Systems and methods for managing policies on a computer

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8713583
  • Patent Number
    8,713,583
  • Date Filed
    Monday, September 9, 2013
    11 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, April 29, 2014
    11 years ago
Abstract
An apparatus, system, and method are disclosed for managing policies on a computer having a foreign operating system. Policies may specify hardware or software configuration information. Policies on a first computer with a native operating system are translated into configuration information usable on a second computer having a foreign operating system. In an embodiment, a translator manager manages the association between the policy on the first computer and the translator on the second computer. Computer management complexity and information technology management costs are reduced by centralizing computer management on the native operating system. Further reductions in management complexity are realized when the present invention is used in conjunction with network directory services.
Description
RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority to other applications as set forth in the Application Data Sheet filed in this application. Each of the patents and/or applications listed on the ADS is hereby incorporated by reference.


BACKGROUND

1. Field of the Invention


This invention relates to managing groups of computers and more particularly relates to managing policies for configuring hardware or software settings on groups of computers with a plurality of operating systems.


2. Description of the Related Art


A major concern of information technology management in corporations and other organizations has been balancing the complexity associated with managing large numbers of computers with the needs of individual users as they try to accomplish their tasks. A heterogeneous set of computer hardware, operating systems, and application software creates complexity and increased costs, but various combinations of hardware, operating systems, and software provide technical advantages when used as user workstations, departmental servers, corporate infrastructure equipment, and the like. User workstations are particularly difficult to manage when various needs and preferences of individual users are accommodated. For example, an engineer may require the use of a CAD system that runs only on the UNIX operating system, where other corporate users may be standardized on the MICROSOFT WINDOWS operating system and associated applications. Many similar compatibility issues exist among current computer systems.


One factor that adds to the complexity of managing various operating systems is that different operating systems employ different techniques for setting configuration information. For example, MICROSOFT WINDOWS and applications that run on Windows typically use a database, called the registry, to store configuration information. Computers running the UNIX operating system or derivatives thereof such as LINUX typically store configuration information in plain text files in particular locations in the file system directory. Information technology managers within an organization that uses heterogeneous operating systems typically institute separate sets of management procedures and standards for each operating system used in the organization.


One component of prior art solutions to the problem of managing large numbers of computers and users is the use of policies. Policies are used to set configurable options associated with an operating system or application program for a group of computer users. For example, a word processing program may have an option to select an American English dictionary or a British English dictionary. By creating one policy for its users in the United States and another policy for its users in England, an organization can set the appropriate option for all users without configuring each user's computer individually.


Another component of prior art solutions to the problem of managing groups of computers and users is the use of network directory services. Directory services provide an infrastructure to store and access information about network-based entities, such as applications, files, printers, and people. Directory services provide a consistent way to name, describe, locate access, manage, and secure information about these resources. The directories associated with directory services are typically hierarchical structures such as a tree with each node in the hierarchy capable of storing information in a unit often referred to as a container. Enterprises may use directory servers and directory services to centrally manage data that is accessed from geographically dispersed locations.


For example, corporations typically create network directory trees that mirror their corporate organizations. Information about individual employees, such as their employee number, telephone number, and hire date may be stored in a user object corresponding to each user in the directory tree. An organizational unit container representing each department may contain the user objects associated with each employee in the department. Organizational unit objects associated with each corporate division may contain the department organizational unit objects associated with each department in the division. Finally, an organization container representing the corporation as a whole may contain the company's division organizational unit objects.


Combining the use of policies and directory services facilitates management of groups of computers and users. Policies may be associated with the various containers in the directory services tree to store associated configuration information at the organization, division, or departmental level. For example, a policy may be associated with the Accounts Receivable container in a corporate organization to set options for the accounting program used in that department. Exceptions to the policy can be managed on an individual level, or by creating a group object and associating a policy with the group. Suppose, for example, that all employees in an organization use a software application with a particular set of configuration options, but department managers require a different set of options. A policy could be created with the basic set of options and associated with the organization container. A separate policy with the configuration options for managers could be created and assigned to a Managers user group object.


Using policies and directory services in combination has proven efficient in homogeneous operating system environments. Prior art computer management systems use policies targeted toward a specific operating system, referred to as the native operating system. From the point of view of prior art policy and policy management systems, other operating systems are considered to be foreign operating systems. However, the operating requirements of many organizations require information technology managers to manage multiple operating systems. The efficiencies associated with policies and directory services have not been realized in heterogeneous operating system environments. Since different operating systems use different approaches to setting configuration information, a policy associated with a directory services container may be applied to users of a native operating system that provided the policies, but there may not be a method for applying the policy for users of a foreign operating system.


From the foregoing discussion, it should be apparent that a need exists for an apparatus, system, and method that extend the use of policies to manage configuration information on computers having operating systems that are foreign to the policy creation and management environment. Beneficially, such an apparatus, system, and method would control cost and complexity associated with management of computers with heterogeneous operating systems within an organization. The benefits are multiplied when network directory services are used in conjunction with policies.


SUMMARY

The present invention has been developed in response to the present state of the art, and in particular, in response to the problems and needs in the art that have not yet been fully solved by currently available policy management systems. Accordingly, the present invention provides an apparatus, system, and method for managing policies on a computer having a foreign operating system that overcome many or all of the above-discussed shortcomings in the art.


In one aspect of the present invention, a method for managing policies on a computer having a foreign operating system includes providing a policy on a first computer with a native operating system, receiving the policy on a second computer with a foreign operating system, and translating the policy to configuration information usable on the second computer. In one embodiment, the method includes receiving the policy on the second computer at workstation start-up. The method also may include updating the policy at user login. These embodiments facilitate obtaining the current policy at the time they are typically needed by operating systems.


In further embodiments, the method includes polling the first computer at periodic intervals for changes to the policy. In these embodiments, configuration information usable on the second computer is updated to reflect changes in policy on the first computer, to keep the configuration information and policy closely synchronized. The method may also con include applying configuration information associated with directory services containers and objects. For example, a policy associated with a directory services organization container may be translated to configuration information that may then be applied to all users in the organization container.


In another aspect of the present invention, an apparatus to manage policies on a computer having a foreign operating system includes a policy on a first computer having a native operating system, a policy translator that translates the policy to configuration information usable on a second computer having foreign operating system, and a translator manager that manages the association between the policy on the first computer and the translator on the second computer. The apparatus, in one embodiment, is configured to manage configuration information usable on a second computer having a foreign operating system by means of policies on a first computer having a native operating system. A translator manager manages the association between the policy on the first computer, and a policy translator on the second computer.


The apparatus is further configured, in one embodiment, to include policies associated with network directory services containers and objects. Policies may be associated, for example, with organization containers, organizational unit containers, and user objects, facilitating the configuration of hardware or software information for groups of computer users at a corporate, department, or individual level.


Various elements of the present invention may be combined into a system arranged to carry out the functions or steps presented above. In one embodiment, the system includes two computers, the first having a native operating system and the second having a foreign operating system. In particular, the system, in one embodiment, includes a directory services server and database, a communications network, a policy, a policy editor, a policy template, a translator manager, and a policy translator.


Reference throughout this specification to features, advantages, or similar language does not imply that all of the features and advantages that may be realized with the present invention should be or are in any single embodiment of the invention. Rather, language referring to the features and advantages is understood to mean that a specific feature, advantage, or characteristic described in connection with an embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the present invention. Thus, discussion of the features and advantages, and similar language, throughout this specification may, but do not necessarily, refer to the same embodiment.


Furthermore, the described features, advantages, and characteristics of the invention may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments. One skilled in the relevant art will recognize that the invention can be practiced without one or more of the specific features or advantages of a particular embodiment. In other instances, additional features and advantages may be recognized in certain embodiments that may not be present in all embodiments of the invention.


These features and advantages of the present invention will become more fully apparent from the following description and appended claims, or may be learned by the practice of the invention as set forth hereinafter.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

In order that the advantages of the invention will be readily understood, a more particular description of the invention briefly described above will be rendered by reference to specific embodiments that are illustrated in the appended drawings. Understanding that these drawings depict only typical embodiments of the invention and are not therefore to be considered to be limiting of its scope, the invention will be described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings, in which:



FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram depicting one embodiment of a typical prior art networking environment wherein the present invention may be deployed;



FIG. 2 is a schematic block diagram illustrating one embodiment of a prior art policy management apparatus;



FIG. 3 is a schematic block diagram illustrating one embodiment of a policy management system in accordance with the present invention;



FIG. 4 is a schematic block diagram illustrating another embodiment of a policy management system in accordance with the present invention;



FIG. 5 is a schematic flow chart diagram illustrating one embodiment of a provide translator method in accordance with the present invention;



FIG. 6 is a schematic flow chart diagram illustrating one embodiment of a policy translation method in accordance with the present invention; and



FIG. 7 is a text diagram illustrating one embodiment of policy translation example data in accordance with the present invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Many of the functional units described in this specification have been labeled as modules, in order to more particularly emphasize their implementation independence. For example, a module may be implemented as a hardware circuit comprising custom VLSI circuits or gate arrays, off-the-shelf semiconductors such as logic chips, transistors, or other discrete components. A module may also be implemented in programmable hardware devices such as field programmable gate arrays, programmable array logic, programmable logic devices or the like.


