Systems and methods for computer security

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11188622
  • Patent Number
    11,188,622
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, April 24, 2019
    6 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 30, 2021
    4 years ago
  • Inventors
  • Examiners
    • Murphy; J. Brant
    Agents
    • Dugan; Benedict R.
    • Lowe Graham Jones PLLC
Abstract
Computer security techniques are described. One example determines whether to allow a program (e.g., native executable, script, etc.) to execute. This decision is based at least in part on the source of the program, such as whether the program is provided by a privileged source. A privileged program source may be any module, mechanism, or process that can provide executable instructions, such as directory or folder (e.g., on a local disk or network-accessible store), a computing device (e.g., server computer), another program (e.g., a Web server), or the like.
Description
TECHNICAL FIELD

The present disclosure relates to methods, techniques, and systems for computer security, and more particularly suppressing, controlling, or restricting execution of malicious software.


BACKGROUND

Hackers and other malicious parties are increasingly attempting to penetrate computing systems operated by home users, corporations, or governments. In many cases, hackers attempt to install and run malicious software on a target computing system. The malicious software (e.g., viruses, Trojan horses, worms, etc.) can be used by the hacker to damage, control, gain access, or otherwise compromise the computing system.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIGS. 1A-1G are flow diagrams that illustrate processes performed by example embodiments.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram of an example computing system or device for implementing a computer security module according to an example embodiment.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Embodiments described herein provide enhanced computer- and network-based methods, devices, and systems for computer security, and more particularly suppressing, controlling, or restricting execution of malicious software. Some embodiments provide a computer security module (“CSM”) that is configured to control (e.g., suppress, restrict, monitor) the execution of malicious software on a computing system.


The core function of the CSM is to determine whether or not to allow a program (e.g., native executable, script, etc.) to execute. This decision is based at least in part on the source of the program, specifically whether the program is provided by one of a set of privileged (or “safe”) source. A privileged program source may be any module, mechanism, or process that can provide executable instructions, such as directory or folder (e.g., on a local disk or network-accessible store), a computing device (e.g., server computer), another program (e.g., a Web server), or the like.


In some cases, a privileged source is a privileged folder or directory. A privileged folder is a folder that has been identified as storing programs that are eligible to be executed on the computer system. The privileged set of folders may contain one or more of: operating system folders (e.g., /bin, /sbin, /system32, etc.); application folders (e.g., /Program Files, /usr/bin); startup or services folders; third-party app folders; folders for the organization (e.g., corporation) that owns or administers the computer to install their own authorized programs; or the like.


In some cases, a privileged source is a privileged computer or process. A privileged computer can be identified by one or more identifiers, such as a machine name, IP address, domain name, process name, process identifier, process/program signature (e.g., a hash of the program instructions), or the like.


Privileged sources can be managed by way of a “white list” or similar data structure. The white list includes multiple identifiers of privileged sources. The identifiers may be or include directory names (system32), directory paths (e.g., /usr/bin), IP addresses, domain names, machine names, or the like. In some cases, URLs may be used to identify privileged sources. A privileged source may be identified or determined based on other or additional properties. For example, some embodiments may consider a source privileged if communication with that source is occurring at a specified time of day (e.g., within a time range), if the source is located in a specified geographic region, if the source address is associated with a particular organization (e.g., via a WHOIS lookup), or the like. Some embodiments may generally base the determination of whether a source is privileged on whether there are one or more allowed or allowable properties of the communication with the source. Additional information regarding determining the allowability of network communication can be found in U.S. Pat. No. 10,084,791, entitled “Evaluating a Questionable Network Communication,” issued Sep. 25, 2018, the content of which is incorporated herein by reference.


The CSM may be implemented in various ways. The CSM may be implemented as code that exists in one or more locations within the operating system, including the loader, scheduler, memory manager, or the like. For example, the loader may check the location of every program as it is loaded into memory. If the location is not in the set of privileged folders, the loader terminates the execution. As another example, the scheduler may check, before switching to a next program on the ready queue, whether the program was loaded from one of the privileged folders. If not, the scheduler terminates the program. Similarly, the memory manager can check, when asked to create a new virtual address space (e.g., page tables, etc.), whether the requesting program was loaded from one of the privileged folders.


Script interpreters may also be employed to control the execution of potentially malicious programs. In some embodiments, script interpreters (e.g., for shell scripts, VBScript, Perl, Python, etc.) will refuse to execute/interpret a given script if it is not being loaded from one of the privileged folders.


