System and method for scanning remote services to locate stored objects with malware

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11368475
  • Patent Number
    11,368,475
  • Date Filed
    Friday, December 21, 2018
    5 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, June 21, 2022
    2 years ago
Abstract
A system and method for retrieval and analysis of stored objects for malware is described. The method involves receiving a scan request message from a customer to conduct analytics on one or more objects stored within a third-party controlled service. In response to receipt of the scan request message, the system generates a redirect message. The redirect message redirects the customer to an authentication portal of the third-party controlled service operating as a logon page and configures receipt by the system of access credentials for the third-party controlled service upon verification of the customer. Using the access credentials, the system is able to retrieve the one or more objects using the access credentials and performing analytics on each object of the one or more objects to classify each object as malicious or benign.
Description
FIELD

Embodiments of the disclosure relate to the field of cybersecurity. More specifically, one embodiment of the disclosure relates to a comprehensive cybersecurity system configured to access and analyze objects, stored within one or more remote services, for malware.


GENERAL BACKGROUND

Cybersecurity attacks have become a pervasive problem for organizations as many electronic devices within an enterprise network have been subjected to attack and compromised. A cybersecurity attack (sometimes referred to as a “cyberattack”) constitutes a threat to security of an electronic device or a network itself caused by infiltration of content, such as executable (e.g., script, one or more commands, program, etc.) for example, with the intent to perpetrate unwanted, malicious or criminal activity. This type of content is generally referred to as “malware.” Upon infiltration, the malware may lay dormant until activated in response to an activity by an unsuspecting user, such as opening an electronic mail (email) message, opening an attachment, or selecting a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) link.


Recently, email messages have become a significant cybersecurity threat vector for circumventing cybersecurity defenses to infect an electronic device connected to a network. Commonly, email cybersecurity solutions analyze email messages for cybersecurity risk (i) during transit to or upon receipt by an email server, or (ii) when the email message is being “opened” by an email client application being controlled by a user. Such email cybersecurity solutions do not analyze and detect resident malicious email messages (e.g., previously received email messages including malware) currently residing in user mailboxes. Stated differently, conventional cybersecurity solutions fail to offer any ability to analyze, for malware, any email messages already received, stored and allocated to different user mailboxes by an email server prior to installation of the cybersecurity solution or where malicious email messages evade cybersecurity defenses due to ineffective (inadequate or out of date) detection definitions. The conventional cybersecurity solutions are directed to monitoring and analyzing received incoming email messages for malware, not analyzing email messages already residing in the email server.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

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:



FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of a retroactive malicious detection system (RMDS).



FIG. 2 is an exemplary embodiment of a registration process for the retroactive malware detection system (RMDS) of FIG. 1.



FIG. 3 is an exemplary embodiment of frontend and backend logic deployed within the retroactive malicious detection system (RMDS) of FIG. 1.



FIG. 4 is a more detailed, exemplary embodiment of the backend logic of the retroactive malware detection system (RMDS) of FIG. 3.



FIG. 5 is an embodiment of an exemplary architecture of the retroactive malware detection system (RMDS) of FIGS. 3-4.



FIGS. 6A-6B are an exemplary flowchart of the operations conducted by the retroactive malware detection system (RMDS) of FIG. 1 in performing analytics on the stored objects to detect a presence of malware.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Embodiments of the present disclosure generally relate to a cybersecurity system and method that, depending on the embodiment, secures requisite credentials to retrieve stored objects (e.g., email messages, files, etc.) from a remote service to analyze whether the stored objects may include malware. As defined below, a remote service may correspond to a cloud-based hosted service by a third-party provider. For example, the remote service may operate as a cloud-based hosted service such as a cloud-based file data store (e.g. Dropbox), a cloud-based email and document data store (e.g., Microsoft® Office 365), a cloud-based server infrastructure service (e.g., Amazon Web Services “AWS” or Microsoft® Azure), or the like. Given the flexibility and cost savings offered by cloud-based hosted services, a greater number of companies are migrating to these services. In doing so, the protection of the stored data from malware infection is solely dependent on the security features deployed by the remote service, which may be devoid of advanced malware detection.


In particular, requests initiated from the cybersecurity system to a remote service, such as a scan request message directed to a particular type of cloud-based hosted service for example, is designed to gain access to its proprietary framework and retrieve objects based on presented customer information and received customer authorization. The customer authorization is provided to the cybersecurity system, thereby granting access to the retrieval of objects located in the remote service. The object may include email messages, documents, information for connectivity to cloud-based infrastructure, or the like.


Herein, as the number and sophistication of cyberattacks grows, subscribers to cloud-based hosted services are deeply concerned about the privacy and safety of their data. To address these concerns, there is a growing, yet unfulfilled need, for a secondary layer of defense in which customers (or subscribers) utilize their own selected data processing mechanisms, such as the cybersecurity system described below, to analyze their own stored data for malware that, if downloaded, may compromise their networks and/or resources. To gain access to the remote services, such as the cloud-based hosted services described herein, the cybersecurity system obtains the requisite credentials to access the remote service and retrieve stored otherwise present in one or more customer's hosted remote services, such as a cloud-based email service. Upon receipt of the objects, the cybersecurity system submits all or a subset of the retrieved objects to one or more resources that perform analytics on the submitted objects, aggregates results from the analytics, and generates a report based on the analytics of these submitted objects.


As an illustrative embodiment, the cybersecurity system may be configured to (i) retrieve objects (e.g., email messages) from a selected remote service hosting one or more electronic mailboxes and (ii) perform selective analytics on all or a subset of the retrieved email messages (hereinafter, “submitted email messages”) in an attempt to detect whether any of the submitted email messages includes malware. In particular, the cybersecurity system, referred to as a “retroactive malicious detection system” (RMDS), identifies a remote service hosting the one or more electronic mailboxes for analysis and retrieves email messages maintained in the hosted electronic mailbox(es) based on permitted access to the remote service using acquired access credentials. Thereafter, the RMDS optionally performs a filtering operation to reduce the number of retrieved email message to a particular subset of “suspicious” email messages, and thereafter, submits each of the subset of “suspicious” email messages to one or more analytic engines for analysis. The selection of the analytic engines may vary, depending on the type of object (e.g., email, file, document, image, etc.), the type of remote service from which the email messages were retrieved (e.g., cloud-based email service, email server, remote file system, etc.), and/or the type of customer issuing the scan request message causing retrieval of the email messages.


The RMDS further performs a correlation of the analytic results directed to the same email message from different analytic engines. This correlation may involve aggregating results from the different analytic engines, where the results include meta-information and other context information gathered during analysis of the email message for malware, along with meta-information associated with the email message prior to submission to the analytic engines. Depending, at least in part, on meta-information obtained from the scan request message that prompted retrieval of the email message (e.g., an identifier assigned to the customer that may imply reason for the scan, etc.), the RMDS may correlate the analytic results differently to account for a different report format.


For example, a scan request message initiated by a customer (e.g., any authorized user of the RMDS such as a subscriber, an cyber-incident investigation and response (IR) team member, etc.) may request analytics to be conducted by all analytic engines and all meta-information generated from the analytics is captured and returned to the RMDS. Upon detecting the IR team identifier as the source initiating the scan request message, the RMDS may perform a more comprehensive aggregation and meta-information retention scheme of the analytic results than normal because the meta-information is also being used to detect susceptibility of the remote service to an attack. This may contradict aggregation and meta-information retention schemes conducted by the RMDS during a periodic scan, where the customer identifier may cause the RMDS to utilize a lesser number of analytic engines or capture and aggregate a lesser amount of meta-information (e.g., timestamp, email source, email title, etc.) for use in classification.


Lastly, the RMDS further classifies the email message as “malicious” or “benign” based on the correlated analytic results from potentially multiple analytic engine(s), which may include aggregating meta-information and other context information received from the multiple analytic engines and weighting the analytic results based on classification rules established for the current threat landscape. The classification rules may be updated on a periodic or aperiodic basis. The context information associated with the email message is organized into a prescribed format, perhaps depending on the customer that initiated the scan request message, that facilitates generation of a malware detection report output from the RMDS. The malware detection report at least identifies the malicious email messages stored within the remote email service along with the context information, such as meta-information associated with the malicious email messages (e.g., customer identifier, source address such as IP address or contents of “FROM:” field, time of receipt, or the like). The malicious detection report (or information within the report) may be provided as an alert to the customer to notify of the presence of malware and response to customer requests to mitigate the malware (e.g., delete email, disinfect, quarantine, etc.) and/or alert the third party platform provider to assist in the mitigation of the malware infection, if necessary.


Hence, the RMDS may be configured to provide an interface for receipt of credentials to access a set of (e.g., one or more) remotely hosted electronic mailboxes. Alternatively, in some embodiments, the RMDS may be configured to exchange authorization tokens (OAuth) with a third-party controlled web server for granting access to at least a set of (e.g., one or more) user mailboxes. The RMDS may generate, based on a classification of the email messages in the authorized set of user mailboxes, a malware detection report describing (i) the classification of each mailbox of the set of authorized mailboxes, (ii) the classification of each email message within the set of authorized mailboxes, and/or (iii) the malicious classification of email message(s) within the set of authorized mailboxes.