Modules may also be implemented in software for execution by various types of processors. An identified module of executable code may, for instance, comprise one or more physical or logical blocks of computer instructions which may, for instance, be organized as an object, procedure, or function. Nevertheless, the executables of an identified module need not be physically located together, but may comprise disparate instructions stored in different locations which, when joined logically together, comprise the module and achieve the stated purpose for the module.


Indeed, a module of executable code could be a single instruction, or many instructions, and may even be distributed over several different code segments, among different programs, and across several memory devices. Similarly, operational data may be identified and illustrated herein within modules, and may be embodied in any suitable form and organized within any suitable type of data structure. The operational data may be collected as a single data set, or may be distributed over different locations including over different storage devices, and may exist, at least partially, merely as electronic signals on a system or network.


Reference throughout this specification to “one embodiment,” “an embodiment,” or similar language means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the present invention. Thus, appearances of the phrases “in one embodiment,” “in an embodiment,” and similar language throughout this specification may, but do not necessarily, all refer to the same embodiment.


Furthermore, the described features, structures, or characteristics of the invention may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments. In the following description, numerous specific details are provided, such as examples of programming, software modules, user selections, network transactions, database queries, database structures, hardware modules, hardware circuits, hardware chips, etc., to provide a thorough understanding of embodiments of the invention. One skilled in the relevant art will recognize, however, that the invention can be practiced without one or more of the specific details, or with other methods, components, materials, and so forth. In other instances, well-known structures, materials, or operations are not shown or described in detail to avoid obscuring aspects of the invention.



FIG. 1 depicts one embodiment of a typical prior art networking environment 100 that demonstrates the issues regarding managing currently deployed enterprises. As depicted, the networking environment 100 includes one or more servers 110, a network 120, and one or more networked computers 130. The components of the networking environment 100 may reside at a single site or may be dispersed over multiple sites.


Some of the servers 110 may be directory servers or domain servers which can function as a registry for resources and users of the networking environment 100. The network 120 may include routers, bridges, hubs, gateways, or the like which facilitate communications among the components of the networking environment 100. Some of the networked computers 130 may execute legacy applications and operating systems that are unable to integrate with the servers 110 that are directory servers.


Some of the networked computers 130 may be used to run utility applications to manage the servers 110 that are directory servers and features of the directory service that runs on the servers 110. These networked computers 130 that manage the directory service typically do not include functionality to manage foreign operating systems that may run on other networked computers 130.



FIG. 2 is a schematic block diagram illustrating one embodiment of a prior art policy management apparatus 200. The prior art policy management apparatus 200 includes a policy template 210, a policy editor 220, a first computer 260 having a native operating system, and a second computer 270 having the same native operating system. The first computer 260 includes a policy manager 230a, a policy-related file 240, and a configuration information database 250a. The second computer 270 includes a policy manager 230b, and a configuration information database 250b. This apparatus is configured to efficiently manage a group of computers having like operating systems.


An administrative user may use a policy template 210 and a policy editor 220 to control the operation of the policy manager 230a. The policy template 210 and the policy editor 220 may be located on the first computer 260 or may be on another computer. The policy manager 230a may use a policy-related file 240 and settings (i.e. information) in a configuration information database 250a to record the policy settings created by the administrative user.


As a means for efficiently managing a group of computers with like operating systems, a policy manager 230b in a second computer 270 may be configured to obtain policy settings by reading from the policy-related file 240 or the configuration information con database 250a on the first computer 260, as represented by the dashed lines 233 and 236 in FIG. 2. The policy manager 230b may then make settings to the configuration information database 250b on the second computer 270.


The policy may include configuration information that applies specifically to the second computer 270, or to a specific user or any of a group of users of the second computer 270. Configuration information may be associated with network directory services containers and objects. For example, by associating configuration information with an organizational unit container, the behavior of an application can be controlled for all users in a company department. Configuration information maybe assigned to containers and objects at various levels in a directory services hierarchy, facilitating management of hardware and software configuration information at various organizational, geographical, or individual levels. For example, application configuration information may be associated with an organization container, organizational unit container, and user object in a network directory services hierarchy, resulting in application configuration options being assigned at corporate, departmental, and individual levels in an organization.



FIG. 3 is a schematic block diagram illustrating one embodiment of a policy management system 300 in accordance with the present invention. The depicted policy management system 300 includes a network 310, a first computer 320, and a second computer 340. The first computer 320 includes a policy template 322, a policy editor 324, a policy manager 230, a policy-related file 326, and a configuration information database 250. The depicted second computer 340 includes a translator manager 342, a translator 344, and a policy-related file 346. The policy management system 300 facilitates management of a group of computers with multiple operating systems by using the first computer 320 as a reference computer from which configuration information are replicated to other computers in a workgroup, or the like. The policy management system 300 depicted in FIG. 3 represents a peer-oriented embodiment of the present invention, where the first computer 320 and the second computer 340 are workstations, and no server is required.


An administrative user may use a policy template 322 and policy editor 324 to control the operation of the policy manager 230. The policy manager 230 may use a policy-related file 326 and settings or information in a configuration information database 250 to record the policy settings created by the administrative user. The translation manager 342 in the second computer 340 may be configured to obtain policy settings by reading from the policy-related file 326 and the configuration information database 250 on the first computer 320, as represented by the dashed lines 333 and 336 in FIG. 3. The translation manager 342 then passes the policy settings obtained from the first computer 320 to the translator 344 to translate to configuration information that may be stored in a policy-related file 346 on the second computer 340. In some embodiments, the translator 344 modifies configuration information stored in a plurality of files. The policy-related file 346 may not be exclusively dedicated to storing policy information. For example, the policy-related file 346 may contain non-policy data or code. In some embodiments, the operating system on the first computer 320 may provide an event notification system that notifies the translation manager 342 that changes have been made to the policy-related file 326 or the configuration information database 250.



FIG. 4 is schematic block diagram illustrating another embodiment of a policy management system 400 in accordance with the present invention. The policy management system 400 includes a server 410, network 310, a first computer 320, and a second computer 340. The server 410 includes a policy-related file 413, and a configuration information database 416. The first computer 320 includes a policy template 322, a policy editor 324, and a policy manager 230. The second computer 340 includes a translation manager 342, a translator 344, and a policy-related file 346. The policy management system 400 facilitates management of a group of computers having multiple operating systems by replicating configuration information from a server 410, such as a directory server. The policy management system 400 depicted in FIG. 4 represents a client-server-oriented embodiment of the present invention, where configuration information are stored on a server 410 and replicated to client workstations represented by the second computer 340.


As with the embodiment depicted in FIG. 3, an administrative user may use a policy template 322 and policy editor 324 to control the operation of the policy manager 230. In this embodiment, however, the policy manager 230 may use a policy-related file 413 and settings in a configuration information database 416 to record the policy settings created by the administrative user on a server 410. The translation manager 342 in the second computer 340 may be configured to obtain policy settings by reading from the policy-related file 413 and the configuration information database 416 on the server 410, as represented by the dashed lines 433 and 436 in FIG. 4. The translation manager 342 then passes the policy settings obtained from the first computer 320 to the translator 344 to translate to configuration information that may be stored in a policy-related file 346 on the second computer 340.


The following schematic flow chart diagrams that follow are generally set forth as logical flow chart diagrams. As such, the depicted order and labeled steps are indicative of one embodiment of the presented method. Other steps, methods, and orderings may be conceived that are equivalent in function, logic, or effect to one or more steps, or portions thereof, of the illustrated method.



FIG. 5 is a schematic flow chart diagram illustrating one embodiment of a provide translator method 500 in accordance with the present invention. The provide translator method 500 includes a provide policy template step 520, and a provide policy translator step 530. The provide translator method 500 provides modules that facilitate translation of policy settings from a native operating system to a foreign operating system.


The provide policy template step 520 provides a policy template such as the policy template 322 to be used in conjunction with the policy editor 324, or the like. As detailed in FIG. 3 and elsewhere, the policy template 322 constrains policy editing, such that policies created by the policy editor 324 conform to requirements of the first computer 320. For example, the policy template 322 may ensure that configuration information car delivered to the policy manager 230 conform to a required syntax, or that numerical values fall within a meaningful range. The provide policy template step 520 may provide a plug-in module to an operating system utility program. In some embodiments, the provide policy template step 520 provides a wizard program module that guides a user through the process of creating a policy.


The provide policy translator step 530 provides a translator 344 that translates configuration information from the first computer 320 having a native operating system to the second computer 340 having a foreign operating system. The provide policy translator step 530 may place the translator 344 in a file system directory known to the translator manager 342. In some embodiments, the provide policy translator step 530 may register the file system location of the translator 344 with the translator manager 342. Upon completion of the provide policy translator step 530, the provide translator method 500 ends 540.