The described techniques of course require that the privileged folders be “locked down.” In other words, the privileged folders are write protected for ordinary users, so that only users having the proper administrative privileges can install programs in those folders. In addition, other measures may be taken to restrict the ability of malicious parties from installing programs, such as secure boot, locked BIOS, and the like.



FIGS. 1A-1G are flow diagrams of example security processes performed by example embodiments. The process may be implemented as computer instructions executing on a computing system. As noted above, these instructions may reside in one or more portions of the operating system, including the loader, scheduler, memory manager, and the like. The instructions may also or instead be present in programs that execute “outside” of the operating system, such as shell command interpreters, scripting language interpreters, virtual machines (e.g., Java Virtual Machine, C# VM), or the like.



FIG. 1A is a flow diagram of example logic for computer security. The illustrated logic in this and the following flow diagrams may be performed by, for example, the module 100 described with respect to FIG. 2, below. FIG. 1A illustrates a process 1A00 that includes the following block(s).


Block 1A01 includes receiving and storing indications of one or more privileged sources that are each designated as providing programs that are allowed to be executed on a computing system. A source may be a directory or folder on a local or remote file system. A source may also or instead be a computer (e.g., a server) that is identified by an IP address, domain name, machine name, URL, or the like. In some embodiments, the process will read or access a “white list” of “safe” sources from a write protected document stored in the file system. In the white list, each source is designated as being a source of programs that are eligible for execution.


Block 1A02 includes receiving an indication of a program. The indication of the program may be received before or during the initiating of the program, such as prior to or during the loading process. The indication of the program will include or can be used to determine the location of the program, specifically the identity of the directory from which the program is being loaded. In the case of programs obtained from remote sources (e.g., JavaScript code received by a Web browser), the indication may be or include a URL, IP address, domain name, or other identifier of the remote source.


Block 1A03 includes determining whether or not the program is provided by one of the one or more privileged sources. The program is looked up in the white list of privileged sources. This may be accomplished via a dictionary lookup, hash table, or the like. This operation can include looking up the program name, remote program source (e.g., domain name, IP address), or the like.


Block 1A04 includes disallowing execution of the program, when the program is not provided by any of the privileged sources. Disallowing execution of the program may accomplished in various ways, such as by terminating the loading process, raising an exception (so that the program will be terminated by the operating system), refusing to create a virtual memory space, the scheduler refusing to run or switch to the process, or the like.



FIG. 1B is a flow diagram of example logic illustrating an extension of process 1A00 of FIG. 1A. FIG. 1B illustrates a process 1600 that includes the process 1A00, and which further includes the following block(s).


Block 1B01 includes when the indicated program is provided by a network-accessible source, determining whether the network-accessible source is one of the one or more privileged sources. In typical embodiments, a Web browser or other module that fetches the program from a remote source will check whether the remote source is identified in the white list. This can include checking if the IP address, domain name, machine name, or other identifier of the remote source is present in the white list.


Block 1B02 includes when the network-accessible source is not one of the one or more privileged sources, disallowing execution of the program. For example, if the source identifier is not present in the white list, then the Web browser or similar module will refuse to load or execute the program. Note that this approach may require the use of a Web browser that has been modified to perform these checks. Users are not able to execute arbitrary remote code because they cannot manually download and execute such code (because only code in designated directories can run), and because they are also not allowed to install an insecure Web browser in any of the designated privileged directories.



FIG. 1C is a flow diagram of example logic illustrating an extension of process 1A00 of FIG. 1A. FIG. 1C illustrates a process 1C00 that includes the process 1A00, and which further includes the following block(s).


Block 1C01 includes disallowing modification one or more directories that are identified by the one or more sources as providers of programs that are allowed to be executed by the computing system. For safe sources that are directories, operating systems permissions can be employed to restrict modification of such directories (e.g., by adding or removing programs) by non-privileged users.



FIG. 1D is a flow diagram of example logic illustrating an extension of process 1A00 of FIG. 1A. FIG. 1D illustrates a process 1 DOO that includes the process 1A00, wherein the disallowing execution of the program includes the following block(s).


Block 1D01 includes terminating the program, suspending the program, and/or raising an exception.



FIG. 1E is a flow diagram of example logic illustrating an extension of process 1A00 of FIG. 1A. FIG. 1E illustrates a process 1E00 that includes the process 1A00, wherein the disallowing execution of the program includes the following block(s).


