US 9,787,700 B1Grant
System and method for offloading packet processing and static analysis operations
Issue Date:2017-10-10
•22 Claims
•11 Drawing Sheets
Abstract
According to one embodiment, a system features analysis circuitry and detection circuitry. The analysis circuitry features a first processing unit and a first memory that includes a filtering logic configured to produce a second plurality of objects from a received first plurality of objects. The second plurality of objects is a subset of the first plurality of objects. The detection circuitry is communicatively coupled to and remotely located from the analysis circuitry. The detection circuitry includes a second processing unit and a second memory. The second memory includes a virtual execution logic to process content within at least a first object of the second plurality of objects. The virtual execution logic is configured to monitor for behaviors, during the processing of the first object, and determine whether any or all of the monitored behaviors correspond to activities indicative that the first object is associated with a malicious attack.
Metadata
Assignee
- FireEye, Inc.
Inventors
- Muhammad Amin
- Masood Mehmood
- Ramaswamy Ramaswamy
- Madhusudan Challa
- Shrikrishna Karandikar
Application Information
Application Number:US 15/451,243
Filing Date:2017-03-06
Priority Date:2014-03-28
Art Unit:2437
Classifications
IPC:
H04L29/06H04L29/12
Field of Search:
H04L 63/1416H04L 63/1433H04L 67/42H04L 61/1511
Patent Drawings (11 sheets)
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/229,541, filed on Mar. 28, 2014 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,591,015), the entire contents of which are incorporated by reference herein.
[0002] 1. Field
[0003] Embodiments of the disclosure relate to the field of network security. More specifically, embodiments of the disclosure relates to a system, apparatus and method for conducting packet processing and/or static analysis of objects by a traffic analysis controller being logic different from a host in order to offload packet processing and/or static analysis from the host.
[0004] 2. General Background
[0005] Over the last decade, malicious software has become a pervasive problem for Internet users as most networked resources include software vulnerabilities that are subject to attack. For instance, over the past few years, more and more vulnerabilities are being discovered in software that is loaded onto computers, such as vulnerabilities within operating systems for example. While some vulnerabilities continue to be addressed through software patches, prior to the release of such software patches, network resources continue to be targeted by exploits.
[0006] In general, an exploit is information that attempts to take advantage of a vulnerability by adversely influencing or attacking normal operations of a targeted computer. As an illustrative example, a Portable Execution Format (PDF) file may be infected with an exploit that is activated upon execution (opening) of the PDF file and takes advantage of a vulnerability associated with a certain type and version of a PDF Reader application.
[0007] Currently, one type of network security device widely used for detecting exploits is designed to identify packets suspected of containing known exploits, attempt to block/halt propagation of such exploits, and log/report information associated with such packets through an alert. In particular, this conventional network security device is implemented with a processor that is wholly responsible for performing packet processing, a static analysis and a dynamic analysis. This type of conventional network security device may experience certain disadvantages.
[0008] For instance, one disadvantage with conventional network security devices is that the packet processing, the static analysis and the dynamic analysis may simultaneously request limited resources of the network security device's processor. Such simultaneous need for the processor's resources inherently leads to one or more processes waiting on others to finish and subsequently relinquish the processor's resources. This dilemma limits the speed, efficiency and detection efficacy at which the network security device may analyze received network traffic, especially when the network traffic is being received at a high rate.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0009] Embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example and not by way of limitation in the figures of the accompanying drawings, in which like references indicate similar elements and in which:
[0010] FIG. 1 is an illustration of an exemplary block diagram of a flow of network traffic within a networking system.
[0011] FIG. 2 is an illustration of an exemplary block diagram of a plurality of network security devices communicatively coupled to a management system via a network.
[0012] FIG. 3 is an illustration of an exemplary block diagram of logic associated with the traffic analysis controller (TAC) of a network security device.
[0013] FIG. 4 is an illustration of an exemplary block diagram of logic associated with the threat detection and prevention (TDP) logic of the host included within a network security device.
[0014] FIG. 5 is an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device.
[0015] FIG. 6 is an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by a communication protocol analysis engine subsystem.
[0016] FIG. 7 is an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by a binary traffic subsystem
[0017] FIG. 8 is an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by a DNS traffic subsystem.
[0018] FIG. 9 is an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by a call-back traffic subsystem.
[0019] FIG. 10 is an illustration of a second exemplary block diagram of a plurality of network security devices communicatively coupled to a management system via a network.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0020] Various embodiments of the disclosure relate to an electronic device with network connectivity, such as a network security device for example, where the electronic device comprises a traffic analysis controller (TAC) and threat detection and prevention (TDP) logic. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the traffic analysis controller comprises a packet capture framework (PCF) which captures packets or objects from received network traffic. The PCF passes the captured objects to a set of pre-filters which comprises logic to determine whether an object is “of interest,” namely whether the object is of or contains a particular type of network traffic. In one embodiment, an object that is determined to be “of interest” is passed to either a static analysis engine operating on the traffic analysis controller and/or a dynamic analysis engine operating separate from the traffic analysis controller but within the network security device (e.g., part of the TDP logic).
[0021] For instance, as illustrated embodiments, the network security device may be implemented as a network appliance with a chassis housing, where both the traffic analysis controller and the TDP logic are implemented and contained within the same chassis housing. Where the network security device is implemented as a rack of blade servers, it is contemplated that the traffic analysis controller may be deployed within a first blade server while the TDP logic is deployed within the first blade server or a different (second) blade server that is communicatively coupled to the first blade server.
[0022] According to this embodiment of the disclosure, the static analysis engine comprises at least one subsystem that conducts a static analysis on incoming objects, where the analysis of the objects is conducted without certain types of processing (e.g., opening an object, running the object, etc.). The static analysis may include signature matching (e.g., exploit signature checks, vulnerability checks), heuristic analysis (e.g., statistical analysis), source reputation checking, blacklist or whitelist checking, or the like. For instance, the static analysis engine subsystem(s) associated with signature matching may comprise logic that conducts exploit signature checks and/or vulnerability signature checks on objects of at least a first traffic-type (e.g., domain name system “DNS”) to identify whether characteristics of any of these objects indicate that the object is associated with a malicious attack (e.g., indicative of an exploit). Furthermore, another static analysis engine subsystem may be associated with heuristics that examines the metadata or attributes of the object to determine whether a certain portion of the object has characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack.
[0023] Furthermore, the dynamic analysis engine also comprises one or more dynamic analysis engine subsystems. For instance, a dynamic analysis engine subsystem may comprise virtual execution logic to automatically analyze, without user assistance, content within objects of at least a second traffic-type (e.g., “Hypertext Transfer Protocol “HTTP”) in order to determine whether any of these objects is an exploit. Such objects or packets are provided to the dynamic analysis engine from the traffic analysis controller automatically and without user assistance.
[0024] Therefore, by compartmentalizing the packet processing and the virtual machine (VM)-based processing, the amount of network traffic that the network security device may process over a given time period is now scalable. Furthermore, using a network processing unit (NPU) on the traffic analysis controller for packet processing allows for an increased processing speed due to hardware acceleration, as much of the packet processing is done within the hardware and/or firmware of the NPU.
I. Terminology
[0025] In the following description, certain terminology is used to describe features of the invention. For example, in certain situations, both terms “logic” and “engine” are representative of hardware, firmware and/or software that is configured to perform one or more functions. As hardware, logic (or engine) may include circuitry having data processing or storage functionality. Examples of such circuitry may include, but are not limited or restricted to a microprocessor, one or more processor cores, a programmable gate array, a microcontroller, an application specific integrated circuit, wireless receiver, transmitter and/or transceiver circuitry, semiconductor memory, or combinatorial logic.
[0026] Logic (or engine) may be software in the form of one or more software modules, such as executable code in the form of an executable application, an application programming interface (API), a subroutine, a function, a procedure, an applet, a servlet, a routine, source code, object code, a shared library/dynamic load library, or one or more instructions. These software modules may be stored in any type of a suitable non-transitory storage medium, or transitory storage medium (e.g., electrical, optical, acoustical or other form of propagated signals such as carrier waves, infrared signals, or digital signals). Examples of non-transitory storage medium may include, but are not limited or restricted to a programmable circuit; a semiconductor memory; non-persistent storage such as volatile memory (e.g., any type of random access memory “RAM”); persistent storage such as non-volatile memory (e.g., read-only memory “ROM”, power-backed RAM, flash memory, phase-change memory, etc.), a solid-state drive, hard disk drive, an optical disc drive, or a portable memory device. As firmware, the executable code is stored in persistent storage.
[0027] Herein, the term “traffic analysis controller” (TAC) may be construed as logic that conducts packet processing and/or some static analysis of received objects to determine (1) whether further in-depth processing of the object is needed to determine whether the object is “malicious” (e.g., associated with a malicious attack) or benign and/or (2) whether an alert or other warning scheme is needed to advise an administrator of the results from the static analysis. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the traffic analysis controller comprises a processor having access to on-chip or off-chip memory and being implemented on a substrate. The substrate may be one of several form factors including, but not limited or restricted to, a network interface card, an expansion card, a circuit board, a semiconductor component, or a plug-in module. In one embodiment, the traffic analysis controller may be a network interface card that comprises a network processing unit communicatively coupled to a non-volatile memory, where the memory includes several software modules that, when executed, conducts packet processing and static analysis of objects as described below.
[0028] A “processing unit” may be construed as any type of logic with data processing capability, including a general purpose processor, a processor core, a micro-controller, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a network processor, a digital signal processor, a virtual processor, a field-programmable gate array (FPGA), or the like.
[0029] Herein, the term “object” generally refers to a collection of data, whether in transit (e.g., over a network) or at rest (e.g., stored), often having a logical structure or organization that enables it to be classified for purposes of analysis. During static analysis, for example, the object may exhibit a set of expected characteristics and, during processing, a set of expected behaviors. The object may also exhibit a set of unexpected characteristics and a set of unexpected behaviors that may be evidence of an exploit and potentially allow the object to be classified as an exploit.
[0030] Examples of objects may include one or more flows or a self-contained element within a flow itself. A “flow” generally refers to related packets that are received, transmitted, or exchanged during a communication session and multiple flows are related packets that are received, transmitted or exchanged during related communication sessions. For convenience, a “packet” is broadly referred to as a series of bits or bytes having a prescribed format, which may include all types of network packets, frames, or cells.
[0031] As an illustrative example, an object may include a set of (one or more) flows such as (1) a sequence of transmissions in accordance with a particular communication protocol (e.g., User Datagram Protocol (UDP); Transmission Control Protocol (TCP); or HTTP; etc.), or (2) inter-process communications (e.g. Remote Procedure Call “RPC” or analogous processes, etc.). Similarly, as another illustrative example, the object may be a self-contained element, where different types of such objects may include a non-executable file (such as a document or a dynamically link library), a Portable Document Format (PDF) file, a JavaScript file, Zip file, a Flash file, a document (for example, a Microsoft Office® document), an electronic mail (email), downloaded web page, an instant messaging element in accordance with Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) or another messaging protocol, or the like.
[0032] An “exploit” may be construed as information (e.g., executable code, data, command(s), etc.) that is associated with a malicious attack on an electronic device, namely an attempt, normally unbeknownst to its user, to (1) alter control of the electronic device where the change in control is unwanted or unintended by the user and/or (2) gain access to stored information or information that is available to the user. According to one embodiment, an exploit attempts to take advantage of a vulnerability. Typically, a “vulnerability” is a coding error or artifact of software (e.g., computer program) that allows an attacker to alter legitimate control flow during processing of the software (computer program) by an electronic device, and thus, causes the electronic device to experience undesirable or unexpected behaviors. The undesired or unexpected behaviors may include a communication-based anomaly or an execution-based anomaly, which, for example, could (1) alter the functionality of an electronic device executing application software in a malicious manner; (2) alter the functionality of the electronic device executing that application software without any malicious intent; and/or (3) provide unwanted functionality which may be generally acceptable in another context. To illustrate, a computer program may be considered as a state machine, where all valid states (and transitions between states) are managed and defined by the program, in which case an exploit may be viewed as seeking to alter one or more of the states (or transitions) from those defined by the program.
[0033] “Malware” may be construed as computer code that executes an exploit to take advantage of a vulnerability, for example, to harm or co-opt operation of an electronic device or misappropriate, modify or delete data. Conventionally, malware is often said to be designed with malicious intent. An object may constitute or contain an exploit and/or malware.
[0034] The term “object of interest” may be construed as any object of the received network traffic associated with a packet selected by a pre-filter to be routed to one or more of the subsystems of either the static analysis engine or the dynamic analysis engine. For instance, an object of interest to the communication protocol traffic subsystem may be any object of a flow such as a sequence of transmissions in accordance with a particular communication protocol (e.g., User Datagram Protocol (UDP); Transmission Control Protocol (TCP); or Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)) that is selected by the communication protocol pre-filter to be routed to the communication protocol traffic subsystem for analysis. Throughout the specification and claims, the terms “object of interest” and “object under analysis” are used interchangeably.
