1. Field of the Invention
This invention is related to the field of protecting digital information from being copied, modified, or used by unauthorized parties. In particular this invention is related to systems and methods that prevent unauthorized access to, and modification of, digital data as found on computer systems and consumer-appliance systems that utilize Compact Disc (CD), DVD, or other removable media (such as Flash Memory on standard or proprietary cards or sticks, or other non-volatile memory) technologies.
2. Description of the Related Art
The electronic publishing industry for application software, computer games, appliance-console games, movies, and music, is facing a growing and serious problem; namely, the piracy and unauthorized modification and use of their content. Since digital content is by nature capable of being copied exactly, wherein a copy is identical in every way to the original, and since the tools to do so are increasingly available, the industry is facing increasing losses. Such losses may include the unauthorized copying of a CD containing a game, or the unauthorized reverse engineering and modification of a word processing program to allow for its illegal distribution, or the reverse engineering of a copy protection scheme to disable it, making it possible to make duplicates with ease.
There are many mechanisms available that may be used to limit or prevent unauthorized access to digital content. Following deployment, such mechanisms are often times subsequently compromised by hackers, and the methods and techniques used to compromise them have been widely disseminated and actively used and enhanced. Most protections are simplistic in nature, and depend to large degree on the secrecy of the simple method as much as its inherent security or ingenuity, such that if not defeated prior to publication, the act of publishing them, for example in patent form, reveals enough about them to render them less effective. More than one of these approaches may be defeated if anticipated by using “ProcDump”, a memory lifting tool that is available free on the World Wide Web (such a tool may also be easily written following technical instructions that may also be found on the web) in conjunction with SoftICE, a powerful debugging tool, which may also be found on the web. A computer system is usually the platform and tool of choice for one intent on reverse engineering or cracking these protection mechanisms; even if the protected content's target was not a computer system such as a PC but rather an appliance computing device such as a game console, the content can best be modified (“hacked”) on a computer. In terms of protecting content from copying or modification by a skilled person with a modem computer system, most inventions in the field (see below) are not protected from being reverse engineered, modified, or content-duplicated by means of commonly available tools such as “SoftICE” (an in-circuit emulator and very powerful debugger), “ProcDump” (can capture any data content from any memory location, regardless of how protected the memory was thought to be), “IDA” (a disassembler), and “FileMon” (a file system monitoring and transcribing service tool). There are no design secrets that can be kept from such a set of tools, and there are many more such tools in existence, and more being created all the time. Therefore it becomes far more important to have well designed mechanisms that do not depend on their secrecy, as much as their design, to ensure security.
A number of patent references describe a variety of methods for protection of digital data and content. These include the following U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,405,829, 4,864,616, 4,888,800, 4,999,806, 5,021,997, 5,027,396, 5,033,084, 5,081,675, 5,155,847, 5,166,886, 5,191,611, 5,220,606, 5,222,133, 5,313,521, 5,325,433, 5,327,563, 5,337,357, 5,351,293, 5,341,429, 5,351,297, 5,361,359, 5,379,433, 5,392,351, 5,394,469, 5,414,850, 5,473,687, 5,490,216, 5,497,423, 5,509,074, 5,511,123, 5,524,072, 5,532,920, 5,555,304, 5,557,346, 5,557,675, 5,592,549, 5,615,264, 5,625,692, 5,638,445, 6,052,780 and 6,185,686.
Many of the aforementioned mechanisms depend to a great extent on lack of knowledge about the mechanisms by the persons attempting to modify or copy the content. With even partial knowledge, many of these mechanisms can be defeated by even a moderately technical person with access to the web where all the necessary tools and techniques are available. There is a need for security methods that do not depend solely upon their secrecy or obscurity in order to be effective.
To address the limitations of the conventional approaches described above, the present invention is directed to a digital content security method and system that does not depend solely upon secrecy or obscurity in order to be effective.
In one aspect, the present invention is directed to a system and method for storing encrypted data, subdivided into arbitrarily small collections of bits within other files, or between them, or outside a file system's known storage areas entirely. The data size used in the discussion below is 4-bit nibbles and 8-bit bytes , but it should be noted that any data size is applicable to the principles of the present invention. The location for the information is arrived at algorithmically, and no single individual location is inherently secret, but knowledge of the totality of the locations and their order of traversal is critical. The content is encrypted, but before being encrypted, each 8-bit word or byte is broken down into 4-bit nibbles, and is merged 4 bits at a time with a completely unrelated stream of bits, which may also themselves be equally meaningful 4-bit nibbles. Such interleaved multiplexing is not limited to the two-way example above, but may be considered N-way, where N is an arbitrary positive integer of any size.