FIG. 6 is a schematic flow chart diagram illustrating one embodiment of a policy translation method 600 in accordance with the present invention. The policy translation method 600 includes a provide policy step 620, a receive policy step 630, a translate policy step 640, an update configuration step 650, an update on start-up test 655, a wait for start-up step 660, an update on login test 665, a wait for login step 670, a refresh time test 675, and a terminate test 685. The policy translation method 600 translates policies on a first computer 320 having a native operating system to policies for a second computer 340 having a foreign operating system.


The provide policy step 620 provides a policy on the first computer 320 having a native operating system. The provide policy step 620 may be performed by an administrative user using a policy template 322, policy editor 324, and/or policy manager 230. The policy may be contained in a policy-related file 326 and a configuration information database 250 on the first computer 320. In some embodiments, the policy may be contained in a policy-related file 413 and a configuration information database 416 on a server 410, such as a directory server.


The receive policy step 630 receives the policy on the second computer 340 having a foreign operating system. The receive policy step 630 may be performed by a translator manager 342 on the second computer 340. The translator manager 342 may copy the policy from a policy-related file 326 and a configuration information database 250 on the first computer 320. In other embodiments, the translator manager 342 may copy the policy from a policy-related file 413 and a configuration information database 416 on a server 410, such as a directory server. The translator manager 342 transmits the policy to a translator 344.


The translate policy step 640 translates configuration information from the first computer 320 having a native operating system to the second computer 340 having a foreign operating system. The translate policy step 740 may be performed by a translator 344 on the second computer 340. The translator 344 receives the policy from the translator manager 342 and translates the policy to foreign operating system configuration information used by the second computer 340.


The update configuration step 650 applies the configuration information translated by the translator 344. The update configuration step 650 may be performed by a translator 344 on the second computer 340 having a foreign operating system. After translating the policy to foreign operating system configuration information, the translator 344 applies the policy by saving the configuration information in a policy-related file 346. In some embodiments, configuration information may be saved in a plurality of policy-related files 346.


The update on start-up test 655 determines whether the policy is to be applied at workstation start-up. A policy may contain configuration information for all users of the second computer 340. Many operating systems apply configuration information at workstation start-up. Updating configuration information on the second computer 340 during workstation start-up makes the updated settings available for application during the workstation start-up process. If the policy is to be updated at workstation start-up, the policy translation method 600 continues with the wait for start-up step 660, otherwise the policy translation method 600 continues with the update on login test 665.


The wait for start-up step 660 waits for the second computer 340 to reach a point in the workstation start-up process where computer resources are available for the second computer 340 to receive the policy from the first computer 320. The wait for start-up step 660 includes setting a configuration setting that causes the policy translation method 600 to continue with the receive policy step 630 at workstation start-up. The wait for start-up step 660 facilitates receiving the current version of the policy so that configuration information may be applied to the second computer 340 at workstation start-up, when many operating systems typically read configuration information. Updating a policy at workstation start-up is particularly advantageous to workstation-specific configuration information.


The update on login test 665 determines whether the policy is to be applied at user login. A policy may contain configuration information that applies to a specific user or any of a group of users of the second computer 340. In some embodiments, configuration information may be associated with network directory services containers and objects. For example, by associating configuration information with an organizational unit container, the behavior of an application can be controlled for all users in a company department. Updating configuration information on the second computer 340 makes the current version of the settings available for application for the user logging in. If the policy is to be updated at user login, the policy translation method 600 continues with the wait for login method 670, otherwise the policy translation method 600 continues with the refresh time test 675.


The wait for login step 670 waits for a user to log in to the second computer 340 to receive the policy from the first computer 320. The wait for login step 670 includes setting a configuration setting that causes the policy translation method 700 to continue with the receive policy step 630 at user login. The wait for login step 670 facilitates receiving the current version of the policy so that configuration information may be applied to the second computer 340 at user login, when many operating systems typically read configuration information. Updating a policy at user login is particularly advantageous to user-specific configuration information.


The refresh time test 675 determines whether it is time to check for updates to the policy on the first computer 320. In some embodiments, the refresh time test 675 polls the first computer 320 at periodic intervals for changes to the policy. The polling interval may be configurable by the user or may itself be a setting configurable by a policy. In some embodiments, the refresh time test 675 may include a means for the first computer 320 to notify the second computer 340 that a change has been made to the policy, and that the policy should be refreshed on the second computer 340. If the refresh time has arrived, the policy translation method 600 continues with the receive policy step 630, otherwise it continues with the terminate test 685.


The terminate test 685 determines whether the refresh time test 675 should be repeated, or if the policy translation method 600 should terminate. In some embodiments, the policy translation method 600 may be terminated to facilitate deallocation of memory or other computer resources when the second computer 340 is shut down, or to allow for system maintenance. If the policy translation method is not to be terminated, it continues with the refresh time test 675, other wise it ends 690.



FIG. 7 is a text diagram illustrating one embodiment of policy translation example data in accordance with the present invention. The policy translation example data 700 includes policy template data 710, policy manager input data 720, native policy-related file data 730, and translated policy-related file data 740. The policy translation example data may be generated in accordance with the policy translation method 600 and the policy management system 300.


The policy template data 710 is one example of the policy template 322. The policy template 322 may reside on the first computer 320 having a native operating system or on a third computer, such as an administrative workstation. The policy template data 710 may comprise plain ASCII text used to constrain data input accepted by the policy editor 324 by identifying names of data objects that the policy editor 324 will allow the user to edit. Policy template data 710 may also contain the text of prompts or other fields that control the user interface presented by the policy editor 324. Using the policy template 322, the policy editor 324 may accept input from an administrative user and generate input data for the policy manager 230.


Policy manager input data 720 illustrates the format of data that may be generated by the policy editor 324. In various embodiments, in accordance with the provide policy step 620, the policy manager 230 may accept the policy manager input data 720 from a file created by the policy editor 324, from a file created by an administrative user, or communicated directly from the policy editor 324 to the policy manager 230 via interprocess communication. The policy manager 230 may alter the format or contents of the policy manager input data 720. In some embodiments, the policy manager creates a policy-related file 326 and enters the location of the policy-related file 326 in the configuration settings database 250.


The native policy-related file data 730 is a textual representation of binary data in one embodiment of the policy-related file 326. The native policy-related file data 730 is generated by the policy manager 230, and in preparation for the receive policy step 630, is stored in a format and location typically used with the native operating system in use on the first computer 320. In the depicted embodiment, the native policy-related file data 730 comprises mixed binary and UNICODE text delimited by square brackets.


The translated policy-related file data 740 is one example of the policy-related file 346. In accordance with the translate policy step 640, the translator 344 translates the policy data received from the translator manager 342 to data usable by the foreign operating system used by the second computer 340. The depicted translated policy-related file data 740 is one example of a configuration file that a translator 344 has converted from mixed binary and UNICODE format to plain ASCII text format, and filtered to include only data usable by the foreign operating system in use on the second computer 340. In the depicted example, the translated policy-related file data 740 comprises a list of user names that will be allowed to log in to the second computer 340.


The present invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential characteristics. The described embodiments are to be considered in all respects only as illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention is, therefore, indicated by the appended claims rather than by the foregoing description. All changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are to be embraced within their scope.