[0035] The term “transmission medium” is a physical or logical communication path between two or more electronic devices (e.g., any devices with data processing and network connectivity such as, for example, a security appliance, a server, a mainframe, a computer such as a desktop or laptop, netbook, tablet, firewall, smart phone, router, switch, bridge, etc.). For instance, the communication path may include wired and/or wireless segments. Examples of wired and/or wireless segments include electrical wiring, optical fiber, cable, bus trace, or a wireless channel using infrared, radio frequency (RF), or any other wired/wireless signaling mechanism.
[0036] In certain instances, the terms “detected” is used herein to represent that there is a prescribed level of confidence (or probability) on the presence of an exploit within an object under analysis. For instance, the logic of the static analysis engine “detects” a potential exploit by examining characteristics or features of an object under analysis, and, in response, determining whether the object has characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack. This determination may be conducted through analysis as to whether there is at least a first probability that such characteristics exist. Likewise, the virtual execution logic detects the presence of an exploit by monitoring or observing unexpected or anomalous behaviors or activities of an object under analysis, and, in response, determining whether there is at least a second probability, perhaps higher than the first probability, that the object has characteristics indicative of an exploit, and thus, is associated with a malicious attack.
[0037] The term “computerized” generally represents that any corresponding operations are conducted by hardware in combination with software and/or firmware. Also, the term “comparison” generally means determining if a match (e.g., a certain level of correlation) is achieved between two items where one of the items may include a particular signature pattern.
[0038] The terms “binary” and “binaries” may be construed as executable code, commonly referred to as object or binary code. Examples of binaries may include, but are not restricted or limited to a compiled executable program.
[0039] Lastly, the terms “or” and “and/or” and “/” as used herein are to be interpreted as inclusive or meaning any one or any combination. Therefore, “A, B or C” or “A, B and/or C” mean “any of the following: A; B; C; A and B; A and C; B and C; A, B and C.” Also, “A/B” represents “any of the following: A; B; A or B; A and B.” An exception to this definition will occur only when a combination of elements or functions, are in some way inherently mutually exclusive.
[0040] As this invention is susceptible to embodiments of many different forms, it is intended that the present disclosure is to be considered as an example of the principles of the invention and not intended to limit the invention to the specific embodiments shown and described.
II. First Embodiment—TAC Comprising Static Analysis Engine Logic
[0041] A. Communication Flow
[0042] Referring to FIG. 1 , an exemplary block diagram of a flow of network traffic within a networking system is shown. Herein, some or all of the incoming objects associated with monitored network traffic are received by network security device 104. The network security device 104 is configured to receive incoming objects over a communication network 101. Thereafter, the network security device 104 is configured to detect, using at least a static analysis and a dynamic analysis, which objects are to be flagged as including characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack.
[0043] Herein, the network security device 104 may be communicatively coupled with the communication network 101 to monitor flows in a passive or active manner. In a passive manner, the network security device 104 may be communicatively coupled so as to capture and duplicate one or more objects associated with a flow propagating over a communication path 103. The duplicated copy is then analyzed while the original flow is passed to one or more client devices 1051-105M (M≧1), where one or more client devices may be simply represented as “client device(s)”). Such a network security device 104 is sometimes referred to as a “tap” or “network tap,” which receives network traffic over communication path 103 between the communication network 101 and client device(s) 1051-105M (M≧1) and re-routes some or all of the network traffic to the network security device 104.
[0044] Alternatively, the network security device 104 may operate in an active manner with an in-line deployment, where the network traffic over the communication path 103 is directly received by the network security device 104. In other words, the network security device 104 is positioned between the communication network 101 and the client device(s) 1051-105M and analyzes objects within the original version of the network traffic. Subsequent to such analysis, for analyzed objects determined to be associated with a malicious attack, the objects may be precluded from being passed to the client device(s) 1051-105M. Rather, the objects may be quarantined and perhaps held for further forensic analysis.
[0045] B. General Architecture
[0046] Referring to FIG. 2 , an exemplary block diagram of a plurality of network security devices 1041-104N (N≧1, e.g., N=3) communicatively coupled to a management system 219 via a communication network 218 is shown. Communication network 218 may be configured as an intranet operating as a private network shared by the network security devices 1041-1043 and management system 219 or communication network 218 may be configured as a public network such as the Internet for example.
[0047] In general, the management system 219 is adapted to manage network security devices 1041-1043. For instance, the management system 219 may be responsible for automatically updating one or more exploit signatures and/or vulnerability signatures used by the static analysis engine 207 within some or all of network security devices 1041-104N. Each of these signatures may represent a prior detected exploit or an uncovered software vulnerability. Such sharing may be conducted automatically or manually, e.g., uploaded by an administrator. Also, such sharing may be conducted without charge among the network security devices 1041-1043 or subject to a paid subscription basis.
[0048] Herein, according to the embodiment illustrated in FIGS. 1 and 2 , a first network security device 1041 is an electronic device that is adapted to analyze information associated with network traffic routed over the communication network 101 between at least one server device 100 and at least one client device 1051. The communication network 101 may include a public network such as the Internet, in which case an optional firewall (not shown) may be interposed prior to network security device 104 (e.g., first network security device). Alternatively, the communication network 101 may be a private network such as a wireless data telecommunication network, wide area network (WAN), a type of local area network (LAN), or a combination of networks.
[0049] As shown in FIG. 2 , the first network security device 1041 comprises a traffic analysis controller 200 communicatively coupled to a host 203, which may include a TDP logic 202 (hereinafter, “TDP logic 202”). The traffic analysis controller 200 comprises communication ports 204; a network processing unit (NPU) 205 communicatively coupled to logic (e.g., software modules residing in persistent storage 206) to conduct packet processing and/or certain static analysis on objects associated with the received network traffic; and a connector 212. As shown, the persistent storage maintains several software modules including static analysis engine 207, a set of pre-filters 208, a signatures rule set 209, packet capture framework (PCF) 210, and/or communication interface logic 211. As shown, the communication ports 204 may be adapted to receive network traffic via path 103 so as to connect network security device 1041 to communications networks 101 and/or 218 while connector 212 provides a communication path to a connector 213 of the TDP logic 202 over transmission medium 220.
[0050] As shown, traffic analysis controller 200 and TDP logic 202 may reside within the same chassis housing of the network security device 1041. Of course, as described above, the network security device 1041 may implemented as a group of electronic devices in close physical proximity (e.g., rack of blade servers), where the traffic analysis controller 1041 may be deployed within a first electronic device while the TDP logic 202 is deployed within a second electronic device. For this deployment, the transmission medium 220 may include Twinaxial cabling, coaxial cabling, twisted pair cabling such as Category 5/5e/6/6a, or the like.
[0051] In general, the traffic analysis controller 200 operates as a data capturing device that is configured to receive data propagating to/from the client device(s) 1051-105M and provide at least some of this data to the packet capture framework (PCF) 210 of the network security device 1041. The traffic analysis controller 200 may provide at least some of the original network traffic to the PCF 210 or duplicate at least some of the network traffic and provide the duplicated copy to the PCF 210.
[0052] According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the static analysis engine 207 may be one or more software modules executed by a first processing unit while the dynamic analysis engine 216 may be one or more software modules executed on a second processing unit. The first and second processing units may be different processing units, where each “processing unit” may be a different physical processor located within the same processor package or at different physical locations, a different core processor within the same processor package, a different virtual processor, or the like. Of course, the first and second processing units may be the same physical/core/virtual processor.
[0053] As an example, as shown in FIG. 2 , the static analysis engine 207, when deployed as one or more software modules, may be executed by the network processing unit (NPU) 205 being a processing unit for the traffic analysis controller 200 while the dynamic analysis engine 216 may be executed by a central processing unit (CPU) 214 being a processing unit for the host 203. The term “host” refers to any portion of the network security device 104 not included within the traffic analysis controller 200. Of course, it is contemplated that certain functionality of the static analysis engine 207 may be conducted by the host 203, such as the TDP logic 202 for example, and executed by the CPU 214. In this embodiment, the packet processing (e.g., pre-filtering) and/or certain static analysis functionality is off-loaded from the CPU 214 to the NPU 205 as described below and illustrated in FIG. 10 .
[0054] In an embodiment in which the packet processing (e.g., processing of the set of pre-filters 208) and some or all of the processing of the static analysis engine 207 is off-loaded from the CPU 214 of the host 203 to the NPU 205 of the traffic analysis controller 200, a computational advantage arises. In particular, off-loading of the packet processing and/or at least some functionality by the static analysis engine 207 allows the CPU 214 to devote most of its resources to VM-based processing and subsequent monitoring. In this implementation, it is now possible to instantiate more VMs and/or run the analyses of the VMs for a longer time period as packet processing is not simultaneously requesting the resources of the CPU 214. Therefore, this logical configuration provides an ability to scale the processing of the network security device 104 by increasing the number of VMs used during the processing as well as potentially performing deep packet inspection and/or a static analysis on a processor separate from that which is executing the VMs.
[0055] 1. Traffic Analysis Controller (TAC)
[0056] Referring to FIG. 3 , a block diagram of logic associated with the traffic analysis controller (TAC) 200 of the network security device 1041 is shown. As illustrated in FIGS. 2-3 , the traffic analysis controller 200 comprises communication interface logic 211, packet capture framework (PCF) 210, pre-filters 208, signatures rule set 209, static analysis engine 207 and connector 212 which provides connectivity from the traffic analysis controller 200 to the threat detection and prevention (TDP) logic 203.
[0057] The PCF 210 controls the flow of the network traffic received by the network security device 1041. Specifically, the PCF 210 confirms that the network security device 1041 is operating properly according to the deployment scenario of the network security device 104. For instance, if the network security device 1041 is deployed off-line, or in a passive mode, the PCF 210 may be configured to ensure that the network security device 1041 receives a copy of the received network traffic and passes the copy of the received network traffic to the set of pre-filters 208 while the network traffic proceeds to one or more of the client device(s) 1051, . . . and/or 105M. In the off-line deployment scenario, the network security device 1041 does not block or delay the network traffic from reaching a client device (e.g., client device 1051) while the static and/or dynamic analysis is being performed. Alternatively, if the network security device 1041 is deployed in-line, the PCF 210 does not permit (blocks/halts) the received network traffic to pass through the network security device 104 to the client device 1051 until the network security device 104 has determined the received network security traffic does not contain malicious content once processing and analysis are complete. In the in-line deployment scenario, the PCF 210 ensures that the received network traffic passes to the client device 1051, after processing and analysis are complete, e.g., the network traffic does not contain malicious content.
[0058] The PCF 210 of the traffic analysis controller 200 is capable of receiving and routing objects associated with network traffic to the set of pre-filters 208. According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the set of pre-filters 208 comprise two or more filtering modules that perform an initial inspection of objects of received network traffic to determine the object type (e.g., the type of traffic associated with the object). In such an embodiment, one pre-filter is associated with objects to be routed to the static analysis engine 207 and another pre-filter may be associated with objects to be routed to the dynamic analysis engine 216 of FIG. 2 .
[0059] Furthermore, each pre-filter is associated with a subsystem of either the static analysis engine 207 or the dynamic analysis engine 216 corresponding to the type of traffic for which the pre-filter is searching. For example, a pre-filter searching for communication protocol traffic may be associated with a communication protocol traffic subsystem deployed within the dynamic analysis engine 216. When a pre-filter determines that an object of the received network traffic is an object type of traffic for which the pre-filter is searching, the object is considered an “object of interest” and is routed from the pre-filter to the analysis engine subsystem with which the pre-filter is associated. When no pre-filter determines that the object is an object of interest, the object is permitted to pass to the client device 1051 without being routed to either the static analysis engine 207 or the dynamic analysis engine 216.
[0060] The set of pre-filters 208, located on the traffic analysis controller 200, may route an object of interest to a subsystem of the static analysis engine 207 located on the traffic analysis controller 200. Additionally or in the alternative, the set of pre-filters 208 may route objects of interest to a subsystem of the dynamic analysis engine 216 in the TDP logic 202 located within the host 203. The pre-filter that determines an object is of interest may provide the entire object or certain content within the object, for example, one or more objects that are part of one or more flows, packet payloads, or the like, to the corresponding analysis engine subsystem.
[0061] In some embodiments, an object of interest may be provided to the static analysis engine 207 and once the static analysis engine 207 has finished its analysis, a determination is made as to whether the object of interest may contain malicious content. Thereafter, the object of interest may not be provided to a subsystem within the dynamic analysis engine 216 for further in-depth analysis, but rather, information is provided to logic within the host 203 to initiate an alert message to a network administrator, user, or another entity regarding presence of a detected object having characteristics associated with a malicious attack. For instance, a call-back traffic subsystem 315 of FIG. 3 may perform such operations upon detecting a call-back condition. Alternatively, in other embodiments, an object of interest may be provided to the static analysis engine 207, analyzed and then provided to the dynamic analysis engine 216 for further analysis prior to the network security device 104 making a determination as to whether the object of interest has characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack. For instance, a domain name system (DNS) subsystem 305 of FIG. 3 may perform such operations.
[0062] In one embodiment of the disclosure, as illustrated in FIGS. 3-4 , the set of pre-filters 208 may comprise four pre-filters searching for four types of traffic, including: (1) DNS traffic; (2) traffic containing call-back activity; (3) communication protocol traffic; and (4) traffic containing at least one binary. In such an embodiment, the four pre-filters correspond to the following subsystems of the static analysis engine 207 or the dynamic analysis engine 216: (1) DNS traffic subsystem 305, (2) call-back traffic subsystem 315, (3) communication protocol traffic subsystem 400, and/or (4) binary traffic subsystem 420. Furthermore, the set of pre-filters 208 are located on the traffic analysis controller 200 along with the static analysis engine 207.