In some embodiments, the RMDS may dynamically scale up or down the number of available analytic engines in order to improve and/or maintain throughput as well as preserve analytic resources for specified classes of customers (e.g., trial customers allocated lesser analytic resources than paid subscribers, etc.). Similarly, the RMDS may monitor system properties of the RMDS and limit analyses where certain thresholds and/or traits (e.g. number of subscribers, number of email messages queued for analytics, etc.) are exceeded.


Embodiments of the above-described cybersecurity system (RMDS) are directed to handling email message analytics. However, the RMDS may be applicable to coordinating analytics and reporting of the analytic results for other types of object besides email messages, such as files residing in cloud stored file repositories, stored images and/or videos, or the like.


I. Terminology


In the following description, certain terminology is used to describe aspects of the invention. In certain situations, each of the terms “logic” or “engine” is 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 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 executable code 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 network (e.g., Internet), a private network (e.g., a wireless data telecommunication network, a local area network “LAN”, etc.), or a combination of networks. 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 an endpoint device (e.g., a laptop, a smartphone, a tablet, a desktop computer, a netbook, gaming console, a medical device, or any general-purpose or special-purpose, user-controlled electronic device).


The term “meta-information” generally refers to a collection of information associated with an object (e.g., an email message or a portion of the email message; a file or portion of the file, etc.), which may be received from a plurality of remote services (e.g., cloud-based hosted service including one of a cloud-based email service, cloud-based file data store, cloud-based email service, email server, etc.). For example, the meta-information may include information pertaining to a source of a request for an object as provided from a remote service (e.g., customer identifier, device identifier, etc.) and information pertaining to the object (and analyses associated with the object), as described below. Each object may be initially determined to be of an unknown classification (e.g., not previously analyzed or analyzed with inconclusive results), and after an analysis, the object may be determined to be a known classification (e.g., benign or malicious). This classification of an object is referred to as rendering a “verdict.”


One type of meta-information is referred to as “consolidated meta-information,” including the collection of meta-information pertaining to an object that may analyzed by a single analytic engine or different analytic engines. The consolidated meta-information for an object under analysis may include, but is not limited or restricted to any or all of the following: (a) distinctive metadata pertaining to the object (e.g., hash value, checksum, or other identifier (ID) for an object); (b) one or more verdicts rendered for the object; (c) a timestamp associated with each verdict; (d) a consolidated verdict that is determined based on an aggregate (unweighted or weighted) of verdicts rendered for the object from one or more analytic engines; and/or (e) information directed to the source of the object (e.g., source identifier, etc.).


The term “object” generally refers to content in the form of an item of information having a logical structure or organization that enables it to be classified for purposes of analysis for malware. One example of the object may include an email message or a portion of the email message. Another example of the object may include a storage file or a document such as a Portable Document Format (PDF) document, a word processing document such as Word® document, or other information that may be subjected to cybersecurity analysis. The object may also include an executable such as an application, program, code segment, a script, dynamic link library “dll,” URL link, or any other element having a format that can be directly executed or interpreted by logic within the electronic device.


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); iMESSAGE; 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 briefly described above, the term “malware” may be broadly construed as malicious software that can cause a malicious communication or activity that initiates or furthers an attack (hereinafter, “cyber-attack”). Malware may prompt or cause unauthorized, unexpected, anomalous, unintended and/or unwanted behaviors (generally “attack-oriented behaviors”) or operations constituting a security compromise of information infrastructure. For instance, malware may correspond to a type of malicious computer code that, upon execution and as an illustrative example, takes advantage of a vulnerability in a network, network device or software, for example, to gain unauthorized access, harm or co-opt operation of a network device or misappropriate, modify or delete data. Alternatively, as another illustrative example, malware may correspond to information (e.g., executable code, script(s), data, command(s), etc.) that is designed to cause a network device to experience attack-oriented behaviors. The attack-oriented behaviors may include a communication-based anomaly or an execution-based anomaly, which, for example, could (1) alter the functionality of a network device in an atypical and unauthorized manner; and/or (2) provide unwanted functionality which may be generally acceptable in another context.


A “remote service” may correspond to a “cloud-based hosted service” or a “hosted service”. A cloud-based hosted service may be generally interpreted to be a multi-tenant service made available to users on demand via a public network (e.g., Internet) from one or more cloud computing provider's servers. These servers may include virtual partitions to separate data maintained on behalf of the user in efforts to protect the security and privacy of the data. A “hosted service” may be generally interpreted as a single-tenant service provided by a company's own on-premises servers, which may be hosted by a third-party provider responsible for server management or by an administrator for the company. 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 two items where one of the items may include content within meta-information associated with the object.


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.


II. Retroactive Malicious Detection System (RMDS)


Referring to FIG. 1, a block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of a retroactive malicious detection system (RMDS) 100 is shown. Herein, the operations of the RMDS 100 are directed toward the retrieval and analysis of objects from any of a plurality of third-party controlled, remote services 1101-110N, such as a first email cloud-based service 1101 hosted by Microsoft® Azure®, a second email cloud-based service 1102 hosted by Amazon® Web Services, a data repository 1103, an email server 1104, or the like. As described herein, the objects may include stored email messages, although the RMDS 100 may be configured to support retrieval and analysis of other types of stored objects (e.g., files, videos, images, documents, etc.).


As shown in FIG. 1, for this embodiment of the disclosure, the RMDS 100 may include content fulfillment logic 120, content acquisition logic 150, content analysis logic 170, and reporting logic 190. The content fulfillment logic 120 is configured to generate a redirect message 130 in response to a scan request message 125. The scan request message 125 corresponds to a request initiated by an electronic device associated with a customer to conduct analytics on content maintained at a remote service (e.g., a cloud-based email service) 1101. The individual customer and/or the electronic device controlled by the customer may be referred to herein as the “customer” 105.


According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the redirect message 130 may include a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) link that, when selected, redirects the customer 105 to an authentication portal 135. For this embodiment, the authentication portal 135 may operate as (i) a logon page that may be provided by the remote service 1101 (as shown) in order to gain access to its stored contents or (ii) a logon page associated with a trusted third-party web service account (e.g., FaceBook® account, Google® Gmail, DropBox®, etc.) whose authentication is recognized by the remote service 1101. The logon page is provided to allow the customer 105 to enter her or his credentials for confirmation by credential verification logic (not shown), which may be hosted at a server associated with the trusted third-party or at a server associated with the remote service 1101.


The redirected URL link may further include address information associated with the RMDS 100 (or an identifier described below) for use by the credential verification logic (or logic operating in concert with the credential verification logic) to return information (e.g., credential token 140) upon authentication of the consumer 105. In particular, for this embodiment of the disclosure, upon receipt and verification of the customer credentials, the credential verification logic of the remote service 1101 extracts address information for the RMDS 100 included in the redirected URL link and returns the credential token 140 directly to the RMDS 100.


In another similar embodiment, the permitted acquisition of the credential token 140 by the RMDS 100 may be accomplished through an OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework or a similar framework. For example, the RMDS 100 (or an administrator for the RMDS 100) may register itself as logic that is authorized to operate as an agent for the customer 105 (and other customers) to gain access to stored data pertaining to the customer within the remote service 1101. During registration, the RMDS 100 (or the administrator) provides one or more network addresses upon which any issued credentials (e.g., credential token 140) for accessing stored content within the remote service 1101 is directed. Upon registration, the RMDS 100 may be assigned an identifier by the remote service 1101. Thereafter, the redirect message 130, generated (or prompted) by the RMDS 100 in response to the scan request message 125 seeking authorization to access the stored content within the remote service 1101 to perform a malware analysis, may include the identifier for the RMDS 100. The identifier may be used by the remote service 1101 to identify a hosted application (e.g., whole or part of RMDS 100) seeking authorization to access the stored data (on behalf of the customer). For some embodiments, the RMDS 100 receives a returned response, which may include a result of the authentication of the customer (Success/Failure) and the credential token 140.


Upon receipt of the credential token 140, the content acquisition logic 150 may obtain requisite objects 160 from the particular remote service 1101. As shown, the RMDS 100 may be communicatively coupled to the plurality of remote services 1101-110N. The receipt of the credential token 140 enables the RMDS 100 to recover objects 160 from the remote service 1101, namely as email messages 160 from one or more user mailboxes maintained within the first cloud-based email service 1101 for the customer.


Upon receipt of email messages 160 retrieved from the first cloud-based email service 1101, the content acquisition logic 150 analyzes the content of each email message in accordance with object evaluation rules 155 loaded into the RMDS 100 or accessible to the content acquisition logic 150 from a remote source. When operating in accordance with the object evaluation rules 155, the content acquisition logic 150 determines whether any of the recovered email messages 160 is deemed to be “suspicious,” namely the email message includes characteristics that encourage further analysis by one or more analytic engines (described below). For example, the object evaluation rules 155, when processed, may identify that any email message including a URL is identified as a “suspicious” email message. Similarly, the object evaluation rules 155, when processed, may identify that any email message including an attachment less than a prescribed size (e.g., in kilobytes) is a “suspicious” email message. The suspicious email messages may be stored in a local data store 165 for subsequent access by the content analysis logic 170. The non-suspicious emails are removed from further analysis.


The content analysis logic 170 may include one or more analytic engines (M≥1), which perform analytics on the suspicious email messages to produce results that are gathered as consolidated meta-information 180 (described below) by analytics correlation logic being part of the content analysis logic 170. The analytics correlation logic organizes the consolidated meta-information 180 from the “M” analytic engines and provides this information to analytics classification logic also being part of the content analysis logic 170. The analytics classification logic determines whether the object is malicious or benign, where such determinations along with at least portions of the consolidated meta-information 180 is provided to the reporting logic 190 for output.