Block 1E01 includes executing the program in an alternative execution environment. In some embodiments, the program may instead be allowed to execute, but will be placed within an alternative execution environment, such as a sandbox or isolated virtual machine. In such embodiments, the program can be monitored to better understand the behavior and properties of potentially malicious code.



FIG. 1F is a flow diagram of example logic illustrating an extension of process 1A00 of FIG. 1A. FIG. 1F illustrates a process 1F00 that includes the process 1A00, and which further includes the following block(s).


Block 1F01 includes receiving the indications of the one or more sources from a file. Some embodiments store the list of privileged sources in a file that is write protected from non-administrative users.


Block 1F02 includes disallowing modification of the file by non-privileged users. Only administrative users may modify the file that identifies the privileged execution sources.



FIG. 1G is a flow diagram of example logic for computer security. FIG. 1G illustrates a process 1G00 that includes the following block(s).


Block 1G01 includes receiving and storing indications of one or more directories that are each designated as containing programs that are allowed to be executed on a computing system. In some embodiments, the process will read a list of files from a write protected document stored in the file system.


Block 1G02 includes receiving an indication of a program. The indication of the program may be received before or during the initiating of the program, such as prior to or during the loading process. The indication of the program will include or can be used to determine the location of the program, specifically the identity of the directory from which the program is being loaded.


Block 1G03 includes determining whether or not the program is located within one of the one or more directories. The location of the program is looked up in the list of privileged folders. This may be accomplished via a dictionary lookup, hash table, or the like.


Block 1G04 includes disallowing execution of the program, when the program is not located within any of the one or more directories. Disallowing execution of the program may accomplished in various ways, such as by terminating the loading process, raising an exception (so that the program will be terminated by the operating system), refusing to create a virtual memory space, the scheduler refusing to run or switch to the process, or the like.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram of an example computing system or device for implementing a computer security module according to an example embodiment. In particular, FIG. 2 shows a computing system 10 that executes a module 100 that implements at least some of the techniques described herein.


In the embodiment shown, computing system 10 comprises a computer memory (“memory”) 11, a display 12, one or more Central Processing Units (“CPU”) 13, Input/Output devices 14 (e.g., keyboard, mouse, CRT or LCD display, and the like), other computer-readable media 15, and a network connection 16. The module 100 is shown residing in memory 11. In other embodiments, some portion of the contents, some or all of the components of the module 100 may be stored on and/or transmitted over the other computer-readable media 15. The module 100 preferably executes on one or more CPUs 13 and performs the techniques described herein. Other code or programs 30 (e.g., an administrative interface, a Web server, and the like) and potentially other data repositories, such as data repository 20, also reside in the memory 11, and preferably execute on one or more CPUs 13. Of note, one or more of the components in FIG. 7 may not be present in any specific implementation. For example, some embodiments may not provide other computer readable media 15 or a display 12.


The module 100 is shown executing in the memory 11 of the device 100. Also included in the memory 11 are a user interface manager 41 and an application program interface (“API”) 42. The user interface manager 41 and the API 42 are drawn in dashed lines to indicate that in other embodiments, functions performed by one or more of these components may be performed externally to the module 100.


The UI manager 41 provides a view and a controller that facilitate user interaction with the module 100 and its various components. For example, the UI manager 41 may provide interactive access to the module 100, such that users or administrators can interact with the module 100. In some embodiments, access to the functionality of the UI manager 41 may be provided via a Web server, possibly executing as one of the other programs 30. In such embodiments, a user operating a Web browser executing on the user computing system 60 can interact with the module 100 via the UI manager 41.


The API 42 provides programmatic access to one or more functions of the module 100. For example, the API 42 may provide a programmatic interface to one or more functions of the module 100 that may be invoked by one of the other programs 30 or some other module. In this manner, the API 42 facilitates the development of third-party software, such as user interfaces, plug-ins, adapters (e.g., for integrating functions of the module 100 into Web applications), and the like.


The module 100 may interact using network connection 16 via a network 99 with other devices/systems including computing systems 60, 62, and 64. The network 99 may be any combination of media (e.g., twisted pair, coaxial, fiber optic, radio frequency), hardware (e.g., routers, switches, repeaters, transceivers), and protocols (e.g., TCP/IP, UDP, Ethernet, Wi-Fi, WiMAX) that facilitate communication between remotely situated humans and/or devices.