In another aspect of the present invention, the locations are not dynamically arrived at but are rather chosen by a mapping process and an encoded location map is generated. This map may be itself encrypted, then subdivided into 4-bit nibbles or 8-bit bytes and itself hidden.
In another aspect of the present invention, any encrypted file is locked by taking its decryption key and then encrypting that key using another encryption method or key. The encrypted key is placed in a known location, such as the beginning, end, or at a known offset within the file, or is subdivided into bits and scattered into the file in known, and therefore retrievable, locations. The locked file itself may then be subdivided, multiplexed, further encrypted, and hidden, as needed.
In another aspect of the present invention, content can be replaced with translocated content, such that, in the example of executable content, the file a.exe is replaced with another file a.exe. The contents of a.exe are encrypted, locked, and hidden as described above. Upon execution of a.exe the content is retrieved, decrypted if necessary, executed as desired. This is not to imply a limitation to executable software content such as .exe files; all other digital content, such as an audio a.wav file, can have one or more associations in preference order, with execution environments such as a variety of MP3 or audio software players. The playback environment can be provided within the secured entity, or can be something that was always resident on the system prior to installation of the secured entity.
In another aspect of the present invention, digital content (whether or not it is also hidden and/or encrypted) is modified such that it is tokenized or otherwise obfuscated, and then when it comes time for the content to be used, it is interpreted within a custom interpreter that is a part of the system. An example of such is to modify a compiler such that the assembly language output is nonstandard, and thus require that the execution occur in an interpreter designed for the task. Such construction is possible even using decades-old utilities such as LEXX and YaCC, traditionally compiler creation tools. Such an interpreter is composed of a parser which consumes tokens, converts the tokenized logic to native computing instructions, obfuscates these instructions with anti-disassembly logic, and feeds them to the standard system interfaces. Such interposition of execution layers makes debugging a nontrivial task, and the anti-disassembly logic eliminates the use of many popular disassembly tools.
In another aspect, the present invention employs saturation “chaff” logic to create a large amount of harmless and meaningless (yet utterly real in appearance and content, and apparently meaningful) information designed to saturate or confuse logging, reverse engineering, and debugging tools. Such logic can be targeted at specific systems, such that large amounts of I/O to the CD device can be used to mask any meaningful activity that may also be occurring on a device. The saturation invention is particularly useful against attempts to reverse engineer a protection system by monitoring its activity, because any such eventual logging/journal output of these tools must be reviewed and interpreted by human beings, and the overall volume (instead of 100 or 500 lines of logging on a device in a few minutes, this invention can generate tens of thousands of spurious log events in the same time period) can make it difficult or impossible to sort out the useful information from the chaff.
In another aspect, the present invention prevents sophisticated monitoring tools from monitoring and logging file access. This is accomplished by creating a driver extension layer, referred to as a “shim”, and attaching it to all appropriate operating system interfaces. Note that these shim interfaces on most consumer computer operating systems allow chaining, so that multiple layers can be stacked dynamically. This is also commonly called “hooking” on Windows operating systems. The present invention provides security by selecting where to hook (whether you choose to hook before or after a monitoring shim/hooking tool, such as FileMon, is significant; one can even hook both before AND after, to provide the tool with spurious input information). The mechanism rehooks at the desired depth(s) with variable frequency to defeat subsequent monitoring tool invocations.
In another aspect the present invention creates a driver extension layer, and shims or hooks the all relevant operating system interfaces, (and re-attach as above if desired). In this aspect, access filtering capabilities are employed to alter access to secured content, or to security-threat content.
In another aspect, the present invention employs an authorization process, which serves as a significant part of the decision in determining the status and origins of a task or process on the system and make an access determination.
In another aspect, the present invention includes an “assassin” construct; a system entity that operates to monitor activity and take action as needed. If, for example, the system were composed of multiple processes, one or more of which were protective by nature, and someone were to kill or stop one of the protective processes, an assassin process would take note of that occurrence, and would take action. The authorization process described below is a significant part of this decision in determining the status and origins of a task or process on the system. Such action might include disabling the rest of the system to prevent tampering, or killing the tampering process, or both. Assassin constructs are most useful if they serve some other purpose essential to the system, such as if, in the example above, the assassin process also served as a system's decryption service, such that killing the assassin would result in loss of ability to decrypt by the system, guaranteeing failure. Such assassin processes can detect the existence of specific tools both dormant and active, and prohibit the protective system's exposure to them.