III. RMDS Registration Process


Referring now to FIG. 2, a block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of a registration process for the RMDS of FIG. 1 is shown. The RMDS 100 may be configured as a subscription service, where a customer registers with an enrollment service 200 provided by the RMDS 100. The enrollment service 200 may be configured as (i) a daemon process running in the background where RMDS 100 corresponds to a web-based application or (ii) logic providing certain functionality to the RMDS 100. The enrollment service 200 collects a user name, organization details, administrative details, or other data to uniquely identify a particular customer to the RMDS 100. Additionally, the enrollment service 200 may generate one or more displayable elements 210 (e.g., pop-ups, web pages, etc.) to gather customer preferences 220. These preferences 220 may identify the scan targets 230 such as any of the remote services to which scanning (e.g., analysis of stored objects) is available. The remote services 1101-110N (e.g., first cloud-based email service 1101, file depository 1103, etc.) may be identified by indicia (e.g., trademark) and/or text characters. Additionally, the preferences 220 may identify (i) scanning preferences 250 such as periodicity of any automated scanning 252 with selectable scan time periods 254 or a prescribed advanced scanning time 256 (e.g., with selectable date/hour 258), and/or (ii) analytic engine preferences 260 (described below) selected by the customer for objects retrieved from a particular remote service 1101-110N or selected by a preselected default setting based at least on the particular type of retrieved object, and/or (iii) a selected network address 270 for use in transmission of malware detection reports after analytics are conducted on the retrieved objects, or the like.


IV. RMDS Internal Architecture


Referring now to FIG. 3, an exemplary embodiment of the logic deployed within the retroactive malicious detection system (RMDS) 100 of FIG. 1 is shown. The RMDS 100 includes front-end logic 300 and back-end logic 350. Herein, according to one embodiment of the disclosure, the front-end logic 300 includes the content fulfillment logic 120 of FIG. 1. Featuring access control logic 310 and management logic 330, the content fulfillment logic 120 is configured to receive the incoming scan request message 125 from the particular customer that requests scanning (analysis) of objects within a particular remote service, such as analytics directed to email messages stored within the first cloud-based email service 1101 to detect the presence of any malicious email messages. For this example, the customer may operate as an incident response provider that conducts a scan (analytics) of stored email messages within a particular user mailbox or multiple user mailboxes to trace a detected cyberattack back to its source. As another example, the customer may operate as a subscriber to a paid subscription service offered by the RMDS 100, where the scan (analytics) may correspond to a fee-based scan directed to one or more user mailboxes identified by the scan, where the fee may be computed based on the number of mailboxes scanned or the number of email message retrieved for analysis. The scope of the scan may be defined by search parameters set forth in the scan request message 125 or selected upon registration as shown in FIG. 2.


The access control logic 310 is responsible for determining how to access content associated with the scan request message 125. This determination may be based on what remote service is to be accessed in retrieval of the objects for analytics and/or the type of objects being analyzed. For instance, where the scan request message 125 is directed to conducting analytics on email messages within one or more Microsoft® Office 365® email accounts for a particular individual or group of individuals hosted by the first cloud-based email service 1101, the access control logic 310 may control certain authentication operations and/or access to particular application programming interfaces (APIs) to obtain credentials for the back-end logic 350 to access these Microsoft® (Outlook) email accounts. Alternatively, where the scan request message 125 is directed to conducting analytics on email messages maintained within one or more Google® mail (Gmail) accounts for a particular individual or group of individuals hosted by the second cloud-based email service 1102, the access control logic 310 may control certain authentication operations and access to particular APIs utilized to access content from Gmail accounts. These authentication operations may differ, in whole or in part, from the authentication operations and/or APIs utilized to access stored content in certain Microsoft® (Outlook) email accounts.


The management logic 330 is responsible for monitoring and controlling the scan operations once the access credentials (e.g., credential token) have been secured and content may be retrieved from the particular remote service. As shown in more detail in FIG. 3, the management logic 330 controls operability of rule-based content retrieval logic 400, which is responsible for retrieving objects from the remote service based on at least a portion of the object evaluation rules 155 established for object retrieval for that particular remote service. For instance, a portion of the object evaluation rules 155 utilized by the content retrieval logic 400 of FIG. 4 for retrieval of email messages from the first cloud-based email service 1101 hosted by Microsoft® Azure® may be different from a portion of the object evaluation rules 155 followed by the content retrieval logic 400 for retrieval of email messages from the second cloud-based email service 1102 hosted by Amazon® Web Services, or even an email server such as a Microsoft® Exchange® server 1104. Additionally, or in the alternative, the management logic 330 may be configured to control operability of the scanning engine 430 of FIG. 4, which is responsible for selecting analytic search engines for analyzing the object(s) retrieved from the content retrieval logic 400 and/or a local data store 410 associated with the content retrieval logic 400 being part of the back-end logic 350.


Referring now to FIG. 4, an exemplary embodiment of the backend logic 350 of the RMDS 100 is shown. For this embodiment of the disclosure, the backend logic 350 comprises (i) rule-based content retrieval logic 400, (ii) local data store 410; (iii) down filtering logic 420; (iv) scanning engine 430, (v) analytics correlation logic 440, (vi) cloud services logic 450; (vii) analytic classification logic 460; and (viii) reporting logic 190.


Herein, the rule-based, content retrieval logic 400 is configured to retrieve one or more objects from a particular remote service (e.g., second cloud-based email service 1102) of the plurality of remote services 1101-110N upon receipt of corresponding access credentials from the access control logic 310. According to this embodiment of the disclosure, depending on the scan request message 125, the content retrieval logic 400 may retrieve email messages from the second cloud-based email service 1102. For example, the scan request message 125 may request an analysis of all email messages associated with a particular user mailbox or a group of user mailboxes. Similarly, the scan request message 125 may request an analysis of a prescribed number of email messages associated with a particular user mailbox or a group of user mailboxes, or an analysis of email messages received and/or sent over a prescribed period of time (e.g., certain hour, day, or any series of days such as a particular week, month, etc.).


The content retrieval logic 400 may further perform one or more preliminary analyses in accordance with object evaluation rules 155 loaded into the RMDS 100 or accessible to the content retrieval logic 400. When operating in accordance with the object evaluation rules 155, the preliminary analyses performed by the content retrieval logic 400 may involve a determination as to whether any of the recovered email messages 160 is deemed to be “suspicious,” namely any of the recovered email messages 160 feature characteristics that are suggestive of maliciousness. Examples of certain characteristics may feature inclusion of a URL within a body portion of an email message, inclusion of an attachment, or the like. The suspicious email messages may be stored in the local data store 410 for subsequent access by the scanning engine 430. The non-suspicious email messages may be discarded and precluded from further analysis by one or more data resources, such as one or more analytic engines 4801-480M (M≥1) described below.


As an optional feature, the down filtering logic 420 may be used to further reduce the number of analyses handled by the scanning engine 430. For instance, the content retrieval logic 400 performs the preliminary analysis as a first filter of the recovered email messages 160 to eliminate email messages that are unlikely to be malicious. However, in response to the number (or rate) of email messages being stored within the local data store 410 exceeding a prescribed threshold or scanning engine 430 experiencing difficulties in maintaining a predetermined throughput, the down filtering logic 420 may be utilized as a second filter to reduce the number of email messages for analysis based on further criterion. Continuing this example, email messages with an attachment less than a prescribed memory size (e.g., in kilobytes) are maintained for analysis while email messages with an attachment greater than the prescribed memory size are discarded. The prescribed memory size may be based on the current threat landscape associated with malicious attachments.


As still shown in FIG. 4, the scanning engine 430 is configured to select one or more analytic engines 4801-480M based on meta-information collected during analytics of an email message under analysis and identified during retrieval of the email message (e.g., source identifier, subscriber identifier that may identify a class of subscriber (e.g., IR team, paid subscriber, free-trial user, etc.)). This meta-information may be used to apply limits or expand the number of analytic engines 4801-480M to be used during analytics. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the analytic engines 4801-480M may include, but are not limited or restricted to any combination of (i) a first analytic engine 4801 operating as appliance to analyze network traffic for malware; (ii) a second analytic engine 4802 operating as a cloud-based hosted service to analyze network traffic for malware; (iii) a third analytic engine 4803 to perform anti-virus analysis; and/or (iv) a fourth analytic engine 4804 operating in accordance with machine learning to identify malware based on heuristics or other historical threat detections, or the like.


As an illustrative example, the selection of the analytic engines 4801-480M may be based on customer preferences identified at registration (or subsequent modification of preferences) or may be based on default settings based on the object type and/or remote services from which the object is retrieved. As an illustrative embodiment, the first analytic engine 4801 (e.g., security appliance to analyze network traffic) does not support spam detection, while the second (cloud-based) analytic engine 4802, performing similar operations on email messages as the first analytic engine 4801, performs spam detection. Hence, if the customer prefers and desires spam detection as part of email analytics, the customer preferences may cause the scanning engine 430 to select the second (cloud-based) analytic engine 4802 over the first (appliance) analytic engine 4801.