Note that one or more general purpose or special purpose computing systems/devices may be used to implement and/or execute the module 100. However, just because it is possible to implement the module 100 on a general purpose computing system does not mean that the techniques themselves or the operations (taken alone or in combination) required to implement the techniques are conventional or well known. The techniques are not conventional at least because they address and improve an existing technology, such as by improving the operation, integration, or efficiency of one or more computing systems.


In an example embodiment, components/modules of the module 100 are implemented using software programming techniques. For example, the module 100 may be implemented as a “native” executable running on the CPU 13, along with one or more static or dynamic libraries. In other embodiments, the module 100 may be implemented as instructions processed by a virtual machine that executes as one of the other programs 30.


The various components may be implemented using more monolithic programming techniques, for example, as an executable running on a single CPU computer system, or alternatively decomposed using a variety of structuring techniques, including but not limited to, multiprogramming, multithreading, client-server, or peer-to-peer, running on one or more computer systems each having one or more CPUs. Some embodiments may execute concurrently and asynchronously, and communicate using message passing, remote procedure call, or other distributed computing paradigms. Equivalent synchronous embodiments are also supported. Also, other functions could be implemented and/or performed by each component/module, and in different orders, and by different components/modules, yet still achieve the described functions.


In addition, programming interfaces to the data stored as part of the module 100, such as in the data store 20, can be available by language-specific APIs; libraries for accessing files, databases, or other data repositories; through representational languages such as XML; or through Web servers, FTP servers, or other types of servers providing access to stored data. The data store 20 may be implemented as one or more database systems, file systems, or any other technique for storing such information, or any combination of the above, including implementations using distributed computing techniques.


Furthermore, in some embodiments, some or all of the components of the module 100 may be implemented or provided in other manners, such as at least partially in firmware and/or hardware, including, but not limited to one or more application-specific integrated circuits (“ASICs”), standard integrated circuits, controllers executing appropriate instructions, and including microcontrollers and/or embedded controllers, field-programmable gate arrays (“FPGAs”), complex programmable logic devices (“CPLDs”), and the like. Some or all of the system components and/or data structures may also be stored as contents (e.g., as executable or other machine-readable software instructions or structured data) on a computer-readable medium (e.g., as a hard disk; a memory; a computer network or cellular wireless network or other data transmission medium; or a portable media article to be read by an appropriate drive or via an appropriate connection, such as a DVD or flash memory device) so as to enable or configure the computer-readable medium and/or one or more associated computing systems or devices to execute or otherwise use or provide the contents to perform at least some of the described techniques. Some or all of the components and/or data structures may be stored on tangible, non-transitory storage mediums. Some or all of the system components and data structures may also be stored as data signals (e.g., by being encoded as part of a carrier wave or included as part of an analog or digital propagated signal) on a variety of computer-readable transmission mediums, which are then transmitted, including across wireless-based and wired/cable-based mediums, and may take a variety of forms (e.g., as part of a single or multiplexed analog signal, or as multiple discrete digital packets or frames). Such computer program products may also take other forms in other embodiments. Accordingly, embodiments of this disclosure may be practiced with other computer system configurations.


While embodiments of the invention have been illustrated and described, as noted above, many changes can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Accordingly, the scope of the invention is not limited by the above disclosure.