In another aspect, the present invention includes an “authorization” construct. Such a process is aware of how the operating system tracks the lineage of processes and tasks, and can determine parentage quickly and accurately, so that is can be used to authorize file accesses to appropriate subtasks of an authorized task. On many operating systems the level of identification required by the system is insufficient so this aspect of the invention can bypass system query utilities and instead walk the system's process memory and track the lineage, creation, and deletion of processes and tasks.
In view of the above, the present invention is first directed to a system and method for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data. Digital content data is subdivided into data segments. The data segments are modified with second data to generate modified data. The modified data are then stored at predetermined memory locations.
It is noted that the digital content data may comprise any form of digital data that is stored, transmitted, or utilized on or between computer systems of all types. Such data includes, but is not limited to, audio, video, documents, electronic text and software and the like.
The data segments are preferably of a variable length, and the second data preferably comprises a randomly generated data stream. The second data may optionally comprise portions of the digital content data.
The modified data may likewise be encrypted and stored, for example with an encryption key, which, may in turn itself be encrypted. The encryption key may be stored with the encrypted modified data at the predetermined memory locations, and may be partitioned among the encrypted modified data.
The digital content data may comprise first and second digital content data, wherein the predetermined memory locations are selected as combinations of the locations at which the first and second digital content data were originally stored. A map of locations at which the modified data is stored may be generated and stored at the predetermined memory locations.
In a preferred embodiment, the memory locations reside on a system and the system is scanned to determine available memory locations. Target memory locations within the available memory locations at which to store the modified data are determined. The modified data is then stored at the target memory locations. The available memory locations may be located within file system locations and outside file system locations.
Modification of the data segments preferably comprises interleaving the data segments with the second data to generate interleaved data. The second data may be tokenized, for example with lexical equivalents of assembly language commands. The lexical equivalents may be consumed by a system interpreter, in turn generating alternative assembly language commands selected to obfuscate the digital content data in the event of an unauthorized access.
The present invention is also directed to a method and system for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data in a system having memory locations comprising. Digital content data is subdivided into data segments, which are, in turn, modified with second data to generate modified data. The system is scanned to determine available memory locations and target memory locations within the available memory locations at which to store the modified data are selected. The modified data are then stored at the target memory locations.
The present invention is further directed to a method and system for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data hosted on a system. Digital content data is modified with saturation data to generate modified data, and the modified data are stored at predetermined memory locations on the system to deter unauthorized access of the digital content data.
In a preferred embodiment, it is determined whether an unauthorized attempt at accessing the digital content data occurs, and in the event of unauthorized access, saturation traffic is generated on the system to deter the unauthorized activity. The saturation traffic may comprise commands that burden system resources, for example as a function of activity utilizing the system resources subject to the unauthorized access.
The present invention is further directed to a method and system for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data hosted on a system wherein a table of contents identifies files stored at memory locations of the system. A first memory location referring to a location at which at which first data file is stored is identified at the table of contents. The first memory location in the table of contents is then modified to refer to a second data file at a second location. Upon an attempt at access by the system of the first data file, the second data file is accessed if the attempt is unauthorized.
In an alternative embodiment, the first data file is replaced with the second data file and upon an attempt at access by the system of the first data file, the second data file is accessed if the attempt is unauthorized.
The present invention is further directed to a method and system for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data hosted on a system. An operating system interface of the system is monitored to determine access of operating system resources. A shim is repeatedly generated on the operating system interface to deter unauthorized access of the digital content data.
The present invention is further directed to a method and system for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data hosted on a system wherein a portion of the digital content data is substituted with token data to generate tokenized data. The tokenized data are stored at predetermined memory locations on the system to deter unauthorized access of the digital content data.
The present invention is further directed to a method and system for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data hosted on a system wherein an operating system interface operating on the system and the digital content data at an assassin process are monitored to determine whether an unauthorized attempt at accessing the digital content data occurs. In the event of unauthorized access, the unauthorized access is deterred and communicated to the operating system interface.
The present invention is further directed to a method and system for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data in a system having memory locations wherein the system is scanned to determine available memory locations based on a file system identifying locations of files on the system. Target memory locations are determined within the available memory locations at which to store the digital content data. The digital content data is stored at the target memory locations.