Claims
  • 1. A computer system comprising: a workstation having a non-Windows operating system, a tangible computer storage medium with user applications stored therein, and a computer processor;a policy refresh component, stored in the storage medium, that checks whether a Windows native policy stored on a Windows computer and associated with the workstation has been changed;a translator manager, stored in the storage medium, that manages the association of the Windows native policy with the workstation and, upon a determination by the policy refresh component that the Windows native policy has been changed, receives the Windows native policy from the Windows computer;a policy translator, stored in the storage medium, that receives the Windows native policy from the translator manager and translates the Windows native policy into configuration information usable by the non-Windows operating system;an update configuration component, stored in the storage medium, that applies the configuration information usable by the non-Windows operating system by saving the configuration information in a policy-related file on the workstation;wherein the Windows native policy can be read, in its native format, by a Windows operating system to set policy settings for Windows computers but cannot be read, in its native format, by a non-Windows operating system to set policy settings for non-Windows computers; andwherein the Windows native policy is used to set configurable options for at least one computer user, and wherein, after translation by the workstation, the Windows native policy remains centrally managed and updated by the Windows computer, and updates to the Windows native policy are propagated to the workstation, such that use of Windows native policies is extended to allow an administrator to use Windows native policies to manage configuration information on the workstation.
  • 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration of at least one application for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration information for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the policy refresh component checks whether the Windows native policy has been changed at least by polling the Windows computer at periodic intervals.
  • 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the policy refresh component checks whether the Windows native policy has been changed at least by receiving a notification from the Windows computer that the Windows native policy has been changed.
  • 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the workstation is a desktop computer.
  • 7. The system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the user applications stored in the storage medium is a word processing application.
  • 8. A method comprising: managing, on a workstation having a non-Windows operating system, a tangible computer storage medium with user applications stored therein, and a computer processor, an association between the workstation and a Windows native policy stored on a Windows computer;checking, by the workstation, whether the Windows native policy stored on the Windows computer and associated with the workstation has been changed;upon a determination by the workstation that the Windows native policy has been changed, receiving, on the workstation, the Windows native policy from the Windows computer;translating, on the workstation, the Windows native policy into configuration information usable by the non-Windows operating system; andapplying the configuration information usable by the non-Windows operating system by saving the configuration information in a policy-related file on the workstation;wherein the Windows native policy can be read, in its native format, by a Windows operating system to set policy settings for Windows computers but cannot be read, in its native format, by a non-Windows operating system to set policy settings for non-Windows computers; andwherein the Windows native policy is used to set configurable options for at least one computer user, and wherein, after translation by the workstation, the Windows native policy remains centrally managed and updated by the Windows computer, and updates to the Windows native policy are propagated to the workstation, such that use of Windows native policies is extended to allow an administrator to use Windows native policies to manage configuration information on the workstation.
  • 9. The method of claim 8, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration of at least one application for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 10. The method of claim 8, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration information for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 11. The method of claim 8, wherein checking whether the Windows native policy has been changed includes polling the Windows computer at periodic intervals.
  • 12. The method of claim 8, wherein checking whether the Windows native policy has been changed includes receiving, on the workstation, a notification from the Windows computer that the Windows native policy has been changed.
  • 13. The method of claim 8, wherein the workstation is a desktop computer.
  • 14. The method of claim 8, wherein at least one of the user applications stored in the storage medium is a word processing application.
  • 15. A policy management and update system that uses Windows native policies to manage policy settings on a Linux computer, the system comprising: a workstation having a Linux operating system, a tangible computer storage medium with user applications stored therein, and a computer processor, wherein the workstation allows a user to login to the Linux operating system and to access one or more application programs comprising at least a word processing program;a policy refresh component, stored in the storage medium, that checks whether a Windows native policy stored on a Windows computer and associated with the workstation has been changed;a translator manager, stored in the storage medium, that manages the association of the Windows native policy with the workstation and, upon a determination by the policy refresh component that the Windows native policy has been changed, receives the Windows native policy from the Windows computer;a policy translator, stored in the storage medium, that receives the Windows native policy from the translator manager and translates the Windows native policy into configuration information usable by the Linux operating system;an update configuration component, stored in the storage medium, that applies the configuration information usable by the Linux operating system by saving the configuration information in a policy-related file on the workstation;wherein the Windows native policy can be read, in its native format, by a Windows operating system to set policy settings for Windows computers but cannot be read, in its native format, by a Linux operating system to set policy settings for Linux computers; andwherein the Windows native policy is used to set configurable options for at least one computer user, and wherein, after translation by the workstation, the Windows native policy remains centrally managed and updated by the Windows computer, and updates to the Windows native policy are propagated to the workstation, such that use of Windows native policies is extended to allow an administrator to use Windows native policies to manage configuration information on the workstation.
  • 16. The system of claim 15, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration of at least one application for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 17. The system of claim 15, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration information for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 18. The system of claim 15, wherein the policy refresh component checks whether the Windows native policy has been changed at least by polling the Windows computer at periodic intervals.
  • 19. The system of claim 15, wherein the policy refresh component checks whether the Windows native policy has been changed at least by receiving a notification from the Windows computer that the Windows native policy has been changed.
  • 20. The system of claim 15, wherein the workstation is a desktop computer.
  • 21. The system of claim 15, wherein the update configuration component changes configuration information of the word processing program.
  • 22. A method of managing and updating policy settings on a Linux computer using Windows native policies, the method comprising: managing, on a workstation having a Linux operating system, a tangible computer storage medium with user applications stored therein, and a computer processor, an association between the workstation and a Windows native policy stored on a Windows computer, wherein the workstation allows a user to login to the Linux operating system and to access one or more application programs comprising at least a word processing program;checking, by the workstation, whether the Windows native policy stored on the Windows computer and associated with the workstation has been changed;upon a determination by the workstation that the Windows native policy has been changed, receiving, on the workstation, the Windows native policy from the Windows computer;translating, on the workstation, the Windows native policy into configuration information usable by the Linux operating system; andapplying the configuration information usable by the Linux operating system by saving the configuration information in a policy-related file on the workstation;wherein the Windows native policy can be read, in its native format, by a Windows operating system to set policy settings for Windows computers but cannot be read, in its native format, by a Linux operating system to set policy settings for Linux computers; andwherein the Windows native policy is used to set configurable options for at least one computer user, and wherein, after translation by the workstation, the Windows native policy remains centrally managed and updated by the Windows computer, and updates to the Windows native policy are propagated to the workstation, such that use of Windows native policies is extended to allow an administrator to use Windows native policies to manage configuration information on the workstation.