[0063] In the embodiment, the static analysis engine 207 comprises the DNS traffic subsystem 305 and the call-back traffic subsystem 315. The dynamic analysis engine 216, located on the host 203, comprises the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 and the binary traffic subsystem 420 as shown in FIG. 4 .
[0064] In an alternative embodiment, the functions of the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 and the binary traffic subsystem 420 may be incorporated into a single subsystem on the dynamic analysis engine 216 while the functions of the DNS traffic subsystem 305 and the call-back traffic subsystem 315 are incorporated into a single subsystem on the static analysis engine 207.
[0065] Referring to FIGS. 2 and 3 , the DNS traffic subsystem 305 and the call-back traffic subsystem 315, when executed on one or more processors, may be configured to perform static analysis on a particular object, such as exploit signature checks and/or vulnerability signature checks by exploit matching logic 312/322 and/or vulnerability matching logic 310/320 for example. Such signature check operations may involve accessing pre-stored signatures from signature rules set 209 stored on one or more non-transitory storage mediums such as persistent storage 206.
[0066] In general, the DNS traffic subsystem 305 and the call-back traffic subsystem 315 of the static analysis engine 207 are communicatively coupled to receive one or more objects within network traffic which may be related or unrelated to each other. For instance, one object may be a series of packets containing one or more requests to a DNS server operating as a flow routed over communication network 101. The subsystems of the static analysis engine 207 comprise logic which analyzes each of the objects for known exploits using exploit signatures and, for the protocol activity, using vulnerability signatures. For instance, the exploit matching logic 312/322 within the DNS traffic subsystem 305 and the call-back traffic subsystem 315 performs exploit signature checks, which may involve a comparison of one or more pre-stored exploit signatures (pre-configured and predetermined attack patterns against the object of interest) from signatures rule set 209.
[0067] Additionally, the DNS traffic subsystem 305 and the call-back traffic subsystem 315 of the static analysis engine 207 may comprise heuristic logic 314/324 which analyzes each of the objects using metadata or attributes of the object of interest to determine whether a certain portion of the object has characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack. For instance, the heuristic logic 314/324 may analyze the object of interest to determine whether certain portions of the object corresponds to one or more “malicious identifiers,” which may include, but are not limited or restricted to a particular source or destination address (e.g., URLs, IP addresses, MAC addresses, etc.) that is associated with known exploits; exploit patterns; or even shell code patterns.
[0068] Upon detecting a match during the exploit signature check, vulnerability signature check and/or the heuristic check (an object under analysis has characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack), the static analysis engine 207 may be adapted to upload the static analysis results for storage in results database 221. These results may include, but are not limited or restricted to (i) an exploit identifier such as a particular name/family of the suspected exploit (if known); (ii) source address (e.g., Uniform Resource Locator “URL”, Internet Protocol “IP” address, etc.) of a source of the suspect object; (iii) time of analysis; and/or (iv) information associated with anomalous characteristics pertaining to the object of interest.
[0069] According to another embodiment of the disclosure, the PCF 210 may be further configured to capture metadata from network traffic intended for client device 1051. According to one embodiment, the metadata may be used, at least in part, by the heuristic logic 314/324 and/or to determine protocols, application types and other information that may be used by logic within the network security device 1041 to determine particular software profile(s). The software profile(s) are used for selecting and/or configuring a run-time environment in one or more virtual machines selected or configured as part of the dynamic analysis engine 216, as described below. These software profile(s) may be directed to different versions of the same software application for fetching corresponding software image(s) from profile software rule set 217.
[0070] Furthermore, according to one embodiment of the disclosure, packet processing and static analysis operations are off-loaded to the traffic analysis controller 200 while VM-based processing remains on the host 203. Herein, the VM-based analysis normally requires significantly more computing resources, including both CPU and memory, which may be best provided by the host 203 (e.g., main system) than within a NIC deployment of the traffic analysis controller 200. Hence, the static analysis engine 207 may be adapted to route information that is used by the scheduler 213, dynamic analysis engine 216 and/or reporting logic (not shown) to conduct further analysis as to whether the suspect object is associated with a malicious attack (e.g., an exploit). This information may include, but is not limited or restricted to (1) the suspect object, (2) anomalous characteristics of the suspect object, based on signature matching, heuristics and other static analysis, that may indicate the presence of an exploit; (3) a score generated to classify a threat level of the suspect object being a possible exploit
[0071] 2. Threat Detection and Prevention (TDP) Logic
[0072] Referring to FIG. 4 , a block diagram of logic associated with the threat detection and prevention (TDP) logic of the host (hereinafter, “TDP logic 202”) included within the network security device 1041 is shown. As illustrated, the TDP logic 202 comprises dynamic analysis engine 216, software profile rule set 217, a scheduler 223 and a second connector 213. The second connector 213 enables the TDP logic 202 to exchange data with the traffic analysis controller 200 over transmission medium 220. The communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 and the binary traffic subsystem 420 of the dynamic analysis engine 216 include virtual execution environments 405/425, score determination logic 410/430 and monitoring logic 415/435. The virtual execution environments 405/425 is comprised of one or more virtual machines (VMs) 4401-440K (K≧1) and 4451-445L (L≧1).
[0073] In general, at least one pre-filter of the set of pre-filters 208 located on the traffic analysis controller 200 provides the objects of interest to the dynamic analysis engine 216 for in-depth dynamic analysis using virtual machines (VMs) 4401-440K or 4451-445L. For instance, the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 may simulate transmission and/or receipt by a destination device comprising the virtual machine.
[0074] According to one embodiment, one or more VMs 4401-440K or 4451-445L within the virtual execution environments 405/425 may be configured with all of the software profiles corresponding to the software images stored within software profile rule set 217. Alternatively, the VMs 4401-440K or 4451-445L may be configured according to a prevalent software configuration, software configuration used by an electronic device within a particular enterprise network (e.g., client device 1051), or an environment that is required for the object to be processed, including software such as a web browser application, PDF reader application, or the like. However, for a known or recognized vulnerability, the VMs 4401-440K or 4451-445L may be more narrowly configured to software profiles associated with vulnerable software.
[0075] As previously stated and shown in FIGS. 3-4 , one embodiment of the set of pre-filters comprises four pre-filters 208 searching for four types of traffic, including: (1) DNS traffic; (2) traffic containing call-back activity; (3) communication protocol traffic; and (4) traffic containing at least one binary. These four pre-filters 208 also correspond to the following analysis engine subsystems: (1) DNS traffic subsystem 305, (2) call-back traffic subsystem 315, (3) communication protocol traffic subsystem 400, and (2) binary traffic subsystem 420. Furthermore, the dynamic analysis engine 216, located on the TDP logic 202 of the host 203, comprises the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 and the binary traffic subsystem 420.
[0076] Upon receiving an object of interest from pre-filters 208, the scheduler 223 may determine which software image(s) are associated with software having the vulnerability. In one embodiment, the determination may be based on the static analysis conducted by the static analysis engine 207. Thereafter, the software profile(s) are selected by the scheduler 223 to fetch these software image(s) for configuration of VM 4401 or 4451. This tailored selection scheme avoids VM configuration for software that does not feature the matched software vulnerability.
[0077] As a second illustrative example, the scheduler 223 may be adapted to configure the multiple VMs 4401-440K for concurrent virtual execution of a variety of different versions of the software in efforts to determine whether the object of interest identified by the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 and the binary traffic subsystem 420 is an exploit.
[0078] Of course, it is contemplated that the VM configuration described above may be handled by logic other than the scheduler 223. For instance, although not shown, the dynamic analysis engine 216 may include configuration logic that is adapted to determine which software image(s) are associated with software having the vulnerability. The vulnerability may be uncovered by the static analysis engine 207. This configuration logic may transmit the VM configuration information to the scheduler 223 to handle VM configuration as described above; alternatively, the dynamic analysis engine 216 may exclusively handle the VM configuration.
[0079] According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 is adapted with the virtual execution environment 405 to execute one or more VMs 4401-440K that, operating in combination with a protocol sequence replayer (replay logic) 442, simulates the receipt and execution of an object of interest within a run-time environment as expected for the type of object. Similarly, the binary traffic subsystem 420 is adapted with the virtual execution environment 425 to execute one or more VMs 4451-445L that, operating in combination with a protocol sequence replayer (replay logic) 447, simulates the receipt and execution of an object of interest within a run-time environment as expected for objects including binaries.
[0080] As an illustrative example, the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 may conduct virtual processing of an object of interest (e.g., a HTTP communication session) and provide the object of interest to the VM(s) 4401, . . . , and/or 440K. The replay logic 442 within the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 may be adapted to provide, and sometimes modify (e.g. modify IP address) packets associated with the objects of interest containing one or more objects containing Internet traffic and synchronize any return network traffic generated by the virtual execution environment 405 in response to the packets. Hence, the communication protocol traffic subsystem 400 may suppress (e.g., discard) the return network traffic such that the return network traffic is not transmitted to the communication network 101. For instance, for a particular suspect object being a flow such as a TCP or UDP sequence, the replay logic 442 may replay the data packets by sending packets to the virtual execution environment 405 via a TCP connection or UDP session. Furthermore, the replay logic 442 may synchronize return network traffic by terminating the TCP connection or UDP session.
[0081] As another illustrative example, the binary traffic subsystem 420 may conduct virtual processing of an object of interest (e.g., a binary extracted from network traffic) and provide the object of interest to the VM(s) 4451, . . . , and/or 445L. The replay logic 447 within the binary traffic subsystem 420 may be adapted to return information to the VM(s) 4451, . . . , and/or 445L in the event that the binary requests information from remote sources.
[0082] As further shown in FIG. 4 , the monitoring logic 415/435 within the dynamic analysis engine 216 may be configured to monitor behavior of the object being processed by one or more VMs 4401, . . . , and/or 440K or 4451, . . . , and/or 445L, for detecting anomalous or unexpected activity indicative of an exploit. If so, the object may be determined as being associated with malicious activity, and thereafter, monitoring logic 415/435 operating with score determination logic 410/430 may route the VM-based results (e.g., computed score, information associated with the detected anomalous behaviors, and other information associated with the detected malicious activity by the suspect object) to results database 221 of FIG. 2 .
[0083] According to one embodiment of the disclosure, the score determination logic 410/430 comprises one or more software modules that are used to determine a probability (or level of confidence) that the object of interest is an exploit. Score determination logic 410/430 is configured to generate a value (referred to as a “score”) that classifies the threat of the possible exploit. Of course, a score may be assigned to the suspect object as a whole by mathematically combining the scores determined by analysis of different content associated with the same object of interest to obtain an overall score for that object of interest.
[0084] When the static analysis results or the VM-based results indicate that the object of interest under analysis contains malicious content, as shown in FIG. 1 , the object may be held within the network security device 1041 and not permitted to pass to one or more of the client devices 1051, . . . and/or 105M. Alternatively, the object may be permitted to pass to one or more of the client devices 1051, . . . and/or 105M, where further monitoring of the object may take place. Furthermore, in either case, an administrator may be alerted to the presence of an object containing malicious content. Such an alert may be issued (e.g., by email or text message) to security administrators for example, communicating the urgency in handling one or more objects containing at least characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack. An issued alert may also provide a designation of a selected threat level of the one or more objects containing at least characteristics indicative of malicious content.
[0085] Of course, in lieu of or in addition to static scanning operations being conducted by network security devices 1041-1043, it is contemplated that cloud computing services 102 may be implemented with static analysis engine 207 to perform the exploit and/or vulnerability signature checks and/or with dynamic analysis engine 216 to conduct virtual execution on content within the object of interest, as described herein. In accordance with this embodiment, network security device 1041 may be adapted to establish secured communications with cloud computing services 102 of FIG. 1 for exchanging information.
[0086] C. Flow of Objects Through TAC, Pre-Filters and Analysis Engine Subsystems
[0087] Referring to FIG. 5 , an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by an analysis engine subsystem is shown. The traffic analysis controller (TAC) 200 of the network security device 1041 of FIG. 2 receives network traffic (block 500). Thereafter, a set of pre-filters operating on the traffic analysis controller perform an initial inspection of an object within the received network traffic to determine whether the object is an object of interest (block 505). This may be conducted through analysis of the object type.
[0088] If none of the pre-filters within the set of pre-filters finds the object to be an object of interest (e.g., the type of object under analysis is not recognized by the pre-filters), the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device without further analysis (NO at block 505). However, if a pre-filter finds the object to be an object of interest, such as the object contains traffic of the type for which the pre-filter is searching for example (YES at block 505), the object of interest may be routed to the appropriate analysis engine subsystem for further processing (block 510).