In another aspect, the present invention includes a software development kit and toolkit, which embodies the aspects of the inventions described above and allows for their application to target content without revealing the details of the construct methods to the user.
The present invention is thus further directed to a system for preventing unauthorized use of digital content data in a system having memory locations wherein the system enables a user to select from a plurality of tool modules, each module providing a service for protecting digital content from unauthorized use such that a user can protect digital content. The tool modules may comprise modules that perform functions selected from the group of functions consisting of: interleaving; tokenization; obfuscation; saturation; translocation; shimming and assassination.
The foregoing and other objects, features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the more particular description of preferred embodiments of the invention, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention.
The present invention will be more completely understood by means of the following detailed description, which should be read in conjunction with the attached drawings,
This invention and its embodiments may be implemented on a personal computer or general purpose digital computer as shown in
The systems and methods of the present invention may be embodied and implemented on a general-purpose digital computer or personal computer system 6 as shown in
The computer system 6 may be a general purpose home or office or mobile computer system. Such systems allow for the usage/consumption/execution of a variety of forms of digital content; the invention disclosed herein can be applied to all forms of such digital content and the foregoing will describe some of the forms of this content on this computing platform family. Such systems are generally multiple-component level hardware-based systems, comprised of a motherboard or main-board, with various specialized components (such as I/O cards, video cards, processors, memory) attached to it by means of connectors. Each such card and the motherboard itself and the attached components have some amount of executable firmware located on various non-volatile memory 3 integrated circuit components, but the majority of the system's operational logic is driven by executable operating system code that is stored on media (non-removable or removable magnetic and or optical media, or non-volatile random access memory media). Usually on a system of this general type such executable code is created by software developers and is written using program code in modern programming languages such as C and C++. Such languages are programmatically compiled into assembly language or machine instruction code and are later executed directly on the system's central processing unit. Other programming languages and techniques, such as those used in Java, JavaScript, and Visual Basic, are interpreted at runtime; they're stored in their original language, or in a moderately tokenized version of their original language, and are then rendered on the fly at execution time into assembly language or machine instruction code and are later executed directly on the system's central processing unit. Other forms of relevant digital content utilized on such a computer system are audio (for example .wav or .mp3 file formats), video (for example .avi file format), e-book and documentation (for example .pdf or variant secure-portable-document-format), and all such content may be significantly security-enhanced by the application of the invention described in this document.
As shown in
In one embodiment of this invention, illustrated in
Prior to writing the output stream, the watermark may optionally be encrypted by a key to further enhance its security. The encryption key itself can also be optionally encrypted in a similar manner in steps 15 (subdivide into segments) 16 (interleave) and 17 (encrypt), and optionally stored in a known location with the data stream 18.
An example of the resultant effect of the system and method of the invention is provided in the following illustration. Assume an identifier 1234 11 that is to be hidden in 100 locations on a game CD (see description below in connection with
The present invention, illustrated in
The following code example details an embodiment of this invention which illustrates the concepts discussed in the above paragraphs which reference
A simple example and embodiment of this aspect of the present invention now follows. Assume three streams of digital content, in this case three files on disk, each of five megabytes in size. File “A” is a text file. File “B” is an audio file. File “C” is a Word document; thus on a general purpose computing device 6 (see
One embodiment of the writing process 18 streams the contents back into the original files A, B and C (see
The following example CmapLocation::WriteFile is a code example of the logic used to create such a map file of locations. Note that there are two types of maps created by the CmapLocation::WriteFile code example below: raw maps and location maps. Raw maps are built upon a linked list structure of locations and lengths and also contain detailed information about the file this mapped area was derived from. Location maps are a further abstraction, and are built upon linked lists of raw map lists, where each location map entry contains information to locate a certain number of data bytes. In the example code below, this value is 16 bytes to support the example encryption method, which is optimized for 16 bit units of data. So in the foregoing example, the location map is created from the raw map by partitioning it into 16 byte blocks. These 16 byte blocks need not be contiguous.