More specifically, the scanning engine 430 receives an email message 432 queued in the local data store 410 (or directly from the content retrieval logic 400) and provides the email message 432 to one or more of the analytic engines 4801-480M. Each of the selected analytic engines 4801 . . . and/or 480M is configured to process content within the email message 432 (e.g., process the email message within a virtual machine during which an URL is selected and operations with certain web servers may be emulated, attachments may be opened, etc.). After processing of the content within the email message 432, the analytic results 435 associated with the email message 432 may be returned to the local data store 410 for subsequent forwarding to the analytics correlation logic 440 or may be forwarded to the analytics correlation logic 440 directly.


Referring still to FIG. 4, the analytics correlation logic 440 is configured to receive analytic results 435 for the email message 432 from potentially different analytic engines and conduct a correlation of the analytic results 435. The correlation may include an aggregation of analytic results from different analytic engines (e.g., analytic engines 4801 and 4804), where the analytic results include meta-information and other context information associated with the analysis of the email message 432 for malware as well as meta-information collected during retrieval of the email message 432 (e.g., customer identifier, source identifier, etc.). The collection of meta-information and context information may be referred to as “consolidated meta-information 180.”


Depending on the customer identifier, the analytics correlation logic 440 may organize the consolidated meta-information 180 differently to account for a different report format. For example, a scan request message initiated by an incident response (IR) team may request analytics to be conducted by all analytic engines 4801-480M and all meta-information generated from the analytics is captured and routed to the analytics correlation logic 440. Based on the customer identifier indicating a source of the scan request message being the IR team identifier, the analytics correlation logic 440 may aggregate the analytic results in a manner to provide a more comprehensive report given the purpose of the scan is to collect any or all meta-information that assist in determining an origin of a cyberattack. This purpose may differ from a scan request message initiated by another subscriber type (e.g., network administrator) that may favor a lesser comprehensive report that merely includes certain types of meta-information (e.g., timestamp, email source, email title, etc.) that assists a network administrator in her or his investigation of lateral movement of the malware.


The analytics correlation logic 440 may be communicatively coupled to the cloud services logic 450. The cloud services logic 450, when requested by the analytics correlation logic 440, attempts to collect additional context associated with the email message 432 under analysis or associated with any portion of the analysis results 435 associated with the email message 432. The additional context information may be included as part of consolidated meta-information 180 provided to the analytics classification logic 460.


The analytic classification logic 460 is configured to classify the email message 432 as “malicious” or “benign” based on the consolidated meta-information 180 based on classification rules 465 established for the current threat landscape. The classification rules 465 may be updated on a periodic or aperiodic basis. The analytic classification logic 460 is identifies whether the email message 432 includes malware, and if so, at least a portion of the context information 470 within the consolidated meta-information 180 is organized into a prescribed format and provided to the reporting logic 190. The reporting logic 190 renders the context information 470 into a perceivable format for conveyance to an administrator associated with the source issuing the scan request message 125. The reporting logic 190 may issue a malicious detection report (described below) or information from the malicious detection report as an alert message to the customer to notify of the presence of malware, and the RMDS 100 may respond to customer requests to mitigate the malware (e.g., delete email, disinfect, quarantine, etc.) and/or alert the remote service (e.g., second cloud-based email service 1102) to assist in the mitigation of the malware infection.


Referring to FIG. 5, an embodiment of an exemplary architecture of the RMDS 100 of FIG. 1 is shown. For this embodiment, the RMDS 100 comprises a processor 510, memory 520 including retroactive evaluation logic 525, and one or more network interfaces 530, which are coupled together by a system interconnect 540, such as a bus. In general, as described below, the retroactive evaluation logic 525, when executed by the processor 510, perform operations that include (i) secures access credentials to one or more remote services; (ii) retrieve objects (e.g., email messages, files, etc.) from a selected remote service; (iii) performs one or more filtering operation prior to providing a subset of the retrieved objects to one or more analytic engines; and (iv) perform correlation of the analytic results to classify the object and reporting of such findings.


Herein, according to one embodiment of the disclosure, the processor 510 is one or more multipurpose, programmable components that accept digital information as input, process the input information according to stored instructions, and provide results as output. One example of a processor may include an Intel® x86 central processing unit (CPU) with an instruction set architecture although other types of processors as described above may be utilized.


The memory 520 operates as system memory, which may include non-persistent storage and/or persistent storage. The memory 520 includes the front-end logic 300 and back-end logic 350, as described above. The front-end logic 300 includes content fulfillment logic 120 that comprises the access control logic 310 and the management logic 330. The back-end logic 350 comprises the rule-based content retrieval logic 400, the local data store 410, the down filtering logic 420, the scanning engine 430, the analytics correlation logic 440, the cloud services logic 450, the analytic classification logic 460, and the reporting logic 190. The operations of software components of the front-end logic 300 and the back-end logic 350, upon execution by the processor 510, are described above.


V. RMDS Operational Flow


Referring now to FIGS. 6A-6B, an exemplary flowchart of the operations conducted by the retroactive malware detection system (RMDS) 100 in performing analytics of stored objects to detect a presence of malware is shown. First, as shown in FIG. 6A, the RMDS determines whether access credentials (consent) has been received to access a remote service with stored objects such as stored email messages (block 600). If the access credentials have not been received, the RMDS performs operations to solicit the return of such access credentials (block 610. However, if the access credentials have been received, content retrieval logic within the RMDS retrieves a plurality of objects from the remote service (block 620). These plurality of objects may undergo one or more filtering operations, performed in accordance with a first set of rules, to retain “suspicious” objects, which may be a subset of the plurality of objects. The “suspicious” objects are considered to be, based on the current threat landscape, objects with characteristics that are more apt to be determined to be malicious (block 630). Where the objects are email messages, the filtering operation(s) may involve permitting analytic operations to be conducted on certain types of email messages having (i) a body portion including a URL and/or (ii) an attachment that is lesser in size (e.g., byte size) than a prescribed threshold. This filtering produces a subset of objects that are permitted to undergo analytic operations by one or more analytic engines.


The scanning engine is configured to receive the subset of objects and to process each object of the subset of objects (block 640). More specifically, the scanning engine is configured to (i) receive the subset of objects and (ii) select a plurality of analytic engines for each object of the subset of objects. The selection of the plurality of analytic engine for an object may be based, at least in part, on meta-information associated with that object. The meta-information may include the source identifier (e.g., identifier of the remote service from which the subset of objects has been received), customer identifier (e.g., identifier of a source requesting a scanning operation), or the like.


The RMDS further includes analytic correlation logic, which is configured to aggregate the analytic results received from the analytic engines (block 650). The aggregation of the analytic results, referred to as “consolidated meta-information,” where the consolidated meta-information includes meta-information and other context information associated with the analysis of the object for malware as well as meta-information collected during retrieval of the object from the remote service (e.g., customer identifier, source identifier, etc.) that prompted performance of the analytics, as described above.


As shown in FIG. 6B, during or after aggregation of the analytic results to produce the consolidated meta-information, the classification logic conducts an analysis of the consolidated meta-information associated with each retrieved object to determine, based on the consolidated meta-information, whether the retrieved object includes malware (blocks 660 and 670). If so, some or all of the meta-information associated with the retrieved object is maintained and included as part of a malware detection report (block 680). The malware detection report is made available to an administrator associated with a source of the scan request message that prompted the analytics of objects within the remote service. In some embodiments the generated report may include mitigations associated with each malicious object (e.g., quarantine malicious files, prevent retrieval of phishing emails, etc.). Otherwise, the object is considered benign and, according to this embodiment, is excluded from the malware detection report.


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.