Claims
  • 1. A method for computer security, the method comprising: by a computing system, receiving and storing indications of one or more privileged sources that are each designated as providing programs that are allowed to be executed on the computing system, wherein the one or more privileged sources include one or more privileged directories in a file system of the computing system;receiving an indication of a first program stored on the computing system;determining, during initiation of the first program, whether or not the first program is provided by one of the one or more privileged sources, wherein the one privileged source is one of the one or more privileged directories; anddisallowing execution of the first program, when the first program is not provided by any of the one or more privileged sources.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving indication of a second program;when the second program is provided by a network-accessible source, determining whether the network-accessible source is one of the one or more privileged sources; andwhen the network-accessible source is not one of the one or more privileged sources, disallowing execution of the second program.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: disallowing modification of the one or more privileged directories that are identified by the one or more sources as providers of programs that are allowed to be executed by the computing system.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the disallowing execution of the first program includes: terminating the first program, suspending the program, and/or raising an exception.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the disallowing execution of the first program includes: executing the first program in an alternative execution environment.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving the indications of the one or more sources from a file; anddisallowing modification of the file by non-privileged users.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving the indication of a second program in a Web browser, wherein the second program is JavaScript code; anddetermining whether the second program is provided by a server that is one or more of the privileged sources.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: disallowing installation of programs on the computing system.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving an indication of a second program;when the second program is provided by a network-accessible source, determining whether the network-accessible source is one of the one or more privileged sources;when the network-accessible source is not one of the one or more privileged sources, disallowing execution of the second program;disallowing modification of one or more directories that are identified by the one or more sources as providers of programs that are allowed to be executed by the computing system;receiving the indications of the one or more sources from a file;disallowing modification of the file by non-privileged users; andexecuting the second program in an alternative execution environment that is a virtual machine executed by the computing system.
  • 10. A non-transitory computer-readable medium including contents that are configured, when executed, to cause a computing system to perform a method for computer security, the method comprising: by the computing system, receiving and storing indications of one or more privileged sources that are each designated as providing programs that are allowed to be executed on the computing system, wherein the one or more privileged sources include one or more privileged directories in a file system of the computing system;receiving an indication of a first program stored on the computing system;determining, during initiation of the first program, whether or not the first program is provided by one of the one or more privileged sources, wherein the one privileged source is one of the one or more privileged directories; anddisallowing execution of the first program, when the program is not provided by any of the one or more privileged sources.
  • 11. The computer-readable medium of claim 10, wherein the method further comprises: receiving an indication of a second program;when the second program is provided by a network-accessible source, determining whether the network-accessible source is one of the one or more privileged sources;when the network-accessible source is not one of the one or more privileged sources, disallowing execution of the second program;disallowing modification of one or more directories that are identified by the one or more sources as providers of programs that are allowed to be executed by the computing system;receiving the indications of the one or more sources from a file; anddisallowing modification of the file by non-privileged users.
  • 12. The computer-readable medium of claim 10, wherein the disallowing execution of the first program includes: executing the first program in an alternative execution environment that is a virtual machine executed by the computing system.
  • 13. A computing system for computer security, the computing system comprising: a processor;a memory; anda module that is stored in the memory and that is configured, when executed by the processor, to perform a method comprising: receiving and storing indications of one or more privileged sources that are each designated as providing programs that are allowed to be executed on the computing system, wherein the one or more privileged sources include one or more privileged directories in a file system of the computing system;receiving an indication of a first program stored on the computing system;determining, during initiation of the first program, whether or not the first program is provided by one of the one or more privileged sources, wherein the one privileged source is one of the one or more privileged directories; anddisallowing execution of the first program, when the first program is not provided by any of the one or more privileged sources.
  • 14. The computing system of claim 13, further comprising a virtual machine executing on the computing system, and wherein the method further comprises: receiving an indication of a second program;when the second program is provided by a network-accessible source, determining whether the network-accessible source is one of the one or more privileged sources;when the network-accessible source is not one of the one or more privileged sources, disallowing execution of the second program;disallowing modification of one or more directories that are identified by the one or more sources as providers of programs that are allowed to be executed by the computing system; anddisallowing execution of the second program by executing the second program in an alternative execution environment that is the virtual machine.
  • 15. The computing system of claim 13, further comprising a Web browser that is configured to: receive the indication of a second program in a Web browser, wherein the second program is JavaScript code; anddetermine whether the second program is provided by a server that is one or more of the privileged sources.
  • 16. The computing system of claim 15, wherein the Web browser is configured to determine whether or not the second program is provided by one of the one or more privileged sources by looking up an identifier of the source in a white list.
  • 17. The computing system of claim 16, wherein the Web browser is further configured to determine whether or not the second program is provided by one of the one or more privileged sources based on one or more properties associated with a communication with the source, including one or more of a geographic location of the source, a time of communication, and an organization associated with the source.
  • 18. The computing system of claim 13, further comprising a program loader that is configured to: receive the indication of the first program;check whether the first program is stored in one of the one or more privileged directories; andwhen the first program is not stored in one of the one or more privileged folders, refuse to load the first program into the memory.
  • 19. The computing system of claim 13, further comprising a ready queue and a program scheduler that is configured to: receive the indication of the first program, wherein the first program is a program in the ready queue;check whether the first program is stored in one of the one or more privileged directories; andwhen the first program is not stored in one of the one or more privileged folders, terminate the first program.
  • 20. The computing system of claim 13, further comprising a memory manager that is configured to: receive the indication of the first program; andwhen asked to create a new virtual address space for the first program, check whether the first program is stored in one of the one or more privileged directories.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/739,094, entitled “SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR COMPUTER SECURITY,” and filed Sep. 28, 2018, the content of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