Also note that the following code examples embody another aspect of this invention; namely, a file locker, a mechanism as described below with reference to
With reference to
The operation for choosing the actual locations will now be described with reference to
With reference to
Low-level operating system interfaces are accessed, and device level access is initialized 34 at a level far below the normal file system interfaces, such that the device may be addressed in any and all valid raw physical locations, whether inside or outside the standard file system. The map or map information obtained above at step 33 is used to determine the ordering or reading and the read locations, and these locations are read in order 35. The items read are concatenated in the order read to re-create the original multiplexed interleaved stream. If decrypted previously, the decryption key is read, either from the map 33 or from a predetermined location which may be at the beginning of the encrypted stream 43 (see
Returning to
Using this research data, and proprietary data collected manually by examining many available file types, the present invention embodies a set of programmatic rules that represent techniques for placing data within all the known safe locations (see
The following code example illustrates an embodiment of the invention described above and the programmatic rules illustrated above and with reference to
In another embodiment of this invention illustrated in
In one such implementation, content may be placed within the file system 65 but hidden between the files 56 in space, for example, that is created by the fragmentation of predetermined storage blocks on the storage media such that the files visible in the file system do not entirely occupy the space allocated for them. Such content is placed in unused between-file fragmentation space within the bounds of the file system 56 such that its location is unknown to the table of contents 54 so that no file system access at the file level will be able to locate or access the files. This type of information hiding may require the information be subdivided into small parts and hidden in multiple smaller locations, since the available space between files may be fragmented.
In another embodiment 66 such content may be placed outside the file system entirely 59. In this implementation, the amount of contiguous available space is larger and thus such a file may be placed in contiguous locations, however note that such a file may in fact still be subdivided and placed into multiple disordered discontiguous locations for added security even in the abundant contiguous space in such extra-file system 59 locations.
In an alternative embodiment 67, the content is placed partly between the files within the file system 62, and partly in space outside the file system, namely the extra-file system 63.
The concept of translocation as implemented in this invention and as illustrated in
Similarly in examples 66 and 67, the locations that are populated with the translocated content (in this case the real “ProcDump.exe” we're hiding) are either outside the file system entirely 66, or, in the case of example 67, partly within the fragmented between-file space and partly outside the file system.
Note that in an alternate inverse embodiment of this invention, the original file is not moved at all 55 but rather the translocation replacement file is placed into the new location 56, and the file system's pointers 57 are temporarily updated to point to the translocated replacement file. Note that locations outside the bounds of the file system, for example location 59, may be on the same media as the file system or on entirely different media, for example, random access memory, rewriteable storage, network storage, or any other viable storage medium accessible to the system.
An example process used to create a translocation replacement file is now detailed with reference to
With reference to
As explained above, translocation is defined as the ability to provide ubiquitous redirection, which may be used for both the hiding of information, and for the purpose of defending against attacks by disabling the opponent's access to the necessary reverse engineering tools. Translocation may be embodied in a system that actually moves content, or in a system that redirects access to content without moving it. For example, in the case of moving content, an individual's intent on reverse engineering a protected system may wish to run the Visual C++ development tools to attempt to debug the running system. When the protective system is invoked, among the first things it does is translocate all threatening tools it finds, such that Visual C++ is moved from its old location 55 to a new location 56 (see
An example of translocation that redirects without moving content is similar. With reference to
Note that translocated content leaves no obvious clues; the process used to create 73 these substitute or redirected files as in the example
Another embodiment of this invention as exemplified in
For example, with reference to
With reference to
Details related to the substitution of tokens are provided at
Returning to
With reference to
In the example below, this invention replaces standard assembly language elements with permuted assembly language which has attributes that cause disassembly utilities such as, for example, the popular disassembly tool IDA Pro, sold and distributed by the Belgian firm DataRescue. Such tools depend on assembly language being formed and structured in specific standard ways; the enhanced assembly language generated by this invention offers the same logical function as the code it replaces but is resistant to disassembly as shown in the example code illustrations below.
The first such code example below illustrates this invention's insertion of jmp statements to instances of the following assembly language instructions: inc, dec, call, jmp, and push
For example, this embodiment changes instances of “jumps” to (push and return) calls:
For example, jumping into the middle of an instruction to confuse all disassemblers:
Another code example of the same class of techniques used by this invention:
Note that the “add ah,03Bh” command is instantiated to insert the value 2503h into location ax. By adding five bytes (as opposed to simply using ‘mov ax,2503h’) this code will defeat all known disassemblers. Even if the instructions are disassembled properly, the value of ax will not be known, so every int call after this point will not be commented properly, as long as the system never moves a value into ax. This embodiment of the invention can conceal the value from the disassembler by using ‘add ax’ or ‘sub ax’ whenever possible. Thus any value can be put into ax.