  • 23. The method of claim 22, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration of at least one application for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 24. The method of claim 22, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration information for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 25. The method of claim 22, wherein checking whether the Windows native policy has been changed includes polling the Windows computer at periodic intervals.
  • 26. The method of claim 22, wherein checking whether the Windows native policy has been changed includes receiving, on the workstation, a notification from the Windows computer that the Windows native policy has been changed.
  • 27. The method of claim 22, wherein the workstation is a desktop computer.
  • 28. The method of claim 22, wherein applying the configuration information updates configuration information of the word processing program.
  • 29. A Windows native policy application system that applies a Windows native policy to set configuration information of at least a word processing program on a Unix computer, the system comprising: a workstation having a Unix operating system, a tangible computer storage medium with user applications stored therein, and a computer processor, wherein the workstation allows a user to login to the Unix operating system and to access one or more application programs comprising at least a word processing program;a policy refresh component, stored in the storage medium, that, upon user login to the workstation, checks whether a Windows native policy stored on a Windows computer and associated with the workstation has been changed;a translator manager, stored in the storage medium, that manages the association of the Windows native policy with the workstation and, upon a determination by the policy refresh component that the Windows native policy has been changed, receives the Windows native policy from the Windows computer;a policy translator, stored in the storage medium, that receives the Windows native policy from the translator manager and translates the Windows native policy into configuration information usable by the Unix operating system;an update configuration component, stored in the storage medium, that applies the configuration information usable by the Unix operating system by saving the configuration information in a policy-related file on the workstation, wherein application of the configuration information updates configuration information of at least the word processing program;wherein the Windows native policy can be read, in its native format, by a Windows operating system to set policy settings for Windows computers but cannot be read, in its native format, by a Unix operating system to set policy settings for Linux computers; andwherein the Windows native policy is used to set configurable options for at least one computer user, and wherein, after translation by the workstation, the Windows native policy remains centrally managed and updated by the Windows computer, and updates to the Windows native policy are propagated to the workstation, such that use of Windows native policies is extended to allow an administrator to use Windows native policies to manage configuration information on the workstation.
  • 30. The system of claim 29, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration of at least one application for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 31. The system of claim 29, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration information for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 32. The system of claim 29, wherein the policy refresh component checks whether the Windows native policy has been changed at least by polling the Windows computer at periodic intervals.
  • 33. The system of claim 29, wherein the policy refresh component checks whether the Windows native policy has been changed at least by receiving a notification from the Windows computer that the Windows native policy has been changed.
  • 34. The system of claim 29, wherein the workstation is a desktop computer.
  • 35. A method of applying a Windows native policy to set configuration information of at least a word processing program on a Unix computer comprising: managing, on a workstation having a Unix operating system, a tangible computer storage medium with user applications stored therein, and a computer processor, an association between the workstation and a Windows native policy stored on a Windows computer, wherein the workstation allows a user to login to the Unix operating system and to access one or more application programs comprising at least a word processing program;upon user login to the workstation, checking, by the workstation, whether the Windows native policy stored on the Windows computer and associated with the workstation has been changed;upon a determination by the workstation that the Windows native policy has been changed, receiving, on the workstation, the Windows native policy from the Windows computer;translating, on the workstation, the Windows native policy into configuration information usable by the Unix operating system; andapplying the configuration information usable by the Linux operating system by saving the configuration information in a policy-related file on the workstation, wherein application of the configuration information updates configuration information of at least the word processing program;wherein the Windows native policy can be read, in its native format, by a Windows operating system to set policy settings for Windows computers but cannot be read, in its native format, by a Unix operating system to set policy settings for Unix computers; andwherein the Windows native policy is used to set configurable options for at least one computer user, and wherein, after translation by the workstation, the Windows native policy remains centrally managed and updated by the Windows computer, and updates to the Windows native policy are propagated to the workstation, such that use of Windows native policies is extended to allow an administrator to use Windows native policies to manage configuration information on the workstation.
  • 36. The method of claim 35, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration of at least one application for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 37. The method of claim 35, wherein the Windows native policy defines configuration information for each of a plurality of users within a group.
  • 38. The method of claim 35, wherein checking whether the Windows native policy has been changed includes polling the Windows computer at periodic intervals.
  • 39. The method of claim 35, wherein checking whether the Windows native policy has been changed includes receiving, on the workstation, a notification from the Windows computer that the Windows native policy has been changed.
  • 40. The method of claim 35, wherein the workstation is a desktop computer.
US Referenced Citations (420)
Number Name Date Kind
4109237 Hill Aug 1978 A
4370707 Phillips et al. Jan 1983 A
4694397 Grant Sep 1987 A
5222018 Sharpe et al. Jun 1993 A
5267865 Lee et al. Dec 1993 A
5302132 Corder Apr 1994 A
5310349 Daniels et al. May 1994 A
5313465 Perlman et al. May 1994 A
5333302 Hensley et al. Jul 1994 A
5339435 Lubkin et al. Aug 1994 A
5367698 Webber et al. Nov 1994 A
5371852 Attanasio et al. Dec 1994 A
5387104 Corder Feb 1995 A
5410703 Nilsson et al. Apr 1995 A
5423032 Byrd et al. Jun 1995 A
5437027 Bannon et al. Jul 1995 A
5437555 Ziv-El Aug 1995 A
5440719 Hanes et al. Aug 1995 A
5441415 Lee et al. Aug 1995 A
5497486 Stolfo et al. Mar 1996 A
5497492 Zbikowski et al. Mar 1996 A
5499379 Tanaka et al. Mar 1996 A
5530829 Beardsley et al. Jun 1996 A
5550968 Miller et al. Aug 1996 A
5550976 Henderson et al. Aug 1996 A
5553291 Tanaka et al. Sep 1996 A
5586304 Stupek, Jr. et al. Dec 1996 A
5590360 Edwards Dec 1996 A
5600833 Senn et al. Feb 1997 A
5608874 Ogawa et al. Mar 1997 A
5608903 Prasad et al. Mar 1997 A
5613090 Willems Mar 1997 A
5623601 Vu Apr 1997 A
5630069 Flores et al. May 1997 A
5630131 Palevich et al. May 1997 A
5659735 Parrish et al. Aug 1997 A
5659736 Hasegawa et al. Aug 1997 A
5666502 Capps et al. Sep 1997 A
5671428 Muranaga et al. Sep 1997 A
5673386 Batra Sep 1997 A
5673387 Chen et al. Sep 1997 A
5675782 Montague et al. Oct 1997 A
5677997 Talatik Oct 1997 A
5680586 Elkins et al. Oct 1997 A
5684950 Dare et al. Nov 1997 A
5692132 Hogan Nov 1997 A
5692902 Aeby Dec 1997 A
5694540 Humelsine et al. Dec 1997 A
5706502 Foley et al. Jan 1998 A
5708812 Van Dyke et al. Jan 1998 A
5708828 Coleman Jan 1998 A
5710884 Dedrick Jan 1998 A
5711671 Geeslin et al. Jan 1998 A
5724521 Dedrick Mar 1998 A
5727145 Nessett et al. Mar 1998 A
5727951 Ho et al. Mar 1998 A
5740427 Stoller et al. Apr 1998 A
5743746 Ho et al. Apr 1998 A
5745113 Jordan et al. Apr 1998 A
5745902 Miller et al. Apr 1998 A
5752042 Cole et al. May 1998 A
5754173 Hiura et al. May 1998 A
5754938 Herz et al. May 1998 A
5758062 Mcmahon et al. May 1998 A
5758074 Marlin et al. May 1998 A
5758344 Prasad et al. May 1998 A
5764897 Khalidi Jun 1998 A
5765140 Knudson et al. Jun 1998 A
5768519 Swift et al. Jun 1998 A
5774551 Wu et al. Jun 1998 A
5778169 Reinhardt Jul 1998 A
5784553 Kolawa et al. Jul 1998 A
5784643 Shields Jul 1998 A
5790801 Funato Aug 1998 A
5796393 Macnaughton et al. Aug 1998 A
5806075 Jain et al. Sep 1998 A
5812669 Jenkins et al. Sep 1998 A
5812865 Theimer et al. Sep 1998 A
5815657 Williams et al. Sep 1998 A
5819265 Ravin et al. Oct 1998 A
5819281 Cummins Oct 1998 A
5819295 Nakagawa et al. Oct 1998 A
5822518 Ooki et al. Oct 1998 A
5835087 Herz et al. Nov 1998 A
5835911 Nakagawa et al. Nov 1998 A
5838918 Prager et al. Nov 1998 A
5844508 Murashita et al. Dec 1998 A
5848396 Gerace Dec 1998 A
5859972 Subramaniam et al. Jan 1999 A
5872928 Lewis et al. Feb 1999 A
5872973 Mitchell et al. Feb 1999 A
5878432 Misheski et al. Mar 1999 A
5889520 Glaser Mar 1999 A
5890161 Helland et al. Mar 1999 A
5890175 Wong et al. Mar 1999 A
5892898 Fujii et al. Apr 1999 A
5893074 Hughes et al. Apr 1999 A
5893076 Hafner et al. Apr 1999 A
5893916 Dooley Apr 1999 A
5930512 Boden et al. Jul 1999 A
5937165 Schwaller et al. Aug 1999 A
5948064 Bertram et al. Sep 1999 A
5949419 Domine et al. Sep 1999 A
5956732 Tsuchida Sep 1999 A
5956736 Hanson et al. Sep 1999 A
5960200 Eager et al. Sep 1999 A
5968176 Nessett et al. Oct 1999 A