Claims
  • 1. A system for detecting objects stored at a remote service, comprising: a processor; anda memory communicatively coupled to the processor, the memory includes content fulfillment logic to (i) receive a scan request message directed to conducting analytics on content within the remote service by at least obtaining credentials for retrieval of a plurality of objects from the remote service and (ii) generate a redirect message in response to the scan request message, the redirect message (a) redirecting communications from a customer to an authentication portal of a third-party controlled service operating as a logon page and (b) configuring receipt of access credentials for the third-party controlled service upon verification of the customer; andback-end logic to (i) retrieve one or more objects of the plurality of objects using the access credentials, and (ii) perform analytics on each object of the one or more objects to classify each object as malicious or benign by at least (a) analyzing a first object to determine whether the first object includes characteristics that lead to further analyses in order to classify the first object as malicious or benign, (b) selecting one or more analytic engines based on meta-information associated with the first object, wherein each of the one or more analytic engines separately analyzes the first object for malware to produce an analytic result, (c) collecting the analytic results from the one or more analytic engines, and (iv) classifying the first object as malicious or benign based on the collected analytic results.
  • 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the content fulfillment logic to gain access to the content being a plurality of electronic mail (email) messages stored within the remote service operating as an cloud-based email service.
  • 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the content fulfillment logic to gain access to the content being a plurality of files stored within a cloud-based file data store.
  • 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the content fulfillment logic to (i) receive as input a scan request message, (ii) return as output a redirect message to an authorization portal controlling access to the remote service, and (iii) receive a credential token permitting the system access to the remote service.
  • 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the analytic result produced by each of the one or more analytic engines includes meta-information resulting from analysis of the first object within a first analytics engine of the one or more analytic engines.
  • 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the content fulfillment logic to further perform a preliminary analysis of the plurality of objects to eliminate objects unlikely to be malicious to create a subset of the plurality of objects.
  • 7. The system of claim 1, wherein the memory further comprises down filtering logic to reduce a number of objects, including the first object, prior to submission of at least the first object to the back-end logic and analysis by the one or more analytic engines selected based on meta-information accompanying the first object.
  • 8. The system of claim 7, wherein the memory further comprises reporting logic communicatively coupled to classification logic within the back-end logic to classify the first object as either malicious or benign based on the collected analytic results, the reporting logic to generate a report including at least a portion of the meta-information associated with the first object.
  • 9. A computerized method for retrieval and analysis of stored objects for malware, the method comprising: receiving a scan request message from a customer to conduct analytics on one or more objects stored within a third-party controlled service;generating a redirect message in response to the scan request message, the redirect message (i) redirecting communications from the customer to an authentication portal of the third-party controlled service operating as a logon page and (ii) configuring receipt of access credentials for the third-party controlled service upon verification of the customer;retrieving the one or more objects using the access credentials; andperforming analytics on each object of the one or more objects to classify each object as malicious or benign by at least (i) analyzing a first object to determine whether the first object includes characteristics that lead to further analyses in order to classify the first object as malicious or benign, (ii) selecting one or more analytic engines based on meta-information associated with the first object, wherein each of the one or more analytic engines separately analyzes the first object for malware to produce an analytic result, (iii) collecting the analytic results from the one or more analytic engines, and (iv) classifying the first object as malicious or benign based on the collected analytic results.
  • 10. The computerized method of claim 9, wherein the redirect message includes (i) a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) link that, upon selection, redirects communications to the authentication portal of the third-party controlled service and (ii) address information used by the third-party controlled service to return a credential token operating as the access credentials upon verification of the customer.
  • 11. The computerized method of claim 10, wherein the third-party controlled service corresponds to an cloud-based email service and the one or more objects corresponding to one or more email messages stored within the cloud-based email service.
  • 12. The computerized method of claim 10, wherein the authentication portal of the third-party controlled service operates as the logon page for a trusted third-party web service account.
  • 13. The computerized method of claim 9, wherein at least one of the characteristics includes a presence of a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) link in a body portion of an email message being the first object.
  • 14. The computerized method of claim 9, wherein at least one of the characteristics for the first object being an email message includes a presence of an attachment to the email message being less than a prescribed memory size.
  • 15. The computerized method of claim 9, wherein the selecting of the one or more analytic engines based on the meta-information that is collected during the analyzing of characteristics of the first object and during retrieval of the first object from the third-party controlled service.
  • 16. The computerized method of claim 9, wherein the collecting of the analytic results from the one or more analytic engines includes aggregating the analytics results in accordance with a first prescribed format based on an identifier representing a first customer type and aggregating the analytics results in accordance with a second prescribed format based on an identifier representing a second customer type, wherein the first prescribed format differs from the second prescribed format.
  • 17. The computerized method of claim 16, wherein the aggregating of the analytics results in accordance with the first prescribed format being more comprehensive than the aggregating of the analytics results in accordance with the second prescribed format when the first customer type corresponds to an incident response provider being different than the second customer type.
  • 18. The computerized method of claim 11 further comprising: generating a malware detection report including one or more entries for each object of the one or more objects being classified as malicious, the one or more entries include at least an identifier of the customer and an identifier of a source of each email message of the one or more email messages.
US Referenced Citations (722)
Number Name Date Kind
4292580 Ot et al. Sep 1981 A
5175732 Hendel et al. Dec 1992 A
5319776 Hile et al. Jun 1994 A
5440723 Arnold et al. Aug 1995 A
5490249 Miller Feb 1996 A
5657473 Killean et al. Aug 1997 A
5802277 Cowlard Sep 1998 A
5842002 Schnurer et al. Nov 1998 A
5960170 Chen et al. Sep 1999 A
5978917 Chi Nov 1999 A
5983348 Ji Nov 1999 A
6088803 Tso et al. Jul 2000 A
6092194 Touboul Jul 2000 A
6094677 Capek et al. Jul 2000 A
6108799 Boulay et al. Aug 2000 A
6154844 Touboul et al. Nov 2000 A
6269330 Cidon et al. Jul 2001 B1
6272641 Ji Aug 2001 B1
6279113 Vaidya Aug 2001 B1
6298445 Shostack et al. Oct 2001 B1
6357008 Nachenberg Mar 2002 B1
6424627 Sorhaug et al. Jul 2002 B1
6442696 Wray et al. Aug 2002 B1
6484315 Ziese Nov 2002 B1
6487666 Shanklin et al. Nov 2002 B1
6493756 O'Brien et al. Dec 2002 B1
6550012 Villa et al. Apr 2003 B1
6775657 Baker Aug 2004 B1
6831893 Ben Nun et al. Dec 2004 B1
6832367 Choi et al. Dec 2004 B1
6895550 Kanchirayappa et al. May 2005 B2
6898632 Gordy et al. May 2005 B2
6907396 Muttik et al. Jun 2005 B1
6941348 Petry et al. Sep 2005 B2
6971097 Wallman Nov 2005 B1
6981279 Arnold et al. Dec 2005 B1
7007107 Ivchenko et al. Feb 2006 B1
7028179 Anderson et al. Apr 2006 B2
7043757 Hoefelmeyer et al. May 2006 B2
7058822 Edery et al. Jun 2006 B2
7069316 Gryaznov Jun 2006 B1
7080407 Zhao et al. Jul 2006 B1
7080408 Pak et al. Jul 2006 B1
7093002 Wolff et al. Aug 2006 B2
7093239 van der Made Aug 2006 B1
7096498 Judge Aug 2006 B2
7100201 Izatt Aug 2006 B2
7107617 Hursey et al. Sep 2006 B2
7159149 Spiegel et al. Jan 2007 B2
7213260 Judge May 2007 B2
7231667 Jordan Jun 2007 B2
7240364 Branscomb et al. Jul 2007 B1
7240368 Roesch et al. Jul 2007 B1
7243371 Kasper et al. Jul 2007 B1
7249175 Donaldson Jul 2007 B1
7287278 Liang Oct 2007 B2
7308716 Danford et al. Dec 2007 B2
7328453 Merkle, Jr. et al. Feb 2008 B2
7346486 Ivancic et al. Mar 2008 B2
7356736 Natvig Apr 2008 B2
7386888 Liang et al. Jun 2008 B2
7392542 Bucher Jun 2008 B2
7418729 Szor Aug 2008 B2
7428300 Drew et al. Sep 2008 B1
7441272 Durham et al. Oct 2008 B2
7448084 Apap et al. Nov 2008 B1
7458098 Judge et al. Nov 2008 B2
7464404 Carpenter et al. Dec 2008 B2
7464407 Nakae et al. Dec 2008 B2
7467408 O'Toole, Jr. Dec 2008 B1
7478428 Thomlinson Jan 2009 B1
7480773 Reed Jan 2009 B1
7487543 Arnold et al. Feb 2009 B2
7496960 Chen et al. Feb 2009 B1
7496961 Zimmer et al. Feb 2009 B2
7519990 Xie Apr 2009 B1
7523493 Liang et al. Apr 2009 B2
7530104 Thrower et al. May 2009 B1
7540025 Tzadikario May 2009 B2
7546638 Anderson et al. Jun 2009 B2
7565550 Liang et al. Jul 2009 B2
7568233 Szor et al. Jul 2009 B1
7584455 Ball Sep 2009 B2
7603715 Costa et al. Oct 2009 B2
7607171 Marsden et al. Oct 2009 B1
7639714 Stolfo et al. Dec 2009 B2
7644441 Schmid et al. Jan 2010 B2
7657419 van der Made Feb 2010 B2
7676841 Sobchuk et al. Mar 2010 B2
7698548 Shelest et al. Apr 2010 B2
7707633 Danford et al. Apr 2010 B2
7712136 Sprosts et al. May 2010 B2
7730011 Deninger et al. Jun 2010 B1
7739740 Nachenberg et al. Jun 2010 B1
7779463 Stolfo et al. Aug 2010 B2
7784097 Stolfo et al. Aug 2010 B1
7832008 Kraemer Nov 2010 B1
7836502 Zhao et al. Nov 2010 B1
7849506 Dansey et al. Dec 2010 B1
7854007 Sprosts et al. Dec 2010 B2
7869073 Oshima Jan 2011 B2
7877803 Enstone et al. Jan 2011 B2
7904959 Sidiroglou et al. Mar 2011 B2
7908660 Bahl Mar 2011 B2
7930738 Petersen Apr 2011 B1