This invention, of course, must make such substitutions in an automated fashion; the code example below illustrates such programmatic assembly language substitution:
In an alternative embodiment of the above aspect of the invention, and a variant example, the inventive system and method, after having tokenized and obfuscated the content and optionally interleaved, multiplexed, encrypted, and/or hidden it, later, as needed, when it is time to execute this content, the content is located and extracted (if it was indeed interleaved, multiplexed, encrypted, and/or hidden), parsed, content type determined, the tokens are parsed and execution occurs in lockstep with the conversion to executable content so the reconstituted content is never written to a file or provided to any entity in the system, but is rather executed on the fly within a custom execution context 101 (see
An embodiment of this invention may generate for example instances of the variant assembly language as illustrated in the example above, and thereby be resistant to disassembly, and may also be made more difficult to debug by defeating automatic disassembly tools using obfuscated assembly language programming techniques, for example inappropriate not-used jumps into the middle of instructions. Such obfuscation, or similarly effective methods accomplished by other means, enhance the security of the invention. Note that this is in addition to the inherent security of running within an interpretive environment. The interpreter operates as a shield from debugging and reverse-engineering tools. The interpreter serves as a layer of abstraction between the protective invention and the real operating system. The values found in system memory and registers will not be directly related to the logical flow of the interpreted program; they will show the debug state of the interpreter itself instead, and that will make assembly language debugging very difficult.
In another embodiment of this invention described with reference to
This targeted saturation embodiment of the present invention operates as follows. The protection by saturation of a system or application first depends on understanding the nature of the normal system traffic generated by that application. Therefore, with reference to
As described in
The functioning of an individual instance of a saturation engine 116 is shown in
All individual saturation engines are controlled by a saturation scheduler as shown in
In another embodiment of this invention as shown in
In the code example below, this dynamic-reconnection mechanism of the present invention manifests itself as a process that attaches to the first location directly at the interface level, and forces all subsequent shims of any other kind to attach themselves after the invention by continually reattaching in the first position:
In another embodiment of this invention, described with reference to
In this embodiment, as above, a filter, shim, device driver extension, or substitute device driver is inserted into system interfaces in this case, interposing itself at step 131 between the reverse engineering monitoring shim and the rest of the system, thus apparently subsuming the role of the operating system interface and providing false and misleading data 132 to the monitoring/reverse-engineering shim/tool. The vulnerability of all such interface shimming techniques in their simplest form is that another such shim intended to compromise such a shim could be inserted after (or before, or both, depending on the intent) this process at any time, thus obviating the utility of such a mechanism. Thus, this embodiment of the invention includes a re-attachment mechanism 134 which guarantees a specific attachment location, in this case directly before the opponent reverse-engineering/monitoring shim, as specified by the invention's user. This is accomplished by repeated automated re-insertions 135 into the interface chain. Such reinsertions are done in a fashion that does not impede function by waiting a number of time units 133 between issued instructions. Thus this embodiment of continual-interface-reattachment can eliminate the threat of device redirection and monitoring tools being used to subvert the system.
In another embodiment of the present invention, as illustrated in
The code example below illustrates the invention discussed above in conjunction with
The code example below illustrates the invention discussed above in conjunction with
In another embodiment of the present invention, a protective entity is created; such entity operates as an independent protective agent and secures all protected content from unauthorized access. As depicted in
In the code example below, a first embodiment of the assassin process determines the identity of another assassin process (this is a two-assassin example) and instances 146, and monitors them for exit conditions 148. Upon an exit condition, this embodiment attempts to kill other assassin processes and then kills itself 150.
At this point, this embodiment has proven that two assassin process identifiers were specified. This means that the currently executing entity is the first assassin launched. The monitored identifiers will therefore be that of the second assassin entity and the application entity (target). This embodiment will wait for either one to exit; and assumes the target entity will exit when it is finished, in which case the first assassin entity can clean up and itself exit. If, on the other hand, it is the assassin entity that exits, this means that someone or something (a debug process perhaps) has killed it, so the first assassin entity will attempt to terminate the target entity and then delete all the instances of other system entities that it can.