[0089] Upon receiving the object of interest, the appropriate analysis engine subsystem performs processing to determine whether the object of interest includes malicious content so as to constitute an exploit (block 515). If the appropriate analysis engine subsystem determines that the object of interest does not have characteristics associated with a malicious attack (e.g., not an exploit), the network security device may allow the object (e.g., associated packet(s) or flows) to pass to the client device (NO at block 515). However, if the appropriate analysis engine subsystem determines that the object has characteristics associated with a malicious attack (YES at block 515), the network security device may (1) conduct further in-depth analysis (e.g., DNS subsystem determines object is suspicious and further analysis by the dynamic analysis engine is warranted); (2) optionally alert the appropriate administer or security technician of the presence of malicious content, (3) prevent the transmission of the object, and possibly any packets or flows associated with the object, or (4) allow transmission of the object and perform further monitoring (block 520).
[0090] Referring to FIG. 6 , an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by a communication protocol traffic subsystem is shown. The network security device receives network traffic via the traffic analysis controller (block 600). Thereafter, a packet capture framework (PCF) captures packets of the received network traffic (block 605).
[0091] The PCF then sends objects of the received network traffic to the communication protocol pre-filter and the communication protocol pre-filter determines whether the object is a communication protocol-based object (block 610). For instance, the communication protocol pre-filter may inspect an object searching for an Internet Protocol (IP) packet comprising a header and a payload. In one embodiment, if an object inspected by the communication protocol pre-filter is determined to contain an IPv4 or an IPv6 packet, the communication protocol pre-filter will designate the object as an object of interest and forward the object, and possibly any associated packets or flows, to the communication protocol analysis engine subsystem. As another example, the communication protocol pre-filter may designate as objects of interest any object containing packets or data transferred using various communication protocols such as, but not limited or restricted to, transmission control protocol (TCP), user datagram protocol (UDP), dynamic host configuration protocol (DHCP), hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) or file transfer protocol (FTP).
[0092] If the object is not determined to be a communication protocol based object, the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device (NO at block 615). However, if the object is determined to be a communication protocol based object, i.e., an object of interest to the communication protocol pre-filter, (YES at block 615), the object is routed from the communication protocol pre-filter to the communication protocol traffic subsystem (of the dynamic analysis engine 216) for processing (block 620).
[0093] In one embodiment, as the communication protocol traffic subsystem is located within the dynamic analysis engine, the processing of the communication protocol traffic subsystem includes VM-based processing of the objects of interest. Such dynamic analysis may include virtual execution of the content of the object of interest. In particular, one or more VMs of the virtual execution environment of the communication protocol traffic subsystem may simulate loading of packets within an object of interest. The monitoring logic monitors what particular content is loaded and/or requested by the object of interest. For instance, the VM(s) may simulate the loading of an object of interest while the monitoring logic monitors for anomalous behavior such as repeated attempts to load the same HTTP address.
[0094] If, based on the processing by the communication protocol analysis engine, the object of interest is not determined to have characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack, the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device (NO at block 625). However, if the object of interest is determined to have characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack (YES at block 625), the network security device may optionally alert the appropriate administer or security technician of the presence of malicious content (block 630), prevent the transmission of the object, and possibly any packets or flows associated with the object, or allow transmission of the object and perform further monitoring.
[0095] Referring to FIG. 7 , an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by a binary traffic subsystem is shown. The network security device receives network traffic via the traffic analysis controller (block 700). Thereafter, a packet capturing framework (PCF) captures packets of the received network traffic (block 705).
[0096] The PCF then routes objects of the received network traffic to the binary traffic pre-filter and the binary traffic pre-filter determines whether the object is an object containing a binary (block 710). For instance, the binary traffic pre-filter may inspect an object searching for one or more packets indicating the presence of a binary within the object or flow. In particular, the binary traffic pre-filter may inspect the payload of a network packet to determine whether particular data is present in the payload. Alternatively, the binary traffic pre-filter may determine the presence of particular data in the payload through inspection of the header of a network packet.
[0097] If the object is not determined to be an object containing a binary, the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device (NO at block 715). However, if the object is determined to be an object containing a binary, such as an object of interest to the binary traffic pre-filter, (YES at block 715), the object of interest is routed, from the binary traffic pre-filter, to the binary traffic subsystem (of the dynamic analysis engine 216) for processing (block 720).
[0098] In one embodiment, as the binary traffic subsystem is located within the dynamic analysis engine, the processing of the binary traffic subsystem includes VM-based processing of the objects of interest. Such dynamic analysis may include virtual execution of the content of the object of interest. In particular, one or more VMs of the virtual execution environment of the binary traffic subsystem may simulate loading of packets within an object of interest. The monitoring logic monitors what particular content is loaded and/or requested by the object of interest. For instance, VM may simulate the execution or loading of a file, such as a PDF file, located within an object of interest while monitoring logic monitors for anomalous behavior that deviates from expected behavior present when executing or loading such a file.
[0099] If, based on the processing by the binary traffic subsystem 420, the object of interest is not determined to have characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack, the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device (NO at block 725). However, if the object of interest is determined to have characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack (YES at block 725), the network security device may optionally alert the appropriate administer or security technician of the presence of malicious content (block 730), prevent the transmission of the object, and possibly any packets or flows associated with the object, or allow transmission of the object and perform further monitoring.
[0100] Referring to FIG. 8 , an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by a DNS traffic subsystem is shown. The network security device receives network traffic via the traffic analysis controller 200 (block 800). Thereafter, a packet capture framework (PCF) captures packets of the received network traffic (block 805). In particular, the DNS traffic pre-filter may designate an object containing a DNS query as an object of interest.
[0101] The PCF then routes objects of the received network traffic to the communication protocol pre-filter and the DNS traffic pre-filter determines whether the object is an object containing DNS traffic (block 810). For instance, the DNS traffic pre-filter may inspect an object that contains data structures and communication exchanges adhering to the DNS protocol which is a protocol typically used with exchanges over the Internet.
[0102] If the object is not determined to be an object containing DNS traffic, the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device (NO at block 815). However, if the object is determined to be an object containing DNS traffic, i.e., an object of interest to the DNS traffic pre-filter, (YES at block 815), the object of interest is routed, from the DNS traffic pre-filter, to the DNS traffic subsystem (of the static analysis engine 207) for processing (block 820).
[0103] In one embodiment, as the DNS traffic subsystem is located within the static analysis engine, the processing of the DNS traffic subsystem includes deep-packet inspection (DPI) and/or performance of a static analysis using at least exploit signature checks, vulnerability signature checks and/or heuristic checks on the objects of interest. In particular, the exploit matching logic within DNS traffic subsystem may perform a comparison of one or more pre-stored exploit signatures from signatures rule set with the object of interest. In particular, the DNS traffic subsystem may perform a heuristic analysis to determine whether the object of interest contains anomalous content such as repeated queries to a DNS server.
[0104] If, based on the processing by the DNS traffic subsystem, the object of interest is not determined to have characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack, the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device (NO at block 825). However, if the object of interest is determined to have characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack (YES at block 825), the network security device may optionally alert the appropriate administer or security technician of the presence of malicious content (block 830), prevent the transmission of the object, and possibly any packets or flows associated with the object, or allow transmission of the object and perform further processing such as VM-based processing within the dynamic analysis engine.
[0105] Referring to FIG. 9 , an exemplary diagram of a flowchart illustrating operations of a network security device determining whether an object of received network traffic requires analysis by a call-back traffic subsystem is shown. The network security device receives network traffic via the traffic analysis controller (block 900). Thereafter, a packet capture framework (PCF) captures packets of the received network traffic (block 905).
[0106] The PCF then routes objects of the received network traffic to the call-back traffic pre-filter and the call-back traffic pre-filter determines whether the object is an object containing call-back traffic (block 910). For instance, the call-back traffic pre-filter may inspect an object searching for content containing a call or query to a specific IP address.
[0107] In one embodiment, the call-back traffic pre-filter may pass a number of the first packets of every object or flow to the call-back traffic subsystem. In such an embodiment, the call-back traffic subsystem determines whether a call-back will be made by the object or flow from the first few packets of the object or flow. The number of first packets of an object or flow passed to the call-back traffic subsystem is a variable number and may be, for instance, the first five or ten packets of every object or flow within the received network traffic.
[0108] If the object is not determined to be an object containing call-back traffic, the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device (NO at block 915). However, if the object is determined to be an object containing call-back traffic, such as an object of interest to the call-back traffic pre-filter, (YES at block 915), the object of interest is routed, from the call-back traffic pre-filter, to the call-back traffic subsystem (of the static analysis engine 207) for processing (block 920).
[0109] In one embodiment, as the call-back traffic subsystem is located within the static analysis engine, the processing of the call-back traffic subsystem includes deep-packet inspection (DPI) and/or performance of a static analysis using at least exploit signature checks and/or vulnerability signature checks on the objects of interest. In particular, the exploit matching logic within call-back traffic subsystem may perform a comparison of one or more pre-stored exploit signatures from signatures rule set with the object of interest. In particular, the call-back traffic subsystem may perform a heuristic analysis to determine whether the object of interest contains queries to one or more particular IP addresses present on a list of IP addresses known to contain malicious content or simply prohibited by the administer or security technician associated with the client device.
[0110] If, based on the processing by the call-back traffic analysis engine, the object of interest is not determined to have characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack, the network security device may allow the object, and associated packets or flows if applicable, to pass to the client device (NO at block 925). However, if the object of interest is determined to have characteristics that suggest the object is an exploit and/or is associated with a malicious attack (YES at block 925), the network security device may optionally alert the appropriate administer or security technician of the presence of malicious content (block 930), prevent the transmission of the object, and possibly any packets or flows associated with the object, or allow transmission of the object and perform further processing such as VM-based processing within the dynamic analysis engine.
III. Second Embodiment—Host Comprising Subsystems Supporting Dynamic Analysis and Limited Static Analysis Subsystems
[0111] A. General Architecture
[0112] Referring to FIG. 10 , a second exemplary block diagram of a plurality of network security devices 1041-104N (N≧1, e.g., N=3) communicatively coupled to a management system 219 via the communication network 218 is shown. In general, as discussed above, management system 219 is adapted to manage network security devices 1041-1043. For instance, management system 219 is responsible for automatically updating one or more exploit signatures and/or vulnerability signatures used by the static analysis engine 207 within some or all of network security devices 1041-104N. Each of these signatures may represent a prior detected exploit or an uncovered software vulnerability. Such sharing may be conducted automatically or manually uploaded by an administrator. Also, such sharing may be conducted freely among the network security devices 1041-1043 or subject to a subscription basis.
[0113] More specifically, according to this embodiment of the disclosure, the TDP logic 202 comprises both the static analysis engine 207 and the dynamic analysis engine 216, while the traffic analysis controller (TAC) 200 comprises the packet capture framework (PCF) 210 and a set of pre-filters 208.
[0114] A. Traffic Analysis Controller
[0115] Still referring to FIG. 10 , the traffic analysis controller 200 comprises communication ports 204, a network processing unit (NPU) 205, connector 212 and persistent storage 206. The persistent storage maintains several software modules including a first stage of static analysis engine 1000, packet capture framework (PCF) 210, the set of pre-filters 208 and the signatures rule set 209. The communication ports 204 connect the network security device 1041 to communications networks 101 and/or 218 while connector 212 connects the traffic analysis controller 200 to the TDP logic 202.
[0116] In this embodiment, as shown in FIGS. 1 and 10 , the PCF 210 controls the flow of the network traffic received by the network security device 104 (e.g., network security device 1041). Specifically, the PCF 210 confirms that the network security device 1041 is operating properly according to the deployment scenario of the network security device 1041. For instance, if the network security device 1041 is deployed off-line (passive mode), the PCF 210 ensures that the network security device 1041 receives a copy of the received network traffic and passes the copy of the received network traffic to the pre-filters 208 while the network traffic is provided to one or more of the client device 1051 . . . and/or 105M. In the off-line deployment scenario, the network security device 1041 does not block the network traffic from reaching the client device(s) 1051, . . . and/or 105M while the static or dynamic analysis is being performed. The traffic analysis controller 200 may provide at least some of the original network traffic to the PCF 210 or duplicate at least some of the network traffic and provide the duplicated copy to the PCF 210.
[0117] Alternatively, if the network security device 1041 is deployed in-line, the PCF 210 does not permit the received network traffic to pass through the network security device 1041 to the client device(s) 1051, . . . , or 105M until the network security device 1041 has determined the received network security traffic does not contain malicious content. In the in-line deployment scenario, the PCF 210 ensures that the received network traffic passes to one or more of the client device 1051, . . . and/or 105M, after processing, unless it contains malicious content, in which case, at least some of the network traffic may be blocked from reaching its intended destination and an alert may be issued.
[0118] As described above, the pre-filters 208 may comprise four pre-filters searching for four types of traffic including: (1) DNS traffic, (2) traffic containing call-back activity, (3) communication protocol traffic, and (4) traffic containing at least one binary. In such an embodiment, the four pre-filters correspond to the following subsystems of the dynamic analysis engine 216, namely the communication protocol traffic subsystem and the binary traffic subsystem, or the static analysis engine 207, namely the DNS traffic subsystem and the call-back traffic subsystem. It should be noted that the set of pre-filters 208 may be located on the traffic analysis controller 200 while the static analysis engine 207 and the dynamic analysis engine 216 are located in the TDP logic 202.