7937387 Frazier et al. May 2011 B2
7937761 Bennett May 2011 B1
7949849 Lowe et al. May 2011 B2
7996556 Raghavan et al. Aug 2011 B2
7996836 McCorkendale et al. Aug 2011 B1
7996904 Chiueh et al. Aug 2011 B1
7996905 Arnold et al. Aug 2011 B2
8006305 Aziz Aug 2011 B2
8010667 Zhang et al. Aug 2011 B2
8011010 Michael Aug 2011 B2
8020206 Hubbard et al. Sep 2011 B2
8028338 Schneider et al. Sep 2011 B1
8042184 Batenin Oct 2011 B1
8045094 Teragawa Oct 2011 B2
8045458 Alperovitch et al. Oct 2011 B2
8069484 McMillan et al. Nov 2011 B2
8087086 Lai et al. Dec 2011 B1
8171553 Aziz et al. May 2012 B2
8176049 Deninger et al. May 2012 B2
8176480 Spertus May 2012 B1
8201246 Wu et al. Jun 2012 B1
8204984 Aziz et al. Jun 2012 B1
8214905 Doukhvalov et al. Jul 2012 B1
8220055 Kennedy Jul 2012 B1
8225288 Miller et al. Jul 2012 B2
8225373 Kraemer Jul 2012 B2
8233882 Rogel Jul 2012 B2
8234640 Fitzgerald et al. Jul 2012 B1
8234709 Viljoen et al. Jul 2012 B2
8239944 Nachenberg et al. Aug 2012 B1
8260914 Ranjan Sep 2012 B1
8266091 Gubin et al. Sep 2012 B1
8286251 Eker et al. Oct 2012 B2
8291499 Aziz et al. Oct 2012 B2
8307435 Mann et al. Nov 2012 B1
8307443 Wang et al. Nov 2012 B2
8312545 Fuvell et al. Nov 2012 B2
8321936 Green et al. Nov 2012 B1
8321941 Fuvell et al. Nov 2012 B2
8332571 Edwards, Sr. Dec 2012 B1
8365286 Poston Jan 2013 B2
8365297 Parshin et al. Jan 2013 B1
8370938 Daswani et al. Feb 2013 B1
8370939 Zaitsev et al. Feb 2013 B2
8375444 Aziz et al. Feb 2013 B2
8381299 Stolfo et al. Feb 2013 B2
8402529 Green et al. Mar 2013 B1
8464340 Ahn et al. Jun 2013 B2
8479174 Chiriac Jul 2013 B2
8479276 Vaystikh et al. Jul 2013 B1
8479291 Bodke Jul 2013 B1
8510827 Leake et al. Aug 2013 B1
8510828 Guo et al. Aug 2013 B1
8510842 Amit et al. Aug 2013 B2
8516478 Edwards et al. Aug 2013 B1
8516590 Ranadive et al. Aug 2013 B1
8516593 Aziz Aug 2013 B2
8522348 Chen et al. Aug 2013 B2
8528086 Viz Sep 2013 B1
8533824 Hutton et al. Sep 2013 B2
8539582 Aziz et al. Sep 2013 B1
8549638 Aziz Oct 2013 B2
8555391 Demir et al. Oct 2013 B1
8561177 Aziz et al. Oct 2013 B1
8566476 Shiffer et al. Oct 2013 B2
8566946 Aziz et al. Oct 2013 B1
8584094 Dadhia et al. Nov 2013 B2
8584234 Sobel et al. Nov 2013 B1
8584239 Aziz et al. Nov 2013 B2
8595834 Xie et al. Nov 2013 B2
8627476 Satish et al. Jan 2014 B1
8635696 Aziz Jan 2014 B1
8682054 Xue et al. Mar 2014 B2
8682812 Ranjan Mar 2014 B1
8689333 Aziz Apr 2014 B2
8695096 Zhang Apr 2014 B1
8713631 Pavlyushchik Apr 2014 B1
8713681 Silberman et al. Apr 2014 B2
8726392 McCorkendale et al. May 2014 B1
8739280 Chess et al. May 2014 B2
8776229 Aziz Jul 2014 B1
8782792 Bodke Jul 2014 B1
8789172 Stolfo et al. Jul 2014 B2
8789178 Kejriwal et al. Jul 2014 B2
8793278 Frazier et al. Jul 2014 B2
8793787 Ismael et al. Jul 2014 B2
8805947 Kuzkin et al. Aug 2014 B1
8806647 Daswani et al. Aug 2014 B1
8832829 Manni et al. Sep 2014 B2
8850570 Ramzan Sep 2014 B1
8850571 Staniford et al. Sep 2014 B2
8881234 Narasimhan et al. Nov 2014 B2
8881271 Butler, II Nov 2014 B2
8881282 Aziz et al. Nov 2014 B1
8898788 Aziz et al. Nov 2014 B1
8935779 Manni et al. Jan 2015 B2
8949257 Shiffer et al. Feb 2015 B2
8984638 Aziz et al. Mar 2015 B1
8990939 Staniford et al. Mar 2015 B2
8990944 Singh et al. Mar 2015 B1
8997219 Staniford et al. Mar 2015 B2
9009822 Ismael et al. Apr 2015 B1
9009823 Ismael et al. Apr 2015 B1
9027135 Aziz May 2015 B1
9071638 Aziz et al. Jun 2015 B1
9104867 Thioux et al. Aug 2015 B1
9106630 Frazier et al. Aug 2015 B2
9106694 Aziz et al. Aug 2015 B2
9118715 Staniford et al. Aug 2015 B2
9159035 Ismael et al. Oct 2015 B1
9171160 Vincent et al. Oct 2015 B2
9176843 Ismael et al. Nov 2015 B1
9189627 Islam Nov 2015 B1
9195829 Goradia et al. Nov 2015 B1
9197664 Aziz et al. Nov 2015 B1
9197665 Cabot Nov 2015 B1
9223972 Vincent et al. Dec 2015 B1
9225740 Ismael et al. Dec 2015 B1
9241010 Bennett et al. Jan 2016 B1
9251343 Vincent et al. Feb 2016 B1
9262635 Paithane et al. Feb 2016 B2
9268936 Butler Feb 2016 B2
9275229 LeMasters Mar 2016 B2
9282109 Aziz et al. Mar 2016 B1
9292686 Ismael et al. Mar 2016 B2
9294501 Mesdaq et al. Mar 2016 B2
9300686 Pidathala et al. Mar 2016 B2
9306960 Aziz Apr 2016 B1
9306974 Aziz et al. Apr 2016 B1
9311479 Manni et al. Apr 2016 B1
9355247 Thioux et al. May 2016 B1
9356944 Aziz May 2016 B1
9363280 Rivlin et al. Jun 2016 B1
9367681 Ismael et al. Jun 2016 B1
9398028 Karandikar et al. Jul 2016 B1
9405902 Xavier Aug 2016 B1
9413781 Cunningham et al. Aug 2016 B2
9426071 Caldejon et al. Aug 2016 B1
9430646 Mushtaq et al. Aug 2016 B1
9432389 Khalid et al. Aug 2016 B1
9438613 Paithane et al. Sep 2016 B1
9438622 Staniford et al. Sep 2016 B1
9438623 Thioux et al. Sep 2016 B1
9459901 Jung et al. Oct 2016 B2
9467460 Otvagin et al. Oct 2016 B1
9483644 Paithane et al. Nov 2016 B1
9495180 Ismael Nov 2016 B2
9497213 Thompson et al. Nov 2016 B2
9507935 Ismael et al. Nov 2016 B2
9516057 Aziz Dec 2016 B2
9519782 Aziz et al. Dec 2016 B2
9536091 Paithane et al. Jan 2017 B2
9537972 Edwards et al. Jan 2017 B1
9560059 Islam Jan 2017 B1
9565202 Kindlund et al. Feb 2017 B1
9591015 Amin et al. Mar 2017 B1
9591020 Aziz Mar 2017 B1
9594904 Jain et al. Mar 2017 B1
9594905 Ismael et al. Mar 2017 B1
9594912 Thioux et al. Mar 2017 B1
9609007 Rivlin et al. Mar 2017 B1
9626509 Khalid et al. Apr 2017 B1
9628498 Aziz et al. Apr 2017 B1
9628507 Haq et al. Apr 2017 B2
9633134 Ross Apr 2017 B2
9635039 Islam et al. Apr 2017 B1
9641546 Manni et al. May 2017 B1
9654485 Neumann May 2017 B1
9661009 Karandikar et al. May 2017 B1
9661018 Aziz May 2017 B1
9674298 Edwards et al. Jun 2017 B1
9680862 Ismael et al. Jun 2017 B2
9690606 Ha et al. Jun 2017 B1
9690933 Singh et al. Jun 2017 B1
9690935 Shiffer et al. Jun 2017 B2
9690936 Malik et al. Jun 2017 B1
9736179 Ismael Aug 2017 B2
9740857 Ismael et al. Aug 2017 B2
9747446 Pidathala et al. Aug 2017 B1
9756074 Aziz et al. Sep 2017 B2
9773112 Rathor et al. Sep 2017 B1
9781144 Otvagin et al. Oct 2017 B1
9787700 Amin et al. Oct 2017 B1
9787706 Otvagin et al. Oct 2017 B1
9792196 Ismael et al. Oct 2017 B1
9824209 Ismael et al. Nov 2017 B1
9824211 Wilson Nov 2017 B2
9824216 Khalid et al. Nov 2017 B1
9825976 Gomez et al. Nov 2017 B1
9825989 Mehra et al. Nov 2017 B1
9838408 Karandikar et al. Dec 2017 B1
9838411 Aziz Dec 2017 B1
9838416 Aziz Dec 2017 B1
9838417 Khalid et al. Dec 2017 B1
9846776 Paithane et al. Dec 2017 B1
9876701 Caldejon et al. Jan 2018 B1
9888016 Amin et al. Feb 2018 B1
9888019 Pidathala et al. Feb 2018 B1
9910988 Vincent et al. Mar 2018 B1
9912644 Cunningham Mar 2018 B2
9912681 Ismael et al. Mar 2018 B1
9912684 Aziz et al. Mar 2018 B1
9912691 Mesdaq et al. Mar 2018 B2
9912698 Thioux et al. Mar 2018 B1
9916440 Paithane et al. Mar 2018 B1
9921978 Chan et al. Mar 2018 B1
9934376 Ismael Apr 2018 B1
9934381 Kindlund et al. Apr 2018 B1
9946568 Ismael et al. Apr 2018 B1
9954890 Staniford et al. Apr 2018 B1
9973531 Thioux May 2018 B1
10002252 Ismael et al. Jun 2018 B2
10019338 Goradia et al. Jul 2018 B1
10019573 Silberman et al. Jul 2018 B2
10025691 Ismael et al. Jul 2018 B1
10025927 Khalid et al. Jul 2018 B1
10027689 Rathor et al. Jul 2018 B1
10027690 Aziz et al. Jul 2018 B2
10027696 Rivlin et al. Jul 2018 B1
10033747 Paithane et al. Jul 2018 B1
10033748 Cunningham et al. Jul 2018 B1
10033753 Islam et al. Jul 2018 B1
10033759 Kabra et al. Jul 2018 B1
10050998 Singh Aug 2018 B1
10068091 Aziz et al. Sep 2018 B1
10075455 Zafar et al. Sep 2018 B2
10083302 Paithane et al. Sep 2018 B1
10084813 Eyada Sep 2018 B2
10089461 Ha et al. Oct 2018 B1
10097573 Aziz Oct 2018 B1
10104102 Neumann Oct 2018 B1
10108446 Steinberg et al. Oct 2018 B1
10121000 Rivlin et al. Nov 2018 B1
10122746 Manni et al. Nov 2018 B1
10133863 Bu et al. Nov 2018 B2
10133866 Kumar et al. Nov 2018 B1
10146810 Shiffer et al. Dec 2018 B2
10148693 Singh et al. Dec 2018 B2
10165000 Aziz et al. Dec 2018 B1
10169585 Pilipenko et al. Jan 2019 B1
10176321 Abbasi et al. Jan 2019 B2
10181029 Ismael et al. Jan 2019 B1
10191861 Steinberg et al. Jan 2019 B1
10192052 Singh et al. Jan 2019 B1
10198574 Thioux et al. Feb 2019 B1
10200384 Mushtaq et al. Feb 2019 B1
10210329 Malik et al. Feb 2019 B1
10216927 Steinberg Feb 2019 B1
10218740 Mesdaq et al. Feb 2019 B1
10242185 Goradia Mar 2019 B1
20010005889 Albrecht Jun 2001 A1
20010047326 Broadbent et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020018903 Kokubo et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020038430 Edwards et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020091819 Melchione et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020095607 Lin-Hendel Jul 2002 A1
20020116627 Tarbotton et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020144156 Copeland Oct 2002 A1
20020162015 Tang Oct 2002 A1
20020166063 Lachman et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020169952 DiSanto et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020184528 Shevenell et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020188887 Largman et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020194490 Halperin et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030021728 Sharpe et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030074578 Ford et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030084318 Schertz May 2003 A1
20030101381 Mateev et al. May 2003 A1
20030115483 Liang Jun 2003 A1
20030188190 Aaron et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030191957 Hypponen et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030200460 Morota et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030212902 van der Made Nov 2003 A1
20030229801 Kouznetsov et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030237000 Denton et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040003323 Bennett et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040006473 Mills et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040015712 Szor Jan 2004 A1
20040019832 Arnold et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040047356 Bauer Mar 2004 A1
20040083408 Spiegel et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040088581 Brawn et al. May 2004 A1
20040093513 Cantrell et al. May 2004 A1
20040111531 Staniford et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040117478 Triulzi et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040117624 Brandt et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040128355 Chao et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040165588 Pandya Aug 2004 A1
20040236963 Danford et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040243349 Greifeneder et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040249911 Alkhatib et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040255161 Cavanaugh Dec 2004 A1
20040268147 Wiederin et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050005159 Oliphant Jan 2005 A1
20050021740 Bar et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050033960 Vialen et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050033989 Poletto et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050050148 Mohammadioun et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050086523 Zimmer et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091513 Mitomo et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091533 Omote et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091652 Ross et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050108562 Khazan et al. May 2005 A1