US Referenced Citations (167)
Number Name Date Kind
6016553 Schneider et al. Jan 2000 A
6185678 Arbaugh et al. Feb 2001 B1
6502135 Munger et al. Dec 2002 B1
6654796 Slater et al. Nov 2003 B1
6687226 Galyas Feb 2004 B1
6888834 Wood et al. May 2005 B1
7111163 Haney Sep 2006 B1
7143175 Adams et al. Nov 2006 B2
7346770 Swander et al. Mar 2008 B2
7363656 Weber et al. Apr 2008 B2
7401358 Christie et al. Jul 2008 B1
7457823 Shraim et al. Nov 2008 B2
7461404 Dudfield et al. Dec 2008 B2
7490237 Morais et al. Feb 2009 B1
7536723 Bhagwat et al. May 2009 B1
7540028 Ahmed et al. May 2009 B2
7602731 Jain Oct 2009 B2
7626940 Jain Dec 2009 B2
7725936 Banerjee et al. May 2010 B2
7797436 Banerjee et al. Sep 2010 B2
7826602 Hunyady et al. Nov 2010 B1
7832009 Wang et al. Nov 2010 B2
7979889 Gladstone et al. Jul 2011 B2
8161552 Sun et al. Apr 2012 B1
8423631 Mower et al. Apr 2013 B1
8495700 Shahbazi Jul 2013 B2
8621604 Chien Dec 2013 B2
8788839 Dong et al. Jul 2014 B1
8813186 Hegg et al. Aug 2014 B2
8848608 Addepalli Sep 2014 B1
8950007 Teal et al. Feb 2015 B1
9015090 Chien Apr 2015 B2
9172721 Jain Oct 2015 B2
9413783 Keogh Aug 2016 B1
9467470 Bhargava Oct 2016 B2
9654458 Bhaktwatsalam et al. May 2017 B1
9674145 Chien Jun 2017 B2
9825911 Brandwine Nov 2017 B1
9838425 Jalan et al. Dec 2017 B2
9892284 Wachendorf et al. Feb 2018 B2
10084791 Chien Sep 2018 B2
10171463 Wiger Jan 2019 B1
20020049883 Schneider et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020133721 Adjaoute Sep 2002 A1
20020188704 Gold et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030084349 Friedrichs et al. May 2003 A1
20030101357 Ronen et al. May 2003 A1
20030118038 Jalava et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030149668 Lee et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030149887 Yadav Aug 2003 A1
20030149888 Yadav Aug 2003 A1
20030185395 Lee et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030188190 Aaron et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030217289 Ammon et al. Nov 2003 A1
20040003285 Whelan et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040068562 Tilton et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040088537 Swander et al. May 2004 A1
20040123141 Yadav Jun 2004 A1
20040123157 Alagna et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040162992 Sami et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040186850 Chowdhury et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040187034 Tamura et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040255151 Mei et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050047355 Wood et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050060412 Chebolu et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050076222 Olkin et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050144279 Wexelblat Jun 2005 A1
20050172229 Reno Aug 2005 A1
20050228899 Wendkos et al. Oct 2005 A1
20060021031 Leahy et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060031412 Adams et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060059092 Burshan et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060059136 Wooldridge et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060059238 Slater et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060059337 Poyhonen et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060069697 Shraim et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060069782 Manning et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060080444 Peddemors et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060123464 Goodman et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060123478 Rehfuss et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060146816 Jain Jul 2006 A1
20060168022 Levin et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060190993 Noble Aug 2006 A1
20060203807 Kouretas et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060212931 Shull et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060224742 Shahbazi Oct 2006 A1
20060230039 Shull et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060230272 Lawrence et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060230452 Field Oct 2006 A1
20060253903 Krumel Nov 2006 A1
20070006305 Florencio et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070022479 Sikdar et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070050377 Srivastava Mar 2007 A1
20070083670 Kelley et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070180448 Low et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070268837 Melton et al. Nov 2007 A1
20080071953 Kershaw et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080077995 Curnyn Mar 2008 A1
20080104186 Wieneke et al. May 2008 A1
20080147837 Klein et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080172382 Prettejohn Jul 2008 A1
20080271118 Greenlaw Oct 2008 A1
20090043765 Pugh Feb 2009 A1