5987247 Lau Nov 1999 A
5995114 Wegman et al. Nov 1999 A
6002868 Jenkins et al. Dec 1999 A
6003047 Osmond et al. Dec 1999 A
6014669 Slaughter et al. Jan 2000 A
6014712 Islam et al. Jan 2000 A
6016495 Mckeehan et al. Jan 2000 A
6016501 Martin et al. Jan 2000 A
6021496 Dutcher et al. Feb 2000 A
6029178 Martin et al. Feb 2000 A
6029195 Herz Feb 2000 A
6029247 Ferguson Feb 2000 A
6035323 Narayen et al. Mar 2000 A
6041344 Bodamer et al. Mar 2000 A
6044368 Powers Mar 2000 A
6044465 Dutcher et al. Mar 2000 A
6049822 Mittal Apr 2000 A
6052512 Peterson et al. Apr 2000 A
6055538 Kessenich et al. Apr 2000 A
6058260 Brockel et al. May 2000 A
6058379 Odom et al. May 2000 A
6061643 Walker et al. May 2000 A
6061650 Malkin et al. May 2000 A
6067568 Li et al. May 2000 A
6070184 Blount et al. May 2000 A
6076166 Moshfeghi et al. Jun 2000 A
6079020 Liu Jun 2000 A
6092199 Dutcher et al. Jul 2000 A
6101481 Miller Aug 2000 A
6101503 Cooper et al. Aug 2000 A
6108649 Young et al. Aug 2000 A
6108670 Weida et al. Aug 2000 A
6112228 Earl et al. Aug 2000 A
6112240 Pogue et al. Aug 2000 A
6115040 Bladow et al. Sep 2000 A
6115544 Mueller Sep 2000 A
6134548 Gottsman et al. Oct 2000 A
6137869 Voit et al. Oct 2000 A
6138086 Rose et al. Oct 2000 A
6141006 Knowlton et al. Oct 2000 A
6141010 Hoyle Oct 2000 A
6141647 Meijer et al. Oct 2000 A
6151600 Dedrick Nov 2000 A
6151610 Senn et al. Nov 2000 A
6161176 Hunter et al. Dec 2000 A
6167445 Gai et al. Dec 2000 A
6167564 Fontana et al. Dec 2000 A
6170009 Mandal et al. Jan 2001 B1
6182212 Atkins et al. Jan 2001 B1
6182226 Reid et al. Jan 2001 B1
6185625 Tso et al. Feb 2001 B1
6195794 Buxton Feb 2001 B1
6199068 Carpenter Mar 2001 B1
6199079 Gupta et al. Mar 2001 B1
6202051 Woolston Mar 2001 B1
6205480 Broadhurst et al. Mar 2001 B1
6208345 Sheard et al. Mar 2001 B1
6209000 Klein et al. Mar 2001 B1
6209033 Datta et al. Mar 2001 B1
6222535 Hurd, II Apr 2001 B1
6223221 Kunz Apr 2001 B1
6226649 Bodamer et al. May 2001 B1
6230160 Chan et al. May 2001 B1
6230309 Turner et al. May 2001 B1
6233584 Purcell May 2001 B1
6237114 Wookey et al. May 2001 B1
6246410 Bergeron et al. Jun 2001 B1
6249905 Yoshida et al. Jun 2001 B1
6256637 Venkatesh et al. Jul 2001 B1
6256659 Mclain, Jr. et al. Jul 2001 B1
6256678 Traughber et al. Jul 2001 B1
6260068 Zalewski et al. Jul 2001 B1
6263352 Cohen Jul 2001 B1
6266666 Ireland et al. Jul 2001 B1
6269405 Dutcher et al. Jul 2001 B1
6269406 Dutcher et al. Jul 2001 B1
6272673 Dale et al. Aug 2001 B1
6272678 Imachi et al. Aug 2001 B1
6279030 Britton et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282576 Lane Aug 2001 B1
6282605 Moore Aug 2001 B1
6286028 Cohen et al. Sep 2001 B1
6286104 Buhle et al. Sep 2001 B1
6301601 Helland et al. Oct 2001 B1
6304893 Gish Oct 2001 B1
6308164 Nummelin et al. Oct 2001 B1
6308188 Bernardo et al. Oct 2001 B1
6308273 Goertzel et al. Oct 2001 B1
6313835 Gever et al. Nov 2001 B1
6314434 Shigemi et al. Nov 2001 B1
6327677 Garg et al. Dec 2001 B1
6330566 Durham Dec 2001 B1
6336118 Hammond Jan 2002 B1
6341287 Siziklai et al. Jan 2002 B1
6345239 Bowman-amuah Feb 2002 B1
6349287 Hayashi Feb 2002 B1
6363398 Andersen Mar 2002 B1
6370573 Bowman Amuah Apr 2002 B1
6370646 Goodman et al. Apr 2002 B1
6381579 Gervais et al. Apr 2002 B1
6389589 Mishra et al. May 2002 B1
6401085 Gershman et al. Jun 2002 B1
6401211 Brezak et al. Jun 2002 B1
6405364 Bowman-amuah Jun 2002 B1
6430556 Goldberg et al. Aug 2002 B1
6438514 Hill et al. Aug 2002 B1
6442620 Thatte et al. Aug 2002 B1
6446096 Holland et al. Sep 2002 B1
6453317 Lacost et al. Sep 2002 B1
6457130 Hitz et al. Sep 2002 B2
6466932 Dennis et al. Oct 2002 B1
6469713 Hetherington et al. Oct 2002 B2
6473794 Guheen et al. Oct 2002 B1
6496847 Bugnion et al. Dec 2002 B1
6567818 Frey et al. May 2003 B1
6587876 Mahon et al. Jul 2003 B1
6615258 Barry et al. Sep 2003 B1
6625622 Henrickson et al. Sep 2003 B1
6658625 Allen Dec 2003 B1
6678714 Olapurath et al. Jan 2004 B1
6715128 Hirashima et al. Mar 2004 B1
6728877 Mackin et al. Apr 2004 B2
6735691 Capps et al. May 2004 B1
6757696 Multer et al. Jun 2004 B2
6760761 Sciacca Jul 2004 B1
6795835 Ricart et al. Sep 2004 B2
6801946 Child et al. Oct 2004 B1
6817017 Goodman Nov 2004 B2
6839766 Parnafes et al. Jan 2005 B1
6880005 Bell et al. Apr 2005 B1
6925477 Champagne et al. Aug 2005 B1
6938158 Azuma Aug 2005 B2
6941465 Palekar et al. Sep 2005 B1
6944183 Iyer et al. Sep 2005 B1
6950818 Dennis et al. Sep 2005 B2
6950935 Allavarpu et al. Sep 2005 B1
6968370 Wu Nov 2005 B2
6973488 Yavatkar et al. Dec 2005 B1
6976090 Ben-Shaul et al. Dec 2005 B2
7028079 Mastrianni et al. Apr 2006 B2
7062781 Shambroom Jun 2006 B2
7080077 Ramamurthy et al. Jul 2006 B2
7089584 Sharma Aug 2006 B1
7100195 Underwood Aug 2006 B1
7117486 Wong et al. Oct 2006 B2
7133984 Dickensheets Nov 2006 B1
7139973 Kirkwood et al. Nov 2006 B1
7143095 Barrett et al. Nov 2006 B2
7162640 Heath et al. Jan 2007 B2
7171458 Brown et al. Jan 2007 B2
7185073 Gai et al. Feb 2007 B1
7209970 Everson et al. Apr 2007 B1
7213266 Maher et al. May 2007 B1
7216181 Jannu et al. May 2007 B1
7231460 Sullivan et al. Jun 2007 B2
7234157 Childs et al. Jun 2007 B2
7243370 Bobde et al. Jul 2007 B2
7284043 Feinleib et al. Oct 2007 B2
7299504 Tiller et al. Nov 2007 B1
7346766 Mackin et al. Mar 2008 B2
7356601 Clymer et al. Apr 2008 B1
7356816 Goodman et al. Apr 2008 B2
7379996 Papatla et al. May 2008 B2
7418597 Thornton et al. Aug 2008 B2
7421555 Dorey Sep 2008 B2
7426642 Aupperle et al. Sep 2008 B2
7428583 Lortz et al. Sep 2008 B1
7440962 Wong et al. Oct 2008 B1
7444401 Keyghobad et al. Oct 2008 B1
7467141 Steele et al. Dec 2008 B1
7478418 Supramaniam et al. Jan 2009 B2
7483979 Prager Jan 2009 B1
7487535 Isaacson et al. Feb 2009 B1
7519813 Cox et al. Apr 2009 B1
7584502 Alkove et al. Sep 2009 B2
7591005 Moore Sep 2009 B1
7617501 Peterson et al. Nov 2009 B2
7650497 Thornton et al. Jan 2010 B2
7653794 Michael et al. Jan 2010 B2
7661027 Langen et al. Feb 2010 B2
7673323 Moriconi Mar 2010 B1
7690025 Grewal et al. Mar 2010 B2
7765187 Bergant et al. Jul 2010 B2
7805721 Feinleib et al. Sep 2010 B2
7895332 Vanyukhin et al. Feb 2011 B2
7904949 Bowers et al. Mar 2011 B2
7987455 Senner et al. Jul 2011 B1
8024360 Moore Sep 2011 B2
8086710 Vanyukhin et al. Dec 2011 B2
8087075 Peterson et al. Dec 2011 B2
8141138 Bhatia et al. Mar 2012 B2
8245242 Peterson et al. Aug 2012 B2
8346908 Vanyukhin et al. Jan 2013 B1
8429712 Robinson et al. Apr 2013 B2
8533744 Peterson et al. Sep 2013 B2
20010034733 Prompt et al. Oct 2001 A1
20020055949 Shiomi et al. May 2002 A1
20020078005 Shi et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020112178 Scherr Aug 2002 A1
20020129274 Baskey et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020133723 Tait Sep 2002 A1
20020138572 Delany et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020169986 Lortz Nov 2002 A1
20020169988 Vandergeest et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020174366 Peterka et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020178377 Hemsath et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020184536 Flavin Dec 2002 A1
20030009487 Prabakaran et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030018913 Brezak et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030023587 Dennis et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030028611 Kenny et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030033535 Fisher et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030065940 Brezak et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030065942 Lineman et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030110397 Supramaniam et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030115186 Wilkinson et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030115313 Kanada et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030115439 Mahalingam et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030149781 Yared et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030177388 Botz et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030188036 Chen et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030229783 Hardt Dec 2003 A1
20040010519 Sinn et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040059953 Purnell Mar 2004 A1
20040078569 Hotti Apr 2004 A1
20040088543 Garg et al. May 2004 A1
20040098595 Aupperle et al. May 2004 A1
20040098615 Mowers et al. May 2004 A1
20040111515 Manion et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040111643 Farmer Jun 2004 A1
20040117382 Houseknecht et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040123146 Himmel et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040128542 Blakley et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040139050 Barrett et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040139081 Barrett et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040199795 Grewal et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040226027 Winter Nov 2004 A1
20040260565 Zimniewicz et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040260651 Chan et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050010547 Carinci et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050044409 Betz et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050055357 Campbell Mar 2005 A1
20050060397 Barthram et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050086457 Hohman Apr 2005 A1
20050091068 Ramamoorthy et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091213 Schutz et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091250 Dunn et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091284 Weissman et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050091290 Cameron et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050108579 Isaacson et al. May 2005 A1
20050114701 Atkins et al. May 2005 A1
20050125798 Peterson Jun 2005 A1
20050144463 Rossebo et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050160423 Bantz et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050193181 Kaneda et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050198303 Knauerhase et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050204143 Ellington Sep 2005 A1
20050223216 Chan et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050246554 Batson Nov 2005 A1
20050267938 Czeczulin Dec 2005 A1
20050268309 Krishnaswamy et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050283443 Hardt Dec 2005 A1
20050283614 Hardt Dec 2005 A1