20050114663 Cornell et al. May 2005 A1
20050125195 Brendel Jun 2005 A1
20050149726 Joshi et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050157662 Bingham et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050183143 Anderholm et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050201297 Peikari Sep 2005 A1
20050210533 Copeland et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050238005 Chen et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050240781 Gassoway Oct 2005 A1
20050262562 Gassoway Nov 2005 A1
20050265331 Stolfo Dec 2005 A1
20050283839 Cowbum Dec 2005 A1
20060010495 Cohen et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015416 Hoffman et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015715 Anderson Jan 2006 A1
20060015747 Van de Ven Jan 2006 A1
20060021029 Brickell et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060021054 Costa et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060031476 Mathes et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060047665 Neil Mar 2006 A1
20060070130 Costea et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060075496 Carpenter et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060095968 Portolani et al. May 2006 A1
20060101516 Sudaharan et al. May 2006 A1
20060101517 Banzhof et al. May 2006 A1
20060117385 Mester et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060123477 Raghavan et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060143709 Brooks et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060150249 Gassen et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060161983 Cothrell et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060161987 Levy-Yurista Jul 2006 A1
20060161989 Reshef et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060164199 Gilde et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060173992 Weber et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060179147 Tran et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060184632 Marino et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060191010 Benjamin Aug 2006 A1
20060221956 Narayan et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060236393 Kramer et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060242709 Seinfeld et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060248519 Jaeger et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060248582 Panjwani et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060251104 Koga Nov 2006 A1
20060288417 Bookbinder et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070006288 Mayfield et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070006313 Porras et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070011174 Takaragi et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070016951 Piccard et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070019286 Kikuchi Jan 2007 A1
20070033645 Jones Feb 2007 A1
20070038943 FitzGerald et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070064689 Shin et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070074169 Chess et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070094730 Bhikkaji et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070101435 Konanka et al. May 2007 A1
20070128855 Cho et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070142030 Sinha et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143827 Nicodemus et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070156895 Vuong Jul 2007 A1
20070157180 Tillmann et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070157306 Elrod et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070168988 Eisner et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070171824 Ruello et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070174915 Gribble et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070192500 Lum Aug 2007 A1
20070192858 Lum Aug 2007 A1
20070198275 Malden et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070208822 Wang et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070220607 Sprosts et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070240218 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070240219 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070240220 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070240222 Tuvell et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070250930 Aziz et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070256132 Oliphant Nov 2007 A2
20070271446 Nakamura Nov 2007 A1
20080005782 Aziz Jan 2008 A1
20080018122 Zierler et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080028463 Dagon et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080040710 Chiriac Feb 2008 A1
20080046781 Childs et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080066179 Liu Mar 2008 A1
20080072326 Danford et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080077793 Tan et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080080518 Hoeflin et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080086720 Lekel Apr 2008 A1
20080098476 Syversen Apr 2008 A1
20080120722 Sima et al. May 2008 A1
20080134178 Fitzgerald et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080134334 Kim et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080141376 Clausen et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080184367 McMillan et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080184373 Traut et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080189787 Arnold et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080201778 Guo et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080209557 Herley et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080215742 Goldszmidt et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080222729 Chen et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080263665 Ma et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080295172 Bohacek Nov 2008 A1
20080301810 Lehane et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080307524 Singh et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080313738 Enderby Dec 2008 A1
20080320594 Jiang Dec 2008 A1
20090003317 Kasralikar et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090007100 Field et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090013408 Schipka Jan 2009 A1
20090031423 Liu et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090036111 Danford et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090037835 Goldman Feb 2009 A1
20090044024 Oberheide et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090044274 Budko et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090064332 Porras et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090077666 Chen et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090083369 Marmor Mar 2009 A1
20090083855 Apap et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090089879 Wang et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090094697 Proves et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090113425 Ports et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090125976 Wassermann et al. May 2009 A1
20090126015 Monastyrsky et al. May 2009 A1
20090126016 Sobko et al. May 2009 A1
20090133125 Choi et al. May 2009 A1
20090144823 Lamastra et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090158430 Borders Jun 2009 A1
20090172815 Gu et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090187992 Poston Jul 2009 A1
20090193293 Stolfo et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090198651 Shiffer et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090198670 Shiffer et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090198689 Frazier et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090199274 Frazier et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090199296 Xie et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090228233 Anderson et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090241187 Troyansky Sep 2009 A1
20090241190 Todd et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090265692 Godefroid et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090271867 Zhang Oct 2009 A1
20090300415 Zhang et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090300761 Park et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090328185 Berg et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090328221 Blumfield et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100005146 Drako et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100011205 McKenna Jan 2010 A1
20100017546 Poo et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100030996 Butler, II Feb 2010 A1
20100031353 Thomas et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100037314 Perdisci et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100043073 Kuwamura Feb 2010 A1
20100054278 Stolfo et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100058474 Hicks Mar 2010 A1
20100064044 Nonoyama Mar 2010 A1
20100077481 Polyakov et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100083376 Pereira et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100115621 Staniford et al. May 2010 A1
20100132038 Zaitsev May 2010 A1
20100154056 Smith et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100180344 Malyshev et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100192223 Ismael et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100220863 Dupaquis et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100235831 Dittmer Sep 2010 A1
20100251104 Massand Sep 2010 A1
20100281102 Chinta et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100281541 Stolfo et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100281542 Stolfo et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100287260 Peterson et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100299754 Amit et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100306173 Frank Dec 2010 A1
20110004737 Greenebaum Jan 2011 A1
20110025504 Lyon et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110041179 St Hlberg Feb 2011 A1
20110047594 Mahaffey et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110047620 Mahaffey et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110055907 Narasimhan et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110078794 Manni et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110093951 Aziz Apr 2011 A1
20110099620 Stavrou et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110099633 Aziz Apr 2011 A1
20110099635 Silberman et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110113231 Kaminsky May 2011 A1