In another embodiment of the present invention, a determination is made by the system as to whether any given process, thread, entity, or access 154 on/of the system is an authorized process or an unauthorized process with respect to access to any of the protected, encrypted, interleaved,or hidden components of the system. As illustrated in
The code example below illustrates the above aspect of the invention as represented in
In another embodiment of this invention, any or all of the above aspects of the invention as illustrated and described above are incorporated into an application, or set of applications, and associated documentation, which are engineered to provide the aforementioned capabilities to digital content creation professionals and other such users. In this manner, digital content that a user desires to protect is provided to an appropriate toolkit as input and the techniques detailed above are applied to the content. The user is not necessarily exposed to the inner operation of the above processes, nor of the applied inventive techniques. The output of such a toolkit is a protected digital content entity. All types of content are supported and are equally applicable to the principles on the invention, including; audio, video, executable, images, text, documents, e-books, and all other digital content of all types on all platforms as described above. The user of this toolkit may choose to include or exclude any of the inventive components mentioned above as part of the configuration of the tool, but at no time is it necessary for the user to understand in any detail how each component works, or how the individual components of the system interact.
While this invention has been particularly shown and described with references to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 60/234,657, filed Sep. 22, 2000, U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 60/240,611, filed Oct. 16, 2000, U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 60/242,949, filed Oct. 24, 2000, and U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 60/244,704, filed Oct. 31, 2000, the contents of each being incorporated herein by reference, in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4118789 | Casto et al. | Oct 1978 | A |
4278837 | Best | Jul 1981 | A |
4306289 | Lumley | Dec 1981 | A |
4405829 | Rivest et al. | Sep 1983 | A |
4433207 | Best | Feb 1984 | A |
4577289 | Comerford et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4593353 | Pickholtz | Jun 1986 | A |
4688169 | Joshi | Aug 1987 | A |
4827508 | Shear | May 1989 | A |
4864494 | Kobus, Jr. | Sep 1989 | A |
4864616 | Pond et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4888800 | Marshall et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
4916637 | Allen et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4969189 | Ohta et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
4977594 | Shear | Dec 1990 | A |
4999806 | Chernow et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5014234 | Edwards, Jr. | May 1991 | A |
5021997 | Archie et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5023907 | Johnson et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5027396 | Platteter et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5033084 | Beecher | Jul 1991 | A |
5050213 | Shear | Sep 1991 | A |
5081675 | Kittirutsunetorn | Jan 1992 | A |
5113518 | Durst, Jr. et al. | May 1992 | A |
5140634 | Guillou et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5155680 | Wiedemer | Oct 1992 | A |
5155837 | Liu et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5155847 | Kirouac et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5166886 | Molnar et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5182770 | Medveczky | Jan 1993 | A |
5191611 | Lang | Mar 1993 | A |
5199066 | Logan | Mar 1993 | A |
5220606 | Greenberg | Jun 1993 | A |
5222133 | Chou et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5247683 | Holmes et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5276311 | Hennige | Jan 1994 | A |
5313521 | Torii et al. | May 1994 | A |
5325433 | Torii et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5327563 | Singh | Jul 1994 | A |
5337357 | Chou et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5341429 | Stringer et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5351293 | Michener et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5351297 | Miyaji et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5357573 | Walters | Oct 1994 | A |
5361359 | Tajalli et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5367683 | Brett | Nov 1994 | A |
5367686 | Fisher et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5379343 | Grube et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5379433 | Yamagishi | Jan 1995 | A |
5392351 | Hasebe et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5394469 | Nagel et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5410598 | Shear | Apr 1995 | A |
5410703 | Nilsson et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5414850 | Whiting | May 1995 | A |
5421009 | Platt | May 1995 | A |
5421017 | Scholz et al. | May 1995 | A |
5473687 | Lipscomb et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5473690 | Grimonprez et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5473692 | Davis | Dec 1995 | A |
5490216 | Richardson, III | Feb 1996 | A |
5491804 | Heath et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5497423 | Miyaji | Mar 1996 | A |
5502831 | Grube et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5509070 | Schull | Apr 1996 | A |
5509074 | Choudhury et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5511123 | Adams | Apr 1996 | A |
5524072 | Labaton et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5532920 | Hartrick et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5544246 | Mandelbaum et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5553143 | Ross et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5555304 | Hasebe et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5557346 | Lipner et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5557675 | Schupak | Sep 1996 | A |
5570291 | Dudle et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5579222 | Bains et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5579479 | Plum | Nov 1996 | A |
5585585 | Paulson et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5592549 | Nagel et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5615061 | Singh | Mar 1997 | A |
5615264 | Kazmierczak et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5625690 | Michel et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5625692 | Herzberg et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5638445 | Spelman et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5654746 | McMullan, Jr. et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5671412 | Christiano | Sep 1997 | A |
5673315 | Wolf | Sep 1997 | A |
5708709 | Rose | Jan 1998 | A |
5715169 | Noguchi | Feb 1998 | A |
5721781 | Deo et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5737416 | Cooper et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745879 | Wyman | Apr 1998 | A |
5754647 | Hsu | May 1998 | A |
5754864 | Hill | May 1998 | A |
5757907 | Cooper et al. | May 1998 | A |
5758068 | Brandt et al. | May 1998 | A |