20060004794 Pizzo et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060005229 Palekar et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060010445 Peterson et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015353 Reese Jan 2006 A1
20060021017 Hinton et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060026195 Gu et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060034494 Holloran Feb 2006 A1
20060085483 Mooney et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060116949 Wehunt et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060130065 Chin et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060161435 Atef et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060174350 Roever et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060184401 DelGaudio et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060200424 Cameron et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060200504 Lo Sep 2006 A1
20060224611 Dunn et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060248099 Barrett et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060265740 Clark et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060282360 Kahn et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060282461 Marinescu Dec 2006 A1
20060294151 Wong et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070011136 Haskin et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070038596 Pizzo et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070083917 Peterson et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070100980 Kataoka et al. May 2007 A1
20070101415 Masui May 2007 A1
20070143430 Johnson et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070143836 Bowers et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070150448 Patnode Jun 2007 A1
20070156766 Hoang et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070156767 Hoang et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070180448 Low et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070180493 Croft et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070192843 Peterson Aug 2007 A1
20070255814 Green et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070288992 Robinson Dec 2007 A1
20080104220 Vanyukhin May 2008 A1
20080104250 Vanyukhin May 2008 A1
20080133533 Ganugapati et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080162604 Soulet et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080215867 Mackin et al. Sep 2008 A1
20090006537 Palekar et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090216975 Halperin et al. Aug 2009 A1
20100050232 Peterson Feb 2010 A1
20110093570 Mackin et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110282977 Peterson Nov 2011 A1
20110283273 Peterson Nov 2011 A1
20120192256 Peterson et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120215899 Peterson Aug 2012 A1
20120297035 Peterson Nov 2012 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (4)
Number Date Country
05728119.1 Mar 2005 EP
1 932 279 Jun 2008 JP
WO 2006016900 Feb 2006 WO
WO 2007044613 Apr 2007 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (149)
Entry
“Description of Digital Certificates”, Jan. 23, 2007.
“Directory Administrator”, p. 1-3. Dec. 15, 2004.
“Innovation Report—Windows Group Policy Protocols”. Jul. 31, 2006.
“Kerberos Module for Apache”.
“LDAP Linux HOWTO”, p. 1-2. Mar. 5, 2004.
“Lnux Authentication Against Active Directory”, p. 1-2. Dec. 15, 2004.
“NegotiateAuth”, Jul. 8, 2010.
“Optimization Techniques for Trusted Semantic Interoperation”, Final Technical Report, Air Force Research Laboratory. Published May 1998.
“Project: AD4Unix: Summary”, p. 1-3. Dec. 15, 2004.
“Replacing NIS with Kerberos and LDAP”, p. 1-2. Dec. 15, 2004.
“Sadma”, p. 1-2. Dec. 15, 2004.
“Sun Enterprise Authentication Mechanism Data Sheet”, pp. 1-4. Dec. 15, 2004.
Vintela Extends the Reach of Microsoft Group Policy to Unix and Linux; Vintela Group Policy (VGP) Provides a Framework for Unix and Linux Policy-Based Management Through the Popular Windows Group Policy System., PR Newswire, Sep. 13, 2004.
Nov. 18, 2011, U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458—Office Action—Transmittal of Communications to Third Party Requester Inter Partes Reexamination, 52 pages.
Nov. 18, 2011, U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458—Patent Owner Comments Regarding Oct. 20, 2011 Action Closing Presecution, 14 pages.
A. Leonard, “Embrace, extend, censor”, Originally published May 11, 2000 on salon.com.
Accelerated Examination Support Document in U.S. Appl. No. 13/198,592, filed Aug. 4, 2011.
Accelerated Examination Support Document in U.S. Appl. No. 13/198,629, filed Aug. 4, 2011.
Aelita Software Domain Migration Wizard 6.0 User's Guide, Aug. 21, 2003.
AIX 5L Differences Guide Version 5.2 Edition Published Dec. 24, 2002, Excerpt.
Akhgar et al., Secure ICT Services for Mobile and Wireless Communications: A Federated Global Identity Management Framework, 2006 IEEE.
Alan H. Harbitter et al., “Performance of Public-Key-Enabled Kerberos Authentication in Large Networks”, Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on Security and Privacy. 2001.
Antti Tikkanen, “Active Directory and nss—idap for Linux: Centralized er Management,” printed from pp. 1-11, 2004.
Apurva Kumar, “The OpenLDAP Proxy Cache,” IBM, India Research Lab, at least as early as May 2003.
Authentication, from Pieces of the Puzzle, Chapter 2, p. 12. (Exhibit IV to U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,872, Inter Partes Reexamination Renewed Petition (Third Party Requester to Response to Mar. 1, 2012 Office Action), dated Aug. 9, 2012.
Buell, D.A. et al., “Identity management”, Internet Computing, IEEEvol. 7, Issue 6, Nov.-Dec. 2003 pp. 26-28.
Centrify Corporation's Answer and Affirmative Defenses, Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-CV-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Centrify DirectControl Administrator's Guide Version 2.0, Aug. 15, 2005.
Chapter 9 Authentication Protocols, Distributed System & Network Security Lab, Department of Computer Science & Information Engineering, National Chiao Tung University, pp. 21-22. 1991.
Complaint, Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-cv-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
COSuser—Identity management and user provisioning for Unix, Linux and Microsoft Windows® May 24, 2010.
Damiani, E., et al, “Managing multiple and dependable identities” Internet Computing, IEEEvol. 7, Issue 6, Nov.-Dec. 2003 pp. 29-37.
David “Del” Elson, “Active Directory and Linux,” printed from pp. 1-11, 2002.
David F. Carr, “What's Federated Identity Management?”, eWeek, Nov. 10, 2003.
Declaration of Ethan L. Miller, Ph.D. (Exh. I, to Inter Partes Reexam), dated Aug. 30, 2012.
Declaration of Matthew Peterson in Support of Quest's Opposition to Centrify's Motion to Transfer Venue to the Northern District of California, Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-cv-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Dennis, Disconnect Login (Was: FC3 Bug Week—Help Wanted) (Sep. 24, 2004).
Description of Digital Certificates, Jan. 23, 2007, available at.
Designing Network Security Published May 7, 1999. Excerpt.
Documentation for Kerberos V5 release krb5-1.3, Copyright 1985-2002, Installation Guide.
Documentation for Kerberos V5 release krb5-1.3, Copyright 1985-2002, Installation Guide:—System Administrator's Guide:—UNIX User's Guide.
Documentation for Kerberos V5 release krb5-1.3, Copyright 1985-2002, System Administrator's Guide.
Documentation for Kerberos V5 release krb5-1.3, Copyright 1985-2002, UNIX User's Guide.
European Office Action, Application No. 05728119.8-1243 dated Apr. 9, 2009.
European Patent Office Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC dated Apr. 9, 2009.
Fabini et al., “IMS in a Bottle: Initial Experiences from an OpenSER-based Prototype Implementation of the 3GPP IP Multimedia Subsystem” Mobile Business, 2006. ICMB '06. International Conference on Publication Date: 2006; On pp. 13-13.
Garman, “Kerberos—The Definitive Guide,” Aug. 2003, O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
Get to One Options for moving from multiple, Unix identities to a single, AD-based authentication infrastructure with Vintela Authentication Services May 24, 2010.
Hank Simon, “SAML:The Secret to Centralized Identity Management”, Dec. 2004.
IBM SecureWay Policy Director, 1999. (4 pages).
IBM z/OS V1R1.0-V1R12.0 DCE Application Development Reference: dce—ace—is—cient—authorized API call: URL: Copyright IBM Corporation 1990,2010, (2 pages).
Identity Management for UNIX Aug. 22, 2005.
Implementing Registry-Based Group Policy for Applications, Microsoft Windows 2000 Server. White Paper. 2000.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2006/039302, mailed on Apr. 2, 2009, in 7 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from International Patent Appl. No. PCT/US2009/038394, mailed Oct. 6, 2009, in 13 pages.
International Search Report in International Application No. PCT/US2006/039302, mailed on Jul. 3, 2008.
International Search Report PCT/US2005/008342 , mailed on Nov. 9, 2006.
Introduction to Group Policy in Windows Server 2003, Microsoft Corporation, Published Apr. 2003.
J. Barr, “The Gates of Hades: Microsoft attempts to co-opt Kerberos”, Published Apr. 2000 as verified by the Internet Archive.
J. Brezak, “HTTP Authentication: SPNEGO Access Authentication as Implemented in Microsoft Windows 2000,” pp. 1-6. 2002.
J. Kohl et al. “RFC 1510: The Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5)”, Published Sep. 1993.
Jan De Clercq, “Win.NET Server Kerberos”, Sep. 17, 2002.
John Brezak, “Interoperability with Microsoft Windows 2000 Active Directory and Kerberos Services,” printed from pp. 1-4, 2000.
Kerberos, PACs, and Microsoft's Dirty Tricks Originally posted to slashdot.org on May 2, 2000.
Langella, S. et al., “Dorian: Grid Service Infrastructure for Identity Management and Federation”, Computer-Based Medical Systems, 2006. CBMS 2006. 19th IEEE International Symposium on Jun. 22-23, 2006 pp. 756-761.
Li, M., et al., “Identity management in vertical handovers for UMTS-WLAN networks”, Mobile Business, 2005. ICMB 2005. International Conference on Jul. 11-13, 2005 pp. 479-484.
Likewise Software, Inc.'s Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims, Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-CV-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