20110145918 Jung et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110145920 Mahaffey et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110145934 Abramovici et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110167493 Song et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110167494 Bowen et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110173213 Frazier et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110173460 Ito et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110219449 St. Neitzel et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110219450 McDougal et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110225624 Sawhney et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110225655 Niemela et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110247072 Staniford et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110265182 Peinado et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110289582 Kejriwal et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110302587 Nishikawa et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110307954 Melnik et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110307955 Kaplan et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110307956 Yermakov et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110314546 Aziz et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120023579 Zaitsev Jan 2012 A1
20120023593 Puder et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120054869 Yen et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120066698 Yanoo Mar 2012 A1
20120079596 Thomas et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120084859 Radinsky et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120096553 Srivastava et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120110667 Zubrilin et al. May 2012 A1
20120117652 Manni et al. May 2012 A1
20120121154 Xue et al. May 2012 A1
20120124426 Maybee et al. May 2012 A1
20120174186 Aziz et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120174196 Bhogavilli et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120174218 McCoy et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120198279 Schroeder Aug 2012 A1
20120210423 Friedrichs et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120222121 Staniford et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120255015 Sahita et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120255017 Sallam Oct 2012 A1
20120260342 Dube et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120266244 Green et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120278886 Luna Nov 2012 A1
20120297489 Dequevy Nov 2012 A1
20120330801 McDougal et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120331553 Aziz et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130014259 Gribble et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130036472 Aziz Feb 2013 A1
20130047257 Aziz Feb 2013 A1
20130067549 Caldwell Mar 2013 A1
20130074185 McDougal et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130086670 Vangpat Apr 2013 A1
20130086684 Mohler Apr 2013 A1
20130097699 Balupar et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130097706 Titonis et al. Apr 2013 A1
20130111587 Goel et al. May 2013 A1
20130117852 Stute May 2013 A1
20130117855 Kim et al. May 2013 A1
20130139260 McDougal May 2013 A1
20130139264 Brinkley et al. May 2013 A1
20130160125 Likhachev et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130160127 Jeong et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130160130 Mendelev et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130160131 Madou et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130167236 Sick Jun 2013 A1
20130174214 Duncan Jul 2013 A1
20130185789 Hagiwara et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130185795 Winn et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130185798 Saunders et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130191915 Antonakakis et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130196649 Paddon et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130227691 Aziz et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130246370 Bartram et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130247186 LeMasters Sep 2013 A1
20130263260 Mahaffey et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130291109 Staniford et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130298243 Kumar et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130318038 Shiffer et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130318073 Shiffer et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130325791 Shiffer et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130325792 Shiffer et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130325871 Shiffer et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130325872 Shiffer et al. Dec 2013 A1
20140032875 Butler Jan 2014 A1
20140053260 Gupta et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140053261 Gupta et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140130158 Wang et al. May 2014 A1
20140137180 Lukacs et al. May 2014 A1
20140169762 Ryu Jun 2014 A1
20140179360 Jackson et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140181131 Ross Jun 2014 A1
20140189687 Jung et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140189866 Shiffer et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140189882 Jung et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140237600 Silberman et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140280245 Wilson Sep 2014 A1
20140283037 Sikorski et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140283063 Thompson et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140328204 Klotsche et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140337836 Ismael Nov 2014 A1
20140344926 Cunningham et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140351935 Shao et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140380473 Bu et al. Dec 2014 A1
20140380474 Paithane et al. Dec 2014 A1
20150007312 Pidathala et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150096022 Vincent Apr 2015 A1
20150096023 Mesdaq et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150096024 Haq et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150096025 Ismael Apr 2015 A1
20150121526 McLarnon 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
20150331905 Brand Nov 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
20160063251 Spernow Mar 2016 A1
20160127393 Aziz et al. May 2016 A1
20160191547 Zafar et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160191550 Ismael et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160217285 Boutnaru Jul 2016 A1
20160261612 Mesdaq et al. Sep 2016 A1
20160285914 Singh et al. Sep 2016 A1
20160301703 Aziz Oct 2016 A1
20160335110 Paithane et al. Nov 2016 A1
20160366119 Rykowski Dec 2016 A1
20170083703 Abbasi et al. Mar 2017 A1
20180013770 Ismael Jan 2018 A1
20180048660 Paithane et al. Feb 2018 A1
20180121316 Ismael et al. May 2018 A1
20180288077 Siddiqui et al. Oct 2018 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (11)
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
Non-Patent Literature Citations (58)
Entry
Pandey et al., “Performance of Malware Detection Tools: A Comparison”, May 2014, IEEE International Conference on Advanced Communications, Control and Computing Technologies, pp. 1811-1817 (Year: 2014).
“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.isp?reload=true&amumbe- r=990073, (Dec. 7, 2013).
Abdullah, et al., Visualizing Network Data for Intrusion Detection, 2005 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security, pp. 100-108.
Adetoye, Adedayo , et al., “Network Intrusion Detection & Response System”, (“Adetoye”), (Sep. 2003).
Apostolopoulos, George; hassapis, Constantinos; “V-eM: A cluster of Virtual Machines for Robust, Detailed, and High-Performance Network Emulation”, 14th IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of computer and Telecommunication Systems, Sep. 11-14, 2006, pp. 117-126.
Aura, Tuomas, “Scanning electronic documents for personally identifiable information”, Proceedings of the 5th ACM workshop on Privacy in electronic society. ACM, 2006.
Baecher, “The Nepenthes Platform: An Efficient Approach to collect Malware”, Springer-verlag Berlin Heidelberg, (2006), pp. 165-184.
Bayer, et al., “Dynamic Analysis of Malicious Code”, J Comput Virol, Springer-Verlag, France., (2006), pp. 67-77.
Boubalos, Chris , “extracting syslog data out of raw pcap dumps, seclists.org, Honeypots mailing list archives”, available at http://seclists.org/honeypots/2003/q2/319 (“Boubalos”), (Jun. 5, 2003).
Chaudet, C., et al., “Optimal Positioning of Active and Passive Monitoring Devices”, International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Conference on Emerging Network Experiment and Technology, CoNEXT '05, Toulousse, France, (Oct. 2005), pp. 71-82.
Chen, P. M. and Noble, B. D., “When Virtual is Better Than Real, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science”, University of Michigan (“Chen”) (2001).
Cisco “Intrusion Prevention for the Cisco ASA 5500-x Series” Data Sheet (2012).
Cohen, M.I. , “PyFlag—An advanced network forensic framework”, Digital investigation 5, Elsevier, (2008), pp. S112-S120.
Costa, M. , et al., “Vigilante: End-to-End Containment of Internet Worms”, SOSP '05, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., Brighton U.K , (Oct. 23-26, 2005).
Didier Stevens, “Malicious PDF Documents Explained”, Security & Privacy, IEEE, IEEE Service Center, Los Alamitos, CA, US, vol. 9, No. 1, Jan. 1, 2011, pp. 80-82, XP011329453, ISSN: 1540-7993, DOI: 10 1109/MSP.2011.14.
Distler, “Malware Analysis: An Introduction”, SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room, SANS Institute, (2007).
Dunlap, George W. , et al., “ReVirt: Enabling Intrusion Analysis through Virtual-Machine Logging and Replay”, Proceeding of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX Association, (“Dunlap”), (Dec. 9, 2002).
FireEye Malware Analysis & Exchange Network, Malware Protection System, FireEye Inc., 2010.
FireEye Malware Analysis, Modern Malware Forensics, FireEye Inc., 2010.
FireEye v.6.0 Security Target, pp. 1-35, Version 1.1, FireEye Inc., May 2011.
Goel, et al., Reconstructing System State for Intrusion Analysis, Apr. 2008 SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, vol. 42 Issue 3, pp. 21-28.
Gregg Keizer: “Microsoft's HoneyMonkeys Show Patching Windows Works”, Aug. 8, 2005, XP055143386, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://www.informationweek.com/microsofts-honeymonkeys-show-patching-windows-works/d/d-d/1035069? [retrieved on Jun. 1, 2016].
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 letection.” 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 for a NetBIOS Service on a TCP/UDP transport: Concepts and Methods. STD 19, RFC 1001, Mar. 1987.
Newsome, J. , et al., “Dynamic Taint Analysis for Automatic Detection, Analysis, and Signature Generation of Exploits on Commodity Software”, In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security, Symposium (NDSS '05), (Feb. 2005).
Nojiri, D. , et al., “Cooperation Response Strategies for Large Scale Attack Mitigation”, DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition, vol. 1, (Apr. 22-24, 2003), pp. 293-302.
Oberheide et al., CloudAV.sub.--N-Version Antivirus in the Network Cloud, 17th USENIX Security Symposium Useni Security '08 Jul. 28-Aug. 1, 2008 San Jose, CA.
Reiner Sailer, Enriquillo Valdez, Trent Jaeger, Roonald Perez, Leendert van Doom, 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.