, 2016]. |
| Heng Yin et al, Panorama: Capturing System-Wide Information Flow for Malware Detection and Analysis, Research Showcase @ CMU, Carnegie Mellon University, 2007. |
| Hiroshi Shinotsuka, Malware Authors Using New Techniques to Evade Automated Threat Analysis Systems, Oct. 26, 2012, http://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/, pp. 1-4. |
| Idika et al., A-Survey-of-Malware-Detection-Techniques, Feb. 2, 2007, Department of Computer Science, Purdue University. |
| Isohara, Takamasa, Keisuke Takemori, and Ayumu Kubota. “Kernel-based behavior analysis for android malware detection.” Computational intelligence and Security (CIS), 2011 Seventh International Conference on. IEEE, 2011. |
| Kaeo, Merike , “Designing Network Security”, (“Kaeo”), (Nov. 2003). |
| Kevin A Roundy et al: “Hybrid Analysis and Control of Malware”, Sep. 15, 2010, Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 317-338, XP019150454 ISBN:978-3-642-15511-6. |
| Khaled Salah et al: “Using Cloud Computing to Implement a Security Overlay Network”, SECURITY & Privacy, IEEE, IEEE Service Center, Los Alamitos, CA, US, vol. 11, No. 1, Jan. 1, 2013 (Jan. 1, 2013). |
| Kim, H. , et al., “Autograph: Toward Automated, Distributed Worm Signature Detection”, Proceedings of the 13th Usenix Security Symposium (Security 2004), San Diego, (Aug. 2004), pp. 271-286. |
| King, Samuel T., et al., “Operating System Support for Virtual Machines”, (“King”), (2003). |
| Kreibich, C. , et al., “Honeycomb-Creating Intrusion Detection Signatures Using Honeypots”, 2nd Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-11), Boston, USA, (2003). |
| Kristoff, J. , “Botnets, Detection and Mitigation: DNS-Based Techniques”, NU Security Day, (2005), 23 pages. |
| Lastline Labs, The Threat of Evasive Malware, Feb. 25, 2013, Lastline Labs, pp. 1-8. |
| Li et al., A VMM-Based System Call Interposition Framework for Program Monitoring, Dec. 2010, IEEE 16th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems, pp. 706-711. |
| Lindorfer, Martina, Clemens Kolbitsch, and Paolo Milani Comparetti. “Detecting environment-sensitive malware.” Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011. |
| Marchette, David J., “Computer Intrusion Detection and Network Monitoring: A Statistical Viewpoint”, (“Marchette”), (2001). |
| Moore, D. , et al., “Internet Quarantine: Requirements for Containing Self-Propagating Code”, INFOCOM, vol. 3, (Mar. 30-Apr. 3, 2003), pp. 1901-1910. |
| Morales, Jose A., et al., ““Analyzing and exploiting network behaviors of malware.””, Security and Privacy in Communication Networks. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. 20-34. |
| Mori, Detecting Unknown Computer Viruses, 2004, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. |
| Natvig, Kurt , “SANDBOXII: Internet”, Virus Bulletin Conference, (“Natvig”), (Sep. 2002). |
| NetBIOS Working Group. Protocol Standard fora NetBIOS Service on a TCP/UDP transport: Concepts and Methods. STD 19, RFC 1001, Mar. 1987. |
| Newsome, J. , et al., “Dynamic Taint Analysis for Automatic Detection, Analysis, and Signature Generation of Exploits on Commodity Software”, In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security, Symposium (NDSS '05), (Feb. 2005). |
| Nojiri, D., et al., “Cooperation Response Strategies for Large Scale Attack Mitigation”, DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition, vol. 1, (Apr. 22-24, 2003), pp. 293-302. |
| Oberheide et al., CloudAV.sub.—N-Version Antivirus in the Network Cloud, 17th USENIX Security Symposium USENIX Security '08 Jul. 28-Aug. 1, 2008 San Jose, CA. |
| Reiner Sailer, Enriquillo Valdez, Trent Jaeger, Roonald Perez, Leendertvan Doorn, John Linwood Griffin, Stefan Berger., sHype: Secure Hypervisor Appraoch to Trusted Virtualized Systems (Feb. 2, 2005) (“Sailer”). |
| Silicon Defense, “Worm Containment in the Internal Network”, (Mar. 2003), pp. 1-25. |
| Singh, S. , et al., “Automated Worm Fingerprinting”, Proceedings of the ACM/USENIX Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation, San Francisco, California, (Dec. 2004). |
| Thomas H. Ptacek, and Timothy N. Newsham , “Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection”, Secure Networks, (“Ptacek”), (Jan. 1998). |
| Venezia, Paul, “NetDetector Captures Intrusions”, InfoWorld Issue 27, (“Venezia”), (Jul. 14, 2003). |
| Vladimir Getov: “Security as a Service in Smart Clouds—Opportunities and Concerns”, Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), 2012 IEEE 36th Annual, IEEE, Jul. 16, 2012 (Jul. 16, 2012). |
| Wahid et al., Characterising the Evolution in Scanning Activity of Suspicious Hosts, Oct. 2009, Third International Conference on Network and System Security, pp. 344-350. |
| Whyte, et al., “DNS-Based Detection of Scanning Works in an Enterprise Network”, Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, (Feb. 2005), 15 pages. |
| Williamson, Matthew M., “Throttling Viruses: Restricting Propagation to Defeat Malicious Mobile Code”, ACSAC Conference, Las Vegas, NV, USA, (Dec. 2002), pp. 1-9. |
| Yuhei Kawakoya et al: “Memory behavior-based automatic malware unpacking in stealth debugging environment”, Malicious and Unwanted Software (Malware), 2010 5th International Conference on, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, Oct. 19, 2010, pp. 39-46, XP031833827, ISBN:978-1-4244-8-9353-1. |
| Zhang et al., The Effects of Threading, Infection Time, and Multiple-Attacker Collaboration on Malware Propagation, Sep. 2009, IEEE 28th International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, pp. 73-82. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 62824300 | Mar 2019 | US |