LinuX® and Windows® Interoperability Guide, Published Dec. 14, 2001, Excerpt.
Lowe-Norris, Alistair G., Windows 2000 Active Directory, Chapters 8 and 9, pp. 177-245, Jan. 2000.
Matsunaga et al, “Secure Authentication System for Public WLAN Roaming, Proceedings of the 1st ACM international workshop on Wireless mobile applications and services on WLAN hotspots,” San Diego, CA, A, Year of Publication: 2003, p. 113-121.
Matthew Hur, “Session Code: ARC241 architecture & infrastructure”, Microsoft Corporation. Oct. 26, 2003.
MCSE in a Nutshell: The Windows 2000 Exams Published Feb. 2001. Excerpt.
Memorandum Decision and Order Denying Defendant Centrify Corporation's Motion to Transfer Venue and Motion to Stay Pending Inter Partes Reexamination, Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-cv-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Memorandum in Support of Centrify's Motion to Stay Pending Inter Partes Reexamination, Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-cv-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Microsoft Corp., Implementing Registry-Based Group Policy for Applications, 2000.
Microsoft Corp., Introduction to Group Policy in Windows Server 2003, 2003.
Microsoft: CATIA Migration from UNIX to Windows, Overview, Jul. 18, 2003. (3 pages).
Microsoft: CATIA Migration from UNIX to Windows, Overview, Jul. 18, 2003, Microsoft, Chapter 8, Windows-Unix Interoperability and Data Sharing. (21 pages).
Mikkonen, H. et al., “Federated Identity Management for Grids” Networking and Services, 2006. ICNS '06. International conference on Jul. 16-18, 2006 pp. 69-69.
Mont, M.C. et al., “Towards accountable management of identity and privacy: sticky policies and enforceable tracing services”, Database and Expert Systems Applications, 2003. Proceedings. 14th International Workshop on Sep. 1-5, 2003 pp. 377-382.
NCSA Introduction to Kerberos 5, All right reserved Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois Page last updated May 21, 2002.
Neuman et al., “RFC 4120—The Kerberos Network Authentication Service V5,” Network Working Group, Jul. 2005.
Neuman, et al.: “Kerberos: An Authentication Service for Computer Networks”, IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 32, Issue 9, Pub. Date Sep. 1994, relevant pp. 33-38.
O'Reily publications “Unix & Internet Security”, Apr. 1996. (3 pages).
PADL Software Pty Ltd., pp. 1-3. Dec. 15, 2004.
PADL Software Pty Ltd., Pam—ccreds readme, (Apr. 11, 2004) (pan—crreds).
Phiri, J. et al., “Modelling and Information Fusion in Digital Identity Management Systems” Networking, International Conference on Systems and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies, 2006. ICN/ICONS/MCL 2006. International Conference on Apr. 23-29, 2006 pp. 181-181.
Quest Software, Inc.'s Opposition to Motion to Stay, Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-cv-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Quest Software; “UNIX Identity Migration Wizard User Guide”, 2006.
Quest Vintela Authentication Services Administrator's Guide Version 3.1, Sep. 2006.
Radeke, E., et al. “Framework for object migration in federated database systems”, Cooperation Univ. of Paderborn, Germany, Parallel and Distributed Information Systems, 1994., Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Publication Date: Sep. 28-30, 1994, on pp. 187-194.
Record of Oral Hearing in Reexamination Control No. 95/001,458 of United States Patent No. 7,617,501, Argued Aug. 15, 2013.
Reply Memorandum in Support of Centrify's Motion to Stay Pending Inter Partes Reexamination, Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-cv-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Request for Withdrawal of the European Application No. 05728119.8 on Feb. 19, 2010.
Response to Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EOC filed Sep. 9, 2009 in EP 05728119.8.
RFC 4120—“The Kerberos Network Authentication Service V5,” Neuman et al., Network Working Group, Jul. 2005.
Sandrasegaran, Hsang, Identity Management in Vertical Handovers for UMTS-WLAN Networks, 2005 IEEE.
Schroeder, SDSC's Installation and Development of Kerberos, San Diego Supercomputer Center, San Diego, CA, Sep. 20, 1995, p. 1-11.
Search Security, “Search Security.com Definitions”, Jun. 4, 2007.
Shim, S.S.Y et al., “Federated identity management” Computer; vol. 38, Issue 12, Dec. 2005 pp. 120-122.
Shin, D. et al., “Ensuring information assurance in federated identity management”, Performance, Computing, and Communications, 2004 IEEE International Conference on 2004 pp. 821-826.
Siddiqi, J. et al., “Secure ICT Services for Mobile and Wireless Communications: A Federated Global Identity Management Framework”, Information Technology: New Generations, 2006. ITNG 2006. Third International Conference on Apr. 10-12, 2006 pp. 351-357.
Sixto Ortiz, Jr., “One-Time Password Technology”, vol. 29, Issue 15, Apr. 13, 2007.
Stipulated Judgment and Entry of Permanent Injunction against Likewise Software, Inc., Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2:10-CV-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Subject 2.15. What do I need to do to setup cross-realm authentication?, Jul. 8, 2010.
The SLAPD and SLURPD Administrator's Guide, University of Michigan Release 3.3 Apr. 30, 1996, available at.
Transcript of Jul. 22, 2011 deposition of Michael W. Dennis in Quest Software, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software, Inc., Case No. 2: 10-CV-00859-TS, United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division.
Turbo Fredriksson, “LDAPv3.” printed from pp. 2-65, 2001.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/612,569, Inter Partes Reexamination Request dated Aug. 31, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Action Closing Prosecution dated Oct. 10, 2011
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Appellant's Brief filed Mar. 15, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Examiner's Answer mailed Sep. 25, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Notice of Appeal filed Jan. 16, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Notice of Defective Paper in Inter Partes Reexamination mailed Jul. 20, 2011.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Notice of Hearing mailed May 30, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Order dated Nov. 24, 2010 Granting Request for Inter Partes Reexamination.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Patent Owner Comments filed Nov. 18, 2011.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Rebuttal Brief filed Oct. 24, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Respondent's Brief filed Apr. 12, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Response to Office Action filed Mar. 21, 2011.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Right of Appeal Notice mailed Dec. 16, 2011.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Shortened Response to Office Action filed Aug. 4, 2011.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Third Party Requester Comments filed Apr. 15, 2011.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Third Party Requester Comments filed Aug. 22, 2011.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458 Reexamination Third Party Requester Comments filed Nov. 29, 2011.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458, Inter Partes Reexamination Office Action, dated Jan. 21, 2011 of co-owned U.S. Patent No. 7,617,501.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458, Inter Partes Reexamination, Request for Oral Hearing, dated Nov. 21, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115 Reexamination Decision dated Oct. 11, 2012 Granting Request for Inter Partes Reexamination.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115 Reexamination Exhibit T submitted Dec. 10, 2012 with Response to Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115 Reexamination Exhibits A-K to Request for Inter Partes Reexamination filed Aug. 31, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115 Reexamination Office Action dated Oct. 11, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115, Patent Owner's Statement in Inter Partes Reexamination, filed Dec. 10, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115, Reexamination Action Closing Prosecution dated Feb. 6, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115, Reexamination Exhibits L-S submitted Dec. 10, 2012 with both Patent Owner's Statement and Response to Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115, Reexamination Notice of Appeal of Patent Owner, filed May 22, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115, Reexamination Right of Appeal Notice dated Apr. 23, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/002,115, Response to Office Action in Inter Partes Reexamination, filed Dec. 10, 2012.
U.S. Appl. No. 95/001,458, Inter Partes Reexamination Request of co-owned U.S. Patent No. 7,617,501.
Ventuneac et al., A policy-based security framework for Web-enabled applications, Proceeding ISICT '03, Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Information and Communication Technologies, pp. 487-492.
Vintela Group Policy Technology Preview, “Extending the Power of Group Policy and Windonws Active Directory to configuration of Unix and Linux users and systems”, Version 0.1, May 2004.
Wedgetail Communications; “Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML)”, 2004.
Weitzner, D.J., “In Search of Manageable Identity Systems”, IEEE Internet Computing, vol. 10, Issue 6, Nov.-Dec. 2006 pp. 84-86.
Windows 2000 Kerberos Authentication White Paper, Microsoft Windows 2000 Server, pp. 1-5 and 41-42. Jul. 12, 2010.
Withers, Integrating Windows 2000 and UNIX Using Kerberos, The Journal for UNIX Systems Administrators, vol. 10, No. 12, Dec. 2001.
Oct. 15, 2013 Related Applications.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/200,814, filed Aug. 28, 2008, Eyes et al.
Dec. 6, 2013 Re-Exam Decision on Appeal—QSOFT.363X.
Jan. 6, 2014 Request for Rehearing by Third Party Requester in Inter PartesReexamination—QSOFT.363X.
Feb. 5, 2014 Comments on Request for Rehearing—QSOFT.363X.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20140012964 A1 Jan 2014 US
Continuations (3)
Number Date Country
Parent 13563490 Jul 2012 US
Child 14021852 US
Parent 12612569 Nov 2009 US
Child 13563490 US
Parent 10888845 Jul 2004 US
Child 12612569 US