5761649 | Hill | Jun 1998 | A |
5790664 | Coley et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5794230 | Horadan et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796824 | Hasebe et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796952 | Davis et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5805802 | Marx | Sep 1998 | A |
5812662 | Hsu et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812980 | Asai | Sep 1998 | A |
5826245 | Sandberg-Diment | Oct 1998 | A |
5835735 | Mason et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835911 | Nakagawa et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5848291 | Milne et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5883954 | Ronning | Mar 1999 | A |
5887060 | Ronning | Mar 1999 | A |
5892900 | Ginter et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5892904 | Atkinson et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5894516 | Brandenburg | Apr 1999 | A |
5903647 | Ronning | May 1999 | A |
5905860 | Olsen et al. | May 1999 | A |
5907617 | Ronning | May 1999 | A |
5909581 | Park | Jun 1999 | A |
5910987 | Ginter et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5915019 | Ginter et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5917912 | Ginter et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5920861 | Hall et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5930828 | Jensen et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5933497 | Beetcher et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5933498 | Schneck et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5940504 | Griswold | Aug 1999 | A |
5943422 | Van Wie et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5949876 | Ginter et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5953502 | Helbig, Sr. | Sep 1999 | A |
5978482 | Dwork et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5982891 | Ginter et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991399 | Graunke et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991876 | Johnson et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6006190 | Baena-Arnaiz et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006328 | Drake | Dec 1999 | A |
6006332 | Rabne et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009274 | Fletcher et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009401 | Horstmann | Dec 1999 | A |
6012144 | Pickett | Jan 2000 | A |
6038316 | Dwork et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6041411 | Wyatt | Mar 2000 | A |
6052780 | Glover | Apr 2000 | A |
6067416 | Fraser | May 2000 | A |
6073124 | Krishnan et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6081794 | Saito et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6112181 | Shear et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6138119 | Hall et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6148402 | Campbell | Nov 2000 | A |
6151618 | Wahbe et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6157721 | Shear et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6164841 | Mattson, Jr. et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6178509 | Nardone et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6185683 | Ginter et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6185686 | Glover | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6188995 | Garst et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192475 | Wallace | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6226618 | Downs et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6226747 | Larsson et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6233567 | Cohen | May 2001 | B1 |
6236727 | Ciacelli et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6243468 | Pearce et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6243692 | Floyd et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6249870 | Kobayashi et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6272636 | Neville et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6286041 | Collins, III et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6289455 | Kocher et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6295613 | Bates et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6327652 | England et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6330670 | England et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6334189 | Granger et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6343280 | Clark | Jan 2002 | B2 |
6351813 | Mooney et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6460023 | Bean et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6501905 | Kimura | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6744905 | Horiike | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6816972 | Kutaragi et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6819766 | Weidong | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6859535 | Tatebayashi et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6931540 | Edwards et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6947973 | Shimura et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6973578 | McIchionc | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6981140 | Choo | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6981279 | Arnold et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7069491 | Sollish et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7237123 | LeVine et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
20010018745 | Laczko, Sr. et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010034846 | Beery | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010037450 | Metlitski et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010037456 | Levy | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010041989 | Vilcauskas, Jr. et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010044782 | Hughes et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020002468 | Spagna et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020003881 | Reitmeier et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020010863 | Mankefors | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020016918 | Tucker et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020035688 | Kutaragi et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020120871 | Watkins et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020146121 | Cohen | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030204702 | Lomax et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20050044228 | Birkestrand et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20060031686 | Atallah et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060053307 | Xu et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060146660 | Ikeda et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070267138 | White et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080028199 | Armstrong et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0844549 | May 1998 | DE |
0855638 | Jul 1998 | EP |
WO 9854713 | Mar 1998 | WO |
WO 9844402 | Aug 1998 | WO |
WO0117163 | Mar 2001 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20020120854 A1 | Aug 2002 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60234657 | Sep 2000 | US | |
60240611 | Oct 2000 | US | |
60242949 | Oct 2000 | US | |
60244704 | Oct 2000 | US |