[0119] The first stage of static engine 1000 performs certain functionality, such as signature matching for example, which is off-loaded from the TDP logic 202 to be handed at the traffic analysis controller 200. A second stage of static engine 1010 performs other functionality, such as heuristic analysis for example, is continued to be handled at the TDP logic 202. It is contemplated that first stage of static engine 1000 may perform heuristic analysis while the second stage of static engine 1010 performs other functionality such as signature matching. The goal is to off-load a portion of the static analysis to the traffic analysis controller 200.
[0120] B. TDP Logic
[0121] Still referring to FIG. 10 , in communication with traffic analysis controller 202 via transmission medium 220, the TDP logic 202 comprises the second connector 213, the CPU 214 and the persistent storage 215. The second connector 213 enables the TDP logic 202 to communicate with the traffic analysis controller 200. The persistent storage 215 comprises software modules including the static analysis engine 207, the scheduler 223, the dynamic analysis engine 216 and the software profile rule set 217.
[0122] As described above, the static analysis engine 207 may comprise the DNS traffic subsystem and the call-back traffic subsystem, but signature matching associated with these subsystems is handled at the traffic analysis controller 200. The dynamic analysis engine 216, located on the host 203, comprises the communication protocol traffic subsystem and the binary traffic subsystem. However, in this embodiment, the TDP logic 202 include portions of the DNS and call-back traffic subsystems, which are executed on the CPU 214 associated with the TDP logic 202.
[0123] In general, the static analysis engine 207 and the dynamic analysis engine 216 perform in a similar manner as described above in the first embodiment, however in this embodiment, both engines, including all subsystems, are executed on the CPU 214 of the threat detection and prevention logic 203.
[0124] In the foregoing description, the invention is described with reference to specific exemplary embodiments thereof. It will, however, be evident that various modifications and changes may be made thereto without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims.
Claims
What is claimed is:
1. A system, comprising:
analysis circuitry including a first processing unit and a first memory communicatively coupled to the first processing unit, the first memory including a filtering logic configured to receive a first plurality of objects and filter the first plurality of objects by identifying a second plurality of objects as objects of interest, the second plurality of objects being a subset of the first plurality of objects and being lesser or equal in number to the first plurality of objects; and
detection circuitry communicatively coupled to and remotely located from the analysis circuitry, the detection circuitry includes (i) a second processing unit being different from the first processing unit and (ii) a second memory communicatively coupled to the second processing unit, the second memory including a virtual execution logic to process content within at least a first object of the second plurality of objects, the virtual execution logic being further configured to monitor for behaviors, during the processing of the first object, and determine whether any of the monitored behaviors correspond to activities indicative that the first object is associated with a malicious attack.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the second memory further comprising reporting logic that, when executed by the second processing unit, transmits an alert message to a network administrator, user, or another entity in response to detection of the first object being associated with a malicious attack.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the analysis circuitry and the detection circuitry are implemented within a single electronic device.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the first memory of the analysis circuitry further includes a static analysis logic configured to determine, when executed by the first processing unit, whether at least the first object of the second plurality of objects includes one or more characteristics associated with a malicious attack.
5. The system of claim 4, wherein the static analysis logic to perform one or more exploit signature checks that include a comparison of one or more pre-stored exploit signatures to content of the first object.
6. The system of claim 4, wherein the static analysis logic to perform an heuristic analysis that analyzes the first object using metadata or attributes of the first object to determine whether a certain portion of the first object has characteristics that suggest the first object is associated with a malicious attack.
7. The system of claim 1, wherein the filtering logic is further configured to identify a first subset of the second plurality of objects that comprise characteristics indicative of a network communication protocol.
8. The system of claim 1, wherein the filtering logic is further configured to identify a second subset of the second plurality of objects that comprise characteristics indicative of a presence of a binary or a third subset of the second plurality of objects that comprise characteristics indicative of a presence of domain name system (DNS) traffic or a fourth subset of the second plurality of objects that comprise call-back characteristics indicative of a presence of a call to an external server.
9. The system of claim 1, wherein the analysis circuitry includes a network interface card that comprises a substrate that communicatively couples the first processing unit to the first memory.
10. The system of claim 1, wherein the virtual execution logic includes at least one virtual machine that is configured to process the content within at least the first object of the second plurality of objects.
11. A system, comprising:
analysis circuitry including a first processing unit and a first memory communicatively couple to the first processing unit, the first memory including a static analysis logic that, when executed by the first processing unit, determines whether at least the first object of a plurality of objects includes one or more characteristics associated with a malicious attack; and
detection circuitry communicatively coupled to and remotely located from the analysis circuitry, the detection circuitry includes a second processing unit being different from the first processing unit and a second memory communicatively coupled to the second processing unit, the second memory including a virtual execution logic that, when executed by the second processing unit, processes at least the first object of the plurality of objects and monitors for behaviors during the processing of the first object that suggests the first object is associated with a malicious attack.
12. The system of claim 11, wherein the second memory further comprising reporting logic that, when executed by the second processing unit, transmits an alert message to a network administrator, user, or another entity in response to detection of the first object being associated with a malicious attack.
13. The system of claim 11, wherein the static analysis logic to perform one or more exploit signature checks that include a comparison of one or more pre-stored exploit signatures to content of the first object.
14. The system of claim 11, wherein the static analysis logic to perform an heuristic analysis that analyzes the first object using metadata or attributes of the first object to determine whether a certain portion of the first object has characteristics that suggest the first object is associated with a malicious attack.
15. The system of claim 11, wherein the analysis circuitry and the detection circuitry are implemented within a single electronic device.
16. The system of claim 11, wherein the first memory of the analysis circuitry further includes a filtering logic that, when executed by the first processing unit, filters a second plurality of objects by identifying the plurality of objects as objects of interest, the plurality of objects being a subset of the second plurality of objects and being lesser or equal in number to the second plurality of objects.
17. The system of claim 16, wherein the filtering logic is further configured to identify a first subset of the plurality of objects that comprise characteristics indicative of a network communication protocol.
18. The system of claim 16, wherein the filtering logic is further configured to identify a second subset of the plurality of objects that comprise characteristics indicative of a presence of a binary or a third subset of the plurality of objects that comprise characteristics indicative of a presence of domain name system (DNS) traffic or a fourth subset of the plurality of objects that comprise call-back characteristics indicative of a presence of a call to an external server.
19. The system of claim 11, wherein the virtual execution logic includes at least one virtual machine that is configured to process the first object of the plurality of objects.
20. A computerized method comprising:
receiving network traffic by analysis circuitry that extracts one or more objects from the network traffic;
performing an analysis, by the analysis circuitry, on each of the one or more objects to determine whether at least a first object of the one or more objects has characteristics associated with a malicious attack;
transmitting information associated with the object to detection circuitry remotely located from the analysis circuitry via a transmission medium; and
subsequent to the transmitting of the information associated with the object to the detection circuitry, performing a virtual analysis of the information associated with the object by the detection circuitry, the virtual analysis includes monitoring for behaviors during execution of the object that identify the object is associated with a malicious attack, the virtual analysis being conducted by the detection circuitry being separate from the analysis circuitry.
21. The method of claim 20, wherein the performing of the analysis by the analysis circuitry includes (i) performing one or more exploit signature checks that include a comparison of one or more pre-stored exploit signatures to content of the object or (ii) performing an heuristic analysis that analyzes the object using metadata or attributes of the object to determine whether a certain portion of the object has characteristics that suggest the object is associated with a malicious attack.
22. The method of claim 20, wherein the performing of the virtual analysis is conducted by at least one virtual machine executed by a processing unit being part of the detection circuitry, the at least one virtual machine being configured with a software profile based on meta information that is part of the information associated with the object that is transmitted from the analysis circuitry to the detection circuitry.
Patent Citations (635)
| Patent | Date | Inventor | Cited By |
|---|---|---|---|
| US4292580(A) | 1981-09-01 | Ott et al. | Applicant |
| US5175732(A) | 1992-12-01 | Hendel et al. | Applicant |
| US5278901(A) | 1994-01-01 | Shieh et al. | Applicant |
| US5440723(A) | 1995-08-01 | Arnold et al. | Applicant |
| US5452442(A) | 1995-09-01 | Kephart | Applicant |
| US5490249(A) | 1996-02-01 | Miller | Applicant |
| US5657473(A) | 1997-08-01 | Killean et al. | Applicant |
| US5842002(A) | 1998-11-01 | Schnurer et al. | Applicant |
| US5889973(A) | 1999-03-01 | Moyer | Applicant |
| US5960170(A) | 1999-09-01 | Chen et al. | Applicant |
| US5978917(A) | 1999-11-01 | Chi | Applicant |
| US6088803(A) | 2000-07-01 | Tso et al. | Applicant |
| US6094677(A) | 2000-07-01 | Capek et al. | Applicant |
| US6108799(A) | 2000-08-01 | Boulay et al. | Applicant |
| US6154844(A) | 2000-11-01 | Touboul et al. | Applicant |
| US6269330(B1) | 2001-07-01 | Cidon et al. | Applicant |
| US6272641(B1) | 2001-08-01 | Ji | Applicant |
| US6279113(B1) | 2001-08-01 | Vaidya | Applicant |
| US6298445(B1) | 2001-10-01 | Shostack et al. | Applicant |
| US6357008(B1) | 2002-03-01 | Nachenberg | Applicant |
| US6424627(B1) | 2002-07-01 | Sørhaug et al. | Applicant |
| US6442696(B1) | 2002-08-01 | Wray et al. | Applicant |
| US6484315(B1) | 2002-11-01 | Ziese | Applicant |
| US6487666(B1) | 2002-11-01 | Shanklin et al. | Applicant |
| US6493756(B1) | 2002-12-01 | O'Brien et al. | Applicant |
| US6550012(B1) | 2003-04-01 | Villa et al. | Applicant |
| US6775657(B1) | 2004-08-01 | Baker | Applicant |
| US6831893(B1) | 2004-12-01 | Ben Nun et al. | Applicant |
| US6832367(B1) | 2004-12-01 | Choi et al. | Applicant |
| US6895550(B2) | 2005-05-01 | Kanchirayappa et al. | Applicant |
| US6898632(B2) | 2005-05-01 | Gordy et al. | Applicant |
| US6907396(B1) | 2005-06-01 | Muttik et al. | Applicant |
| US6941348(B2) | 2005-09-01 | Petry et al. | Applicant |
| US6971097(B1) | 2005-11-01 | Wallman | Applicant |
| US6981279(B1) | 2005-12-01 | Arnold et al. | Applicant |
| US7007107(B1) | 2006-02-01 | Ivchenko et al. | Applicant |
| US7028179(B2) | 2006-04-01 | Anderson et al. | Applicant |
| US7043757(B2) | 2006-05-01 | Hoefelmeyer et al. | Applicant |
| US7069316(B1) | 2006-06-01 | Gryaznov | Applicant |
| US7080407(B1) | 2006-07-01 | Zhao et al. | Applicant |
| US7080408(B1) | 2006-07-01 | Pak et al. | Applicant |
| US7093002(B2) | 2006-08-01 | Wolff et al. | Applicant |
| US7093239(B1) | 2006-08-01 | van der Made | Applicant |
| US7096498(B2) | 2006-08-01 | Judge | Applicant |
| US7100201(B2) | 2006-08-01 | Izatt | Applicant |
| US7107617(B2) | 2006-09-01 | Hursey et al. | Applicant |
| US7159149(B2) | 2007-01-01 | Spiegel et al. | Applicant |
| US7213260(B2) | 2007-05-01 | Judge | Applicant |
| US7231667(B2) | 2007-06-01 | Jordan | Applicant |
| US7240364(B1) | 2007-07-01 | Branscomb et al. | Applicant |
| US7240368(B1) | 2007-07-01 | Roesch et al. | Applicant |
| US7243371(B1) | 2007-07-01 | Kasper et al. | Applicant |
| US7249175(B1) | 2007-07-01 | Donaldson | Applicant |
| US7287278(B2) | 2007-10-01 | Liang | Applicant |
| US7308716(B2) | 2007-12-01 | Danford et al. | Applicant |
| US7328453(B2) | 2008-02-01 | Merkle, Jr. et al. | Applicant |
| US7346486(B2) | 2008-03-01 | Ivancic et al. | Applicant |
| US7356736(B2) | 2008-04-01 | Natvig | Applicant |
| US7386888(B2) | 2008-06-01 | Liang et al. | Applicant |
| US7392542(B2) | 2008-06-01 | Bucher | Applicant |