20090077616 Lindholm et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090185523 Allen et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090271625 Kolluru et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090287844 Bailey Nov 2009 A1
20090300759 Wang et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090311963 Haverty Dec 2009 A1
20100050255 Upadhyay et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100131756 Schneider May 2010 A1
20100132018 Takala et al. May 2010 A1
20100241836 Proudler Sep 2010 A1
20100325424 Etchegoyen Dec 2010 A1
20110113249 Gelbard et al. May 2011 A1
20120077480 DeLuca Mar 2012 A1
20120084549 Mackintosh et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120158541 Ganti et al. Jun 2012 A1
20130013905 Held et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130055256 Banga Feb 2013 A1
20130198065 McPherson et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130252604 Huber et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130301833 Wong Nov 2013 A1
20130318573 Reunamaki et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130333038 Chien Dec 2013 A1
20130346628 Canion et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130347111 Karta Dec 2013 A1
20140006579 Pitsch et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140157355 Clancy, III Jun 2014 A1
20140189808 Mahaffey et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140244991 Akdemir et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140258465 Li Sep 2014 A1
20140313975 Berenberg et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140325588 Jalan et al. Oct 2014 A1
20150020214 Copsey Jan 2015 A1
20150026784 Kurkure Jan 2015 A1
20150058628 Abzarian Feb 2015 A1
20150067838 Gunti Mar 2015 A1
20150082438 Prieto Alvarez et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150089621 Khalid et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150089625 Swanson et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150180875 Kay Jun 2015 A1
20150180884 Bhargava Jun 2015 A1
20150188714 Leoutsarakos et al. Jul 2015 A1
20150213131 Styler et al. Jul 2015 A1
20150229609 Chien Aug 2015 A1
20150256546 Zhu et al. Sep 2015 A1
20150372978 Bharrat et al. Dec 2015 A1
20160021610 Wan et al. Jan 2016 A1
20160099963 Mahaffey Apr 2016 A1
20160142393 Wang et al. May 2016 A1
20160248795 Chien Aug 2016 A1
20160261601 Zhou et al. Sep 2016 A1
20170011219 Li et al. Jan 2017 A1
20170034193 Schulman et al. Feb 2017 A1
20170118210 Athias Apr 2017 A1
20170185790 Gauda Jun 2017 A1
20170332307 Pan Nov 2017 A1
20170334522 Zahid et al. Nov 2017 A1
20170364685 Shah et al. Dec 2017 A1
20180020002 Duca et al. Jan 2018 A1
20180097843 Bursell et al. Apr 2018 A1
20180131719 Amit et al. May 2018 A1
20180189478 Richardson Jul 2018 A1
20190037406 Wash Jan 2019 A1
20190052606 Lapidous Feb 2019 A1
20190190723 Lee et al. Jun 2019 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (5)
Number Date Country
2005020446 Mar 2005 WO
2016176686 Nov 2016 WO
2017035159 Mar 2017 WO
2017112641 Jun 2017 WO
2018063583 Apr 2018 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (13)
Entry
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority completed Jul. 23, 2019, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US19/34039, 7 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority completed Aug. 24, 2020, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US19/67003, 9 pages.
Extended European Search Report completed Jul. 11, 2016, in European Patent Application No. 14 83 6161, 7 pages.
Horowitz, Michael, “Examples of Links That Lie,” michaelhorowitz.com, last updated Jan. 29, 2008, retrieved from the Internet at http://www.michaelhorowitz.com/linksthatlie.html, on Feb. 8, 2008, 11 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Aug. 29, 2019, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US19/23274, 7 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Oct. 18, 2018, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US18/29486, 8 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Aug. 21, 2014, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US14/31244, 6 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Oct. 12, 2007, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US06/35159, 6 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Jan. 31, 2018, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US17/60889, 6 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Feb. 21, 2018, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US17/61886, 6 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Apr. 23, 2008, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US07/64102, 8 pages.
“Netcraft Toolbar Tutorial,” Netcraft Ltd, 2007, retrieved from the Internet at http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/12/29/netcraft_toolbar_tutorial.html, on Feb. 8, 2008, 4 pages.
Office Action dated Mar. 20, 2009, in U.S. Appl. No. 11/470,581, 7 pages.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20200104468 A1 Apr 2020 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
62739094 Sep 2018 US