| US7418729(B2) | 2008-08-01 | Szor | Applicant |
| US7428300(B1) | 2008-09-01 | Drew et al. | Applicant |
| US7441272(B2) | 2008-10-01 | Durham et al. | Applicant |
| US7448084(B1) | 2008-11-01 | Apap et al. | Applicant |
| US7458098(B2) | 2008-11-01 | Judge et al. | Applicant |
| US7464404(B2) | 2008-12-01 | Carpenter et al. | Applicant |
| US7464407(B2) | 2008-12-01 | Nakae et al. | Applicant |
| US7467408(B1) | 2008-12-01 | O'Toole, Jr. | Applicant |
| US7478428(B1) | 2009-01-01 | Thomlinson | Applicant |
| US7480773(B1) | 2009-01-01 | Reed | Applicant |
| US7487543(B2) | 2009-02-01 | Arnold et al. | Applicant |
| US7496960(B1) | 2009-02-01 | Chen et al. | Applicant |
| US7496961(B2) | 2009-02-01 | Zimmer et al. | Applicant |
| US7519990(B1) | 2009-04-01 | Xie | Applicant |
| US7523493(B2) | 2009-04-01 | Liang et al. | Applicant |
| US7530104(B1) | 2009-05-01 | Thrower et al. | Applicant |
| US7540025(B2) | 2009-05-01 | Tzadikario | Applicant |
| US7565550(B2) | 2009-07-01 | Liang et al. | Applicant |
| US7568233(B1) | 2009-07-01 | Szor et al. | Applicant |
| US7584455(B2) | 2009-09-01 | Ball | Applicant |
| US7603715(B2) | 2009-10-01 | Costa et al. | Applicant |
| US7607171(B1) | 2009-10-01 | Marsden et al. | Applicant |
| US7639714(B2) | 2009-12-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US7644441(B2) | 2010-01-01 | Schmid et al. | Applicant |
| US7657419(B2) | 2010-02-01 | van der Made | Applicant |
| US7676841(B2) | 2010-03-01 | Sobchuk et al. | Applicant |
| US7698548(B2) | 2010-04-01 | Shelest et al. | Applicant |
| US7707633(B2) | 2010-04-01 | Danford et al. | Applicant |
| US7712136(B2) | 2010-05-01 | Sprosts et al. | Applicant |
| US7730011(B1) | 2010-06-01 | Deninger et al. | Applicant |
| US7739740(B1) | 2010-06-01 | Nachenberg et al. | Applicant |
| US7779463(B2) | 2010-08-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US7784097(B1) | 2010-08-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US7832008(B1) | 2010-11-01 | Kraemer | Applicant |
| US7836502(B1) | 2010-11-01 | Zhao et al. | Applicant |
| US7849506(B1) | 2010-12-01 | Dansey et al. | Applicant |
| US7854007(B2) | 2010-12-01 | Sprosts et al. | Applicant |
| US7869073(B2) | 2011-01-01 | Oshima | Applicant |
| US7877803(B2) | 2011-01-01 | Enstone et al. | Applicant |
| US7904959(B2) | 2011-03-01 | Sidiroglou et al. | Applicant |
| US7908660(B2) | 2011-03-01 | Bahl | Applicant |
| US7930738(B1) | 2011-04-01 | Petersen | Applicant |
| US7937387(B2) | 2011-05-01 | Frazier et al. | Applicant |
| US7937761(B1) | 2011-05-01 | Bennett | Applicant |
| US7949849(B2) | 2011-05-01 | Lowe et al. | Applicant |
| US7996556(B2) | 2011-08-01 | Raghavan et al. | Applicant |
| US7996836(B1) | 2011-08-01 | McCorkendale et al. | Applicant |
| US7996904(B1) | 2011-08-01 | Chiueh et al. | Applicant |
| US7996905(B2) | 2011-08-01 | Arnold et al. | Applicant |
| US8006305(B2) | 2011-08-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US8010667(B2) | 2011-08-01 | Zhang et al. | Applicant |
| US8020206(B2) | 2011-09-01 | Hubbard et al. | Applicant |
| US8028338(B1) | 2011-09-01 | Schneider et al. | Applicant |
| US8042184(B1) | 2011-10-01 | Batenin | Applicant |
| US8045094(B2) | 2011-10-01 | Teragawa | Applicant |
| US8045458(B2) | 2011-10-01 | Alperovitch et al. | Applicant |
| US8069484(B2) | 2011-11-01 | McMillan et al. | Applicant |
| US8087086(B1) | 2011-12-01 | Lai et al. | Applicant |
| US8171553(B2) | 2012-05-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8176049(B2) | 2012-05-01 | Deninger et al. | Applicant |
| US8176480(B1) | 2012-05-01 | Spertus | Applicant |
| US8201072(B2) | 2012-06-01 | Matulic | Applicant |
| US8201246(B1) | 2012-06-01 | Wu et al. | Applicant |
| US8204984(B1) | 2012-06-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8214905(B1) | 2012-07-01 | Doukhvalov et al. | Applicant |
| US8220055(B1) | 2012-07-01 | Kennedy | Applicant |
| US8225288(B2) | 2012-07-01 | Miller et al. | Applicant |
| US8225373(B2) | 2012-07-01 | Kraemer | Applicant |
| US8233882(B2) | 2012-07-01 | Rogel | Applicant |
| US8234640(B1) | 2012-07-01 | Fitzgerald et al. | Applicant |
| US8234709(B2) | 2012-07-01 | Viljoen et al. | Applicant |
| US8239944(B1) | 2012-08-01 | Nachenberg et al. | Applicant |
| US8260914(B1) | 2012-09-01 | Ranjan | Applicant |
| US8266091(B1) | 2012-09-01 | Gubin et al. | Applicant |
| US8286251(B2) | 2012-10-01 | Eker et al. | Applicant |
| US8291198(B2) | 2012-10-01 | Mott et al. | Applicant |
| US8291499(B2) | 2012-10-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8307435(B1) | 2012-11-01 | Mann et al. | Applicant |
| US8307443(B2) | 2012-11-01 | Wang et al. | Applicant |
| US8312545(B2) | 2012-11-01 | Tuvell et al. | Applicant |
| US8321240(B2) | 2012-11-01 | Lorsch | Applicant |
| US8321936(B1) | 2012-11-01 | Green et al. | Applicant |
| US8321941(B2) | 2012-11-01 | Tuvell et al. | Applicant |
| US8332571(B1) | 2012-12-01 | Edwards, Sr. | Applicant |
| US8365286(B2) | 2013-01-01 | Poston | Applicant |
| US8365297(B1) | 2013-01-01 | Parshin et al. | Applicant |
| US8370938(B1) | 2013-02-01 | Daswani et al. | Applicant |
| US8370939(B2) | 2013-02-01 | Zaitsev et al. | Applicant |
| US8375444(B2) | 2013-02-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8381299(B2) | 2013-02-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US8402529(B1) | 2013-03-01 | Green et al. | Applicant |
| US8464340(B2) | 2013-06-01 | Ahn et al. | Applicant |
| US8468604(B2) | 2013-06-01 | Claudatos | Examiner |
| US8479174(B2) | 2013-07-01 | Chiriac | Applicant |
| US8479276(B1) | 2013-07-01 | Vaystikh et al. | Applicant |
| US8479291(B1) | 2013-07-01 | Bodke | Applicant |
| US8510827(B1) | 2013-08-01 | Leake et al. | Applicant |
| US8510828(B1) | 2013-08-01 | Guo et al. | Applicant |
| US8510842(B2) | 2013-08-01 | Amit et al. | Applicant |
| US8516478(B1) | 2013-08-01 | Edwards et al. | Applicant |
| US8516590(B1) | 2013-08-01 | Ranadive et al. | Applicant |
| US8516593(B2) | 2013-08-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US8522348(B2) | 2013-08-01 | Chen et al. | Applicant |
| US8528086(B1) | 2013-09-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US8533824(B2) | 2013-09-01 | Hutton et al. | Applicant |
| US8539582(B1) | 2013-09-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8549638(B2) | 2013-10-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US8555391(B1) | 2013-10-01 | Demir et al. | Applicant |
| US8561177(B1) | 2013-10-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8566476(B2) | 2013-10-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US8566946(B1) | 2013-10-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8584094(B2) | 2013-11-01 | Dadhia et al. | Applicant |
| US8584234(B1) | 2013-11-01 | Sobel et al. | Applicant |
| US8584239(B2) | 2013-11-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8595834(B2) | 2013-11-01 | Xie et al. | Applicant |
| US8627476(B1) | 2014-01-01 | Satish et al. | Applicant |
| US8635696(B1) | 2014-01-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US8682054(B2) | 2014-03-01 | Xue et al. | Applicant |
| US8682812(B1) | 2014-03-01 | Ranjan | Applicant |
| US8689333(B2) | 2014-04-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US8695096(B1) | 2014-04-01 | Zhang | Applicant |
| US8713631(B1) | 2014-04-01 | Pavlyushchik | Applicant |
| US8713681(B2) | 2014-04-01 | Silberman et al. | Applicant |
| US8726392(B1) | 2014-05-01 | McCorkendale et al. | Applicant |
| US8739280(B2) | 2014-05-01 | Chess et al. | Applicant |
| US8769692(B1) | 2014-07-01 | Muttik et al. | Applicant |
| US8776229(B1) | 2014-07-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US8782792(B1) | 2014-07-01 | Bodke | Applicant |
| US8789172(B2) | 2014-07-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US8789178(B2) | 2014-07-01 | Kejriwal et al. | Applicant |
| US8793278(B2) | 2014-07-01 | Frazier et al. | Applicant |
| US8793787(B2) | 2014-07-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US8805947(B1) | 2014-08-01 | Kuzkin et al. | Applicant |
| US8806647(B1) | 2014-08-01 | Daswani et al. | Applicant |
| US8832829(B2) | 2014-09-01 | Manni et al. | Applicant |
| US8850570(B1) | 2014-09-01 | Ramzan | Applicant |
| US8850571(B2) | 2014-09-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US8881234(B2) | 2014-11-01 | Narasimhan et al. | Applicant |
| US8881271(B2) | 2014-11-01 | Butler, II | Applicant |
| US8881282(B1) | 2014-11-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8898788(B1) | 2014-11-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8935779(B2) | 2015-01-01 | Manni et al. | Applicant |
| US8949257(B2) | 2015-02-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US8959428(B2) | 2015-02-01 | Majidian | Applicant |
| US8984638(B1) | 2015-03-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US8990939(B2) | 2015-03-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US8990944(B1) | 2015-03-01 | Singh et al. | Applicant |
| US8997219(B2) | 2015-03-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US9009822(B1) | 2015-04-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US9009823(B1) | 2015-04-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US9027135(B1) | 2015-05-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US9071638(B1) | 2015-06-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US9104867(B1) | 2015-08-01 | Thioux et al. | Applicant |
| US9106630(B2) | 2015-08-01 | Frazier et al. | Applicant |
| US9106694(B2) | 2015-08-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US9118715(B2) | 2015-08-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US9159035(B1) | 2015-10-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US9165142(B1) | 2015-10-01 | Sanders | Examiner |
| US9171160(B2) | 2015-10-01 | Vincent et al. | Applicant |
| US9176843(B1) | 2015-11-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US9189627(B1) | 2015-11-01 | Islam | Applicant |
| US9195829(B1) | 2015-11-01 | Goradia et al. | Applicant |
| US9197664(B1) | 2015-11-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US9223972(B1) | 2015-12-01 | Vincent et al. | Applicant |
| US9225740(B1) | 2015-12-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US9241010(B1) | 2016-01-01 | Bennett et al. | Applicant |
| US9251343(B1) | 2016-02-01 | Vincent et al. | Applicant |
| US9262635(B2) | 2016-02-01 | Paithane et al. | Applicant |
| US9268936(B2) | 2016-02-01 | Butler | Applicant |
| US9275229(B2) | 2016-03-01 | LeMasters | Applicant |
| US9282109(B1) | 2016-03-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US9294501(B2) | 2016-03-01 | Mesdaq et al. | Applicant |
| US9300686(B2) | 2016-03-01 | Pidathala et al. | Applicant |
| US9306960(B1) | 2016-04-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US9306974(B1) | 2016-04-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US9311479(B1) | 2016-04-01 | Manni et al. | Applicant |
| US9355246(B1) | 2016-05-01 | Wan | Examiner |
| US9355247(B1) | 2016-05-01 | Thioux et al. | Applicant |
| US9356944(B1) | 2016-05-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US9363280(B1) | 2016-06-01 | Rivlin et al. | Applicant |
| US9367681(B1) | 2016-06-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US9398028(B1) | 2016-07-01 | Karandikar et al. | Applicant |
| US9430646(B1) | 2016-08-01 | Mushtaq et al. | Applicant |
| US9432389(B1) | 2016-08-01 | Khalid et al. | Applicant |
| US9438613(B1) | 2016-09-01 | Paithane et al. | Applicant |
| US9438622(B1) | 2016-09-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US9438623(B1) | 2016-09-01 | Thioux et al. | Applicant |
| US9459901(B2) | 2016-10-01 | Jung et al. | Applicant |
| US9483644(B1) | 2016-11-01 | Paithane et al. | Applicant |
| US9495180(B2) | 2016-11-01 | Ismael | Applicant |
| US9516057(B2) | 2016-12-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US9519782(B2) | 2016-12-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US9536091(B2) | 2017-01-01 | Paithane et al. | Applicant |
| US9560059(B1) | 2017-01-01 | Islam | Applicant |
| US9565202(B1) | 2017-02-01 | Kindlund et al. | Applicant |
| US9591015(B1) | 2017-03-01 | Amin | Examiner |
| US9591020(B1) | 2017-03-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US9594904(B1) | 2017-03-01 | Jain et al. | Applicant |
| US9594905(B1) | 2017-03-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US9594912(B1) | 2017-03-01 | Thioux et al. | Applicant |
| US9609007(B1) | 2017-03-01 | Rivlin et al. | Applicant |
| US9626509(B1) | 2017-04-01 | Khalid et al. | Applicant |
| US9628498(B1) | 2017-04-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US9628507(B2) | 2017-04-01 | Haq et al. | Applicant |
| US9635039(B1) | 2017-04-01 | Islam et al. | Applicant |
| US9641546(B1) | 2017-05-01 | Manni et al. | Applicant |
| US9661009(B1) | 2017-05-01 | Karandikar et al. | Applicant |
| US9661018(B1) | 2017-05-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US2001/0005889(A1) | 2001-06-01 | Albrecht | Applicant |
| US2001/0047326(A1) | 2001-11-01 | Broadbent et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0018903(A1) | 2002-02-01 | Kokubo et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0038430(A1) | 2002-03-01 | Edwards et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0091819(A1) | 2002-07-01 | Melchione et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0095607(A1) | 2002-07-01 | Lin-Hendel | Applicant |
| US2002/0116627(A1) | 2002-08-01 | Tarbotton et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0144156(A1) | 2002-10-01 | Copeland | Applicant |
| US2002/0162015(A1) | 2002-10-01 | Tang | Applicant |
| US2002/0166063(A1) | 2002-11-01 | Lachman et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0169952(A1) | 2002-11-01 | DiSanto et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0184528(A1) | 2002-12-01 | Shevenell et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0188887(A1) | 2002-12-01 | Largman et al. | Applicant |
| US2002/0194490(A1) | 2002-12-01 | Halperin et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0074578(A1) | 2003-04-01 | Ford et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0084318(A1) | 2003-05-01 | Schertz | Applicant |
| US2003/0101381(A1) | 2003-05-01 | Mateev et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0115483(A1) | 2003-06-01 | Liang | Applicant |
| US2003/0188190(A1) | 2003-10-01 | Aaron et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0191957(A1) | 2003-10-01 | Hypponen et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0200460(A1) | 2003-10-01 | Morota et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0212902(A1) | 2003-11-01 | van der Made | Applicant |
| US2003/0229801(A1) | 2003-12-01 | Kouznetsov et al. | Applicant |
| US2003/0237000(A1) | 2003-12-01 | Denton et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0003323(A1) | 2004-01-01 | Bennett et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0015712(A1) | 2004-01-01 | Szor | Applicant |
| US2004/0019832(A1) | 2004-01-01 | Arnold et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0047356(A1) | 2004-03-01 | Bauer | Applicant |
| US2004/0083408(A1) | 2004-04-01 | Spiegel et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0088581(A1) | 2004-05-01 | Brawn et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0093513(A1) | 2004-05-01 | Cantrell et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0111531(A1) | 2004-06-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0117478(A1) | 2004-06-01 | Triulzi et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0117624(A1) | 2004-06-01 | Brandt et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0128355(A1) | 2004-07-01 | Chao et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0165588(A1) | 2004-08-01 | Pandya | Applicant |
| US2004/0236963(A1) | 2004-11-01 | Danford et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0243349(A1) | 2004-12-01 | Greifeneder et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0249911(A1) | 2004-12-01 | Alkhatib et al. | Applicant |
| US2004/0255161(A1) | 2004-12-01 | Cavanaugh | Applicant |
| US2004/0268147(A1) | 2004-12-01 | Wiederin et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0005159(A1) | 2005-01-01 | Oliphant | Applicant |
| US2005/0021740(A1) | 2005-01-01 | Bar et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0022018(A1) | 2005-01-01 | Szor | Examiner |
| US2005/0033960(A1) | 2005-02-01 | Vialen et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0033989(A1) | 2005-02-01 | Poletto et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0050148(A1) | 2005-03-01 | Mohammadioun et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0086523(A1) | 2005-04-01 | Zimmer et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0091513(A1) | 2005-04-01 | Mitomo et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0091533(A1) | 2005-04-01 | Omote et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0091652(A1) | 2005-04-01 | Ross et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0108562(A1) | 2005-05-01 | Khazan | Examiner |
| US2005/0114663(A1) | 2005-05-01 | Cornell et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0125195(A1) | 2005-06-01 | Brendel | Applicant |
| US2005/0149726(A1) | 2005-07-01 | Joshi et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0157662(A1) | 2005-07-01 | Bingham et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0183143(A1) | 2005-08-01 | Anderholm et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0201297(A1) | 2005-09-01 | Peikari | Applicant |
| US2005/0210533(A1) | 2005-09-01 | Copeland et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0238005(A1) | 2005-10-01 | Chen et al. | Applicant |
| US2005/0240781(A1) | 2005-10-01 | Gassoway | Applicant |
| US2005/0262562(A1) | 2005-11-01 | Gassoway | Applicant |
| US2005/0265331(A1) | 2005-12-01 | Stolfo | Applicant |
| US2005/0283839(A1) | 2005-12-01 | Cowburn | Applicant |
| US2006/0010495(A1) | 2006-01-01 | Cohen et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0015416(A1) | 2006-01-01 | Hoffman et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0015715(A1) | 2006-01-01 | Anderson | Applicant |
| US2006/0015747(A1) | 2006-01-01 | Van de Ven | Applicant |
| US2006/0021029(A1) | 2006-01-01 | Brickell et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0021054(A1) | 2006-01-01 | Costa et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0031476(A1) | 2006-02-01 | Mathes et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0047665(A1) | 2006-03-01 | Neil | Applicant |
| US2006/0070130(A1) | 2006-03-01 | Costea et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0075496(A1) | 2006-04-01 | Carpenter et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0095968(A1) | 2006-05-01 | Portolani et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0101516(A1) | 2006-05-01 | Sudaharan et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0101517(A1) | 2006-05-01 | Banzhof et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0117385(A1) | 2006-06-01 | Mester et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0123477(A1) | 2006-06-01 | Raghavan et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0143709(A1) | 2006-06-01 | Brooks et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0150249(A1) | 2006-07-01 | Gassen et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0161983(A1) | 2006-07-01 | Cothrell et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0161987(A1) | 2006-07-01 | Levy-Yurista | Applicant |
| US2006/0161989(A1) | 2006-07-01 | Reshef et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0164199(A1) | 2006-07-01 | Gilde et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0173992(A1) | 2006-08-01 | Weber et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0179147(A1) | 2006-08-01 | Tran et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0184632(A1) | 2006-08-01 | Marino et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0190561(A1) | 2006-08-01 | Conboy et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0191010(A1) | 2006-08-01 | Benjamin | Applicant |
| US2006/0221956(A1) | 2006-10-01 | Narayan et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0236393(A1) | 2006-10-01 | Kramer et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0242709(A1) | 2006-10-01 | Seinfeld et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0248519(A1) | 2006-11-01 | Jaeger et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0248582(A1) | 2006-11-01 | Panjwani et al. | Applicant |
| US2006/0251104(A1) | 2006-11-01 | Koga | Applicant |
| US2006/0288417(A1) | 2006-12-01 | Bookbinder et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0006288(A1) | 2007-01-01 | Mayfield et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0006313(A1) | 2007-01-01 | Porras et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0011174(A1) | 2007-01-01 | Takaragi et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0016951(A1) | 2007-01-01 | Piccard et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0033645(A1) | 2007-02-01 | Jones | Applicant |
| US2007/0038943(A1) | 2007-02-01 | FitzGerald et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0064689(A1) | 2007-03-01 | Shin et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0074169(A1) | 2007-03-01 | Chess et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0094730(A1) | 2007-04-01 | Bhikkaji et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0101435(A1) | 2007-05-01 | Konanka et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0128855(A1) | 2007-06-01 | Cho et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0142030(A1) | 2007-06-01 | Sinha et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0143827(A1) | 2007-06-01 | Nicodemus et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0156895(A1) | 2007-07-01 | Vuong | Applicant |
| US2007/0157180(A1) | 2007-07-01 | Tillmann et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0157306(A1) | 2007-07-01 | Elrod et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0168988(A1) | 2007-07-01 | Eisner et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0171824(A1) | 2007-07-01 | Ruello et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0174915(A1) | 2007-07-01 | Gribble et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0192500(A1) | 2007-08-01 | Lum | Applicant |
| US2007/0192858(A1) | 2007-08-01 | Lum | Applicant |
| US2007/0198275(A1) | 2007-08-01 | Malden et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0208822(A1) | 2007-09-01 | Wang et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0220607(A1) | 2007-09-01 | Sprosts et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0240218(A1) | 2007-10-01 | Tuvell et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0240219(A1) | 2007-10-01 | Tuvell et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0240220(A1) | 2007-10-01 | Tuvell et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0240222(A1) | 2007-10-01 | Tuvell et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0250930(A1) | 2007-10-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US2007/0256132(A2) | 2007-11-01 | Oliphant | Applicant |
| US2007/0271446(A1) | 2007-11-01 | Nakamura | Applicant |
| US2008/0005782(A1) | 2008-01-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US2008/0028463(A1) | 2008-01-01 | Dagon et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0040710(A1) | 2008-02-01 | Chiriac | Applicant |
| US2008/0046781(A1) | 2008-02-01 | Childs et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0066179(A1) | 2008-03-01 | Liu | Applicant |
| US2008/0072326(A1) | 2008-03-01 | Danford et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0077793(A1) | 2008-03-01 | Tan et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0080518(A1) | 2008-04-01 | Hoeflin et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0086720(A1) | 2008-04-01 | Lekel | Applicant |
| US2008/0098476(A1) | 2008-04-01 | Syversen | Applicant |
| US2008/0120722(A1) | 2008-05-01 | Sima et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0134178(A1) | 2008-06-01 | Fitzgerald et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0134334(A1) | 2008-06-01 | Kim et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0141376(A1) | 2008-06-01 | Clausen et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0163356(A1) | 2008-07-01 | Won-Jip et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0181227(A1) | 2008-07-01 | Todd | Applicant |
| US2008/0184367(A1) | 2008-07-01 | McMillan et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0184373(A1) | 2008-07-01 | Traut et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0189787(A1) | 2008-08-01 | Arnold et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0201778(A1) | 2008-08-01 | Guo et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0209557(A1) | 2008-08-01 | Herley et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0215742(A1) | 2008-09-01 | Goldszmidt et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0222729(A1) | 2008-09-01 | Chen et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0263665(A1) | 2008-10-01 | Ma et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0295172(A1) | 2008-11-01 | Bohacek | Applicant |
| US2008/0301810(A1) | 2008-12-01 | Lehane et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0307524(A1) | 2008-12-01 | Singh et al. | Applicant |
| US2008/0313738(A1) | 2008-12-01 | Enderby | Applicant |
| US2008/0320594(A1) | 2008-12-01 | Jiang | Applicant |
| US2009/0003317(A1) | 2009-01-01 | Kasralikar et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0007100(A1) | 2009-01-01 | Field et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0013408(A1) | 2009-01-01 | Schipka | Applicant |
| US2009/0031423(A1) | 2009-01-01 | Liu et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0036111(A1) | 2009-02-01 | Danford et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0037835(A1) | 2009-02-01 | Goldman | Applicant |
| US2009/0044024(A1) | 2009-02-01 | Oberheide et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0044274(A1) | 2009-02-01 | Budko et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0064332(A1) | 2009-03-01 | Porras et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0077666(A1) | 2009-03-01 | Chen et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0083369(A1) | 2009-03-01 | Marmor | Applicant |
| US2009/0083855(A1) | 2009-03-01 | Apap et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0089879(A1) | 2009-04-01 | Wang et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0094697(A1) | 2009-04-01 | Provos et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0113425(A1) | 2009-04-01 | Ports et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0125976(A1) | 2009-05-01 | Wassermann et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0126015(A1) | 2009-05-01 | Monastyrsky et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0126016(A1) | 2009-05-01 | Sobko | Examiner |
| US2009/0133125(A1) | 2009-05-01 | Choi | Examiner |
| US2009/0144823(A1) | 2009-06-01 | Lamastra et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0158430(A1) | 2009-06-01 | Borders | Applicant |
| US2009/0172815(A1) | 2009-07-01 | Gu et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0187992(A1) | 2009-07-01 | Poston | Applicant |
| US2009/0193293(A1) | 2009-07-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0198651(A1) | 2009-08-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0198670(A1) | 2009-08-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0198689(A1) | 2009-08-01 | Frazier et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0199274(A1) | 2009-08-01 | Frazier et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0199296(A1) | 2009-08-01 | Xie et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0228233(A1) | 2009-09-01 | Anderson et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0241187(A1) | 2009-09-01 | Troyansky | Applicant |
| US2009/0241190(A1) | 2009-09-01 | Todd et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0265692(A1) | 2009-10-01 | Godefroid et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0271867(A1) | 2009-10-01 | Zhang | Applicant |
| US2009/0300415(A1) | 2009-12-01 | Zhang et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0300761(A1) | 2009-12-01 | Park et al. | Applicant |
| US2009/0328185(A1) | 2009-12-01 | Berg | Examiner |
| US2009/0328221(A1) | 2009-12-01 | Blumfield et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0005146(A1) | 2010-01-01 | Drako et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0011205(A1) | 2010-01-01 | McKenna | Applicant |
| US2010/0017546(A1) | 2010-01-01 | Poo et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0030996(A1) | 2010-02-01 | Butler, II | Applicant |
| US2010/0031353(A1) | 2010-02-01 | Thomas | Examiner |
| US2010/0037314(A1) | 2010-02-01 | Perdisci et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0043073(A1) | 2010-02-01 | Kuwamura | Applicant |
| US2010/0054278(A1) | 2010-03-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0058474(A1) | 2010-03-01 | Hicks | Applicant |
| US2010/0064044(A1) | 2010-03-01 | Nonoyama | Applicant |
| US2010/0077481(A1) | 2010-03-01 | Polyakov et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0083376(A1) | 2010-04-01 | Pereira et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0115621(A1) | 2010-05-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0132038(A1) | 2010-05-01 | Zaitsev | Applicant |
| US2010/0154056(A1) | 2010-06-01 | Smith et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0180344(A1) | 2010-07-01 | Malyshev et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0192057(A1) | 2010-07-01 | Majidian | Applicant |
| US2010/0192223(A1) | 2010-07-01 | Ismael et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0220863(A1) | 2010-09-01 | Dupaquis et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0235831(A1) | 2010-09-01 | Dittmer | Applicant |
| US2010/0251104(A1) | 2010-09-01 | Massand | Applicant |
| US2010/0275210(A1) | 2010-10-01 | Phillips et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0281102(A1) | 2010-11-01 | Chinta et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0281541(A1) | 2010-11-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0281542(A1) | 2010-11-01 | Stolfo et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0287260(A1) | 2010-11-01 | Peterson et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0299754(A1) | 2010-11-01 | Amit et al. | Applicant |
| US2010/0306173(A1) | 2010-12-01 | Frank | Applicant |
| US2011/0004737(A1) | 2011-01-01 | Greenebaum | Applicant |
| US2011/0025504(A1) | 2011-02-01 | Lyon et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0041179(A1) | 2011-02-01 | St hlberg | Applicant |
| US2011/0047594(A1) | 2011-02-01 | Mahaffey et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0047620(A1) | 2011-02-01 | Mahaffey et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0055907(A1) | 2011-03-01 | Narasimhan et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0078794(A1) | 2011-03-01 | Manni et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0093951(A1) | 2011-04-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US2011/0099620(A1) | 2011-04-01 | Stavrou et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0099633(A1) | 2011-04-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US2011/0099635(A1) | 2011-04-01 | Silberman et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0113231(A1) | 2011-05-01 | Kaminsky | Applicant |
| US2011/0145918(A1) | 2011-06-01 | Jung et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0145920(A1) | 2011-06-01 | Mahaffey et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0145934(A1) | 2011-06-01 | Abramovici et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0167493(A1) | 2011-07-01 | Song et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0167494(A1) | 2011-07-01 | Bowen et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0173178(A1) | 2011-07-01 | Conboy et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0173213(A1) | 2011-07-01 | Frazier et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0173460(A1) | 2011-07-01 | Ito et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0219449(A1) | 2011-09-01 | St. Neitzel et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0219450(A1) | 2011-09-01 | McDougal et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0225624(A1) | 2011-09-01 | Sawhney et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0225655(A1) | 2011-09-01 | Niemela et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0247072(A1) | 2011-10-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0265182(A1) | 2011-10-01 | Peinado et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0289582(A1) | 2011-11-01 | Kejriwal et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0302587(A1) | 2011-12-01 | Nishikawa et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0302656(A1) | 2011-12-01 | El-Moussa | Examiner |
| US2011/0307954(A1) | 2011-12-01 | Melnik et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0307955(A1) | 2011-12-01 | Kaplan et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0307956(A1) | 2011-12-01 | Yermakov et al. | Applicant |
| US2011/0314546(A1) | 2011-12-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0023593(A1) | 2012-01-01 | Puder et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0054869(A1) | 2012-03-01 | Yen et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0066698(A1) | 2012-03-01 | Yanoo | Applicant |
| US2012/0079596(A1) | 2012-03-01 | Thomas et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0084859(A1) | 2012-04-01 | Radinsky et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0110667(A1) | 2012-05-01 | Zubrilin et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0117652(A1) | 2012-05-01 | Manni et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0121154(A1) | 2012-05-01 | Xue et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0124426(A1) | 2012-05-01 | Maybee et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0174186(A1) | 2012-07-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0174196(A1) | 2012-07-01 | Bhogavilli et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0174218(A1) | 2012-07-01 | McCoy et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0198279(A1) | 2012-08-01 | Schroeder | Applicant |
| US2012/0210423(A1) | 2012-08-01 | Friedrichs et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0222121(A1) | 2012-08-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0255015(A1) | 2012-10-01 | Sahita et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0255017(A1) | 2012-10-01 | Sallam | Applicant |
| US2012/0260342(A1) | 2012-10-01 | Dube et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0266244(A1) | 2012-10-01 | Green et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0278886(A1) | 2012-11-01 | Luna | Applicant |
| US2012/0297489(A1) | 2012-11-01 | Dequevy | Applicant |
| US2012/0330801(A1) | 2012-12-01 | McDougal et al. | Applicant |
| US2012/0331553(A1) | 2012-12-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0014259(A1) | 2013-01-01 | Gribble et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0036472(A1) | 2013-02-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US2013/0047257(A1) | 2013-02-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US2013/0074185(A1) | 2013-03-01 | McDougal et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0086684(A1) | 2013-04-01 | Mohler | Applicant |
| US2013/0097699(A1) | 2013-04-01 | Balupari et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0097706(A1) | 2013-04-01 | Titonis et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0111587(A1) | 2013-05-01 | Goel et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0117852(A1) | 2013-05-01 | Stute | Applicant |
| US2013/0117855(A1) | 2013-05-01 | Kim et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0139264(A1) | 2013-05-01 | Brinkley et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0160125(A1) | 2013-06-01 | Likhachev et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0160127(A1) | 2013-06-01 | Jeong et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0160130(A1) | 2013-06-01 | Mendelev et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0160131(A1) | 2013-06-01 | Madou et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0167236(A1) | 2013-06-01 | Sick | Applicant |
| US2013/0174214(A1) | 2013-07-01 | Duncan | Applicant |
| US2013/0185789(A1) | 2013-07-01 | Hagiwara et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0185795(A1) | 2013-07-01 | Winn et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0185798(A1) | 2013-07-01 | Saunders et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0191915(A1) | 2013-07-01 | Antonakakis et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0196649(A1) | 2013-08-01 | Paddon et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0227691(A1) | 2013-08-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0246370(A1) | 2013-09-01 | Bartram et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0247186(A1) | 2013-09-01 | LeMasters | Applicant |
| US2013/0247187(A1) | 2013-09-01 | Hsiao | Examiner |
| US2013/0263260(A1) | 2013-10-01 | Mahaffey et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0291109(A1) | 2013-10-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0298243(A1) | 2013-11-01 | Kumar et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0318038(A1) | 2013-11-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0318073(A1) | 2013-11-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0325791(A1) | 2013-12-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0325792(A1) | 2013-12-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0325871(A1) | 2013-12-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2013/0325872(A1) | 2013-12-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0032875(A1) | 2014-01-01 | Butler | Applicant |
| US2014/0053260(A1) | 2014-02-01 | Gupta et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0053261(A1) | 2014-02-01 | Gupta et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0130158(A1) | 2014-05-01 | Wang et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0137180(A1) | 2014-05-01 | Lukacs et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0169762(A1) | 2014-06-01 | Ryu | Applicant |
| US2014/0179360(A1) | 2014-06-01 | Jackson et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0181131(A1) | 2014-06-01 | Ross | Applicant |
| US2014/0181975(A1) | 2014-06-01 | Spernow et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0189687(A1) | 2014-07-01 | Jung et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0189866(A1) | 2014-07-01 | Shiffer et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0189882(A1) | 2014-07-01 | Jung et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0237600(A1) | 2014-08-01 | Silberman et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0280245(A1) | 2014-09-01 | Wilson | Applicant |
| US2014/0283037(A1) | 2014-09-01 | Sikorski et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0283063(A1) | 2014-09-01 | Thompson et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0325344(A1) | 2014-10-01 | Bourke et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0328204(A1) | 2014-11-01 | Klotsche et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0337836(A1) | 2014-11-01 | Ismael | Applicant |
| US2014/0344926(A1) | 2014-11-01 | Cunningham et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0351935(A1) | 2014-11-01 | Shao et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0380473(A1) | 2014-12-01 | Bu et al. | Applicant |
| US2014/0380474(A1) | 2014-12-01 | Paithane et al. | Applicant |
| US2015/0007312(A1) | 2015-01-01 | Pidathala et al. | Applicant |
| US2015/0096022(A1) | 2015-04-01 | Vincent et al. | Applicant |
| US2015/0096023(A1) | 2015-04-01 | Mesdaq | Examiner |
| US2015/0096024(A1) | 2015-04-01 | Haq et al. | Applicant |
| US2015/0096025(A1) | 2015-04-01 | Ismael | Applicant |
| US2015/0121526(A1) | 2015-04-01 | McLarnon | Examiner |
| US2015/0180886(A1) | 2015-06-01 | Staniford et al. | Applicant |
| US2015/0186645(A1) | 2015-07-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US2015/0220735(A1) | 2015-08-01 | Paithane et al. | Applicant |
| US2015/0244732(A1) | 2015-08-01 | Golshan | Examiner |
| US2015/0372980(A1) | 2015-12-01 | Eyada | Applicant |
| US2016/0044000(A1) | 2016-02-01 | Cunningham | Applicant |
| US2016/0127393(A1) | 2016-05-01 | Aziz et al. | Applicant |
| US2016/0191547(A1) | 2016-06-01 | Zafar et al. | Applicant |
| US2016/0261612(A1) | 2016-09-01 | Mesdaq et al. | Applicant |
| US2016/0285914(A1) | 2016-09-01 | Singh et al. | Applicant |
| US2016/0301703(A1) | 2016-10-01 | Aziz | Applicant |
| US2016/0335110(A1) | 2016-11-01 | Paithane et al. | Applicant |
| US2017/0083703(A1) | 2017-03-01 | Abbasi et al. | Applicant |
| GB2439806(A) | 2008-01-01 | Applicant | |
| GB2490431(A) | 2012-10-01 | Applicant | |
| WO206928 | 2002-01-01 | Applicant | |
| WO223805(A2) | 2002-03-01 | Applicant | |
| WO2007117636(A2) | 2007-10-01 | Applicant | |
| WO2008041950(A2) | 2008-04-01 | Applicant | |
| WO2011084431(A2) | 2011-07-01 | Applicant | |
| WO2011/112348(A1) | 2011-09-01 | Applicant | |
| WO2012/075336(A1) | 2012-06-01 | Applicant | |
| WO2012145066(A1) | 2012-10-01 | Applicant | |
| WO2013/067505(A1) | 2013-05-01 | Applicant |
Non-Patent Literature (88)
- “Network Security: NetDetector—Network Intrusion Forensic System (NIFS) Whitepaper”, (“NetDetector Whitepaper”), (2003).Applicant
- “Packet”, Microsoft Computer Dictionary Microsoft Press, (Mar. 2002), 1 page.Applicant
- “When Virtual is Better Than Real”, IEEEXplore Digital Library, available at, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.iso?reload=true&arnumber=990073, (Dec. 7, 2013).Applicant
- Abdullah, et al., Visualizing Network Data for Intrusion Detection, 2005 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security, pp. 100-108.Applicant
- Adetoye, Adedayo, et al., “Network Intrusion Detection & Response System”, (“Adetoye”) (Sep. 2003).Applicant
- AltaVista Advanced Search Results (subset). “attack vector identifier” Http://www.altavista.com/web/results?Itag=ody&pg=aq&aqmode=aqa=Event+Orchestrator . . . , (Accessed on Sep. 15, 2009).Applicant
- AltaVista Advanced Search Results (subset). “Event Orchestrator”. Http://www.altavista.com/web/results?Itag=ody&pg=aq&aqmode=aqa=Event+Orchesrator . . . , (Accessed on Sep. 3, 2009).Applicant
- Apostolopoulos, George; hassapis, Constantinos; “V-eM: A cluster of Virtual Machines for Robust, Detailed, and High-Performance Network Emulation”, 14th IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of computer and Telecommunication Systems, Sep. 11-14, 2006, pp. 117-126.Applicant
- Aura, Tuomas, “Scanning electronic documents for personally identifiable information”, Proceedings of the 5th ACM workshop on Privacy in electronic society. ACM, 2006.Applicant
- Baecher, “The Nepenthes Platform: An Efficient Approach to collect Malware”, Springer-verlaq Berlin Heidelberg, (2006), pp. 165-184.Applicant
- Baldi, Mario; Risso, Fulvio; “A Framework for Rapid Development and Portable Execution of Packet-Handling Applications”, 5th IEEE International Symposium Processing and Information Technology, Dec. 21, 2005, pp. 233-238.Applicant
- Bayer, et al., “Dynamic Analysis of Malicious Code”, J Comput Virol, Springer-Verlag, France., (2006), pp. 67-77.Applicant
- Boubalos, Chris , “Extracting syslog data out of raw pcap dumps, seclists.org, Honeypots mailing list archives”, available at http://seclists,org/honeypots/2003/q2/319 (“Boubalos”), (Jun. 5, 2003).Applicant
- Bowen, B. M. et al “BotSwindler: Tamper Resistant Injection of Believable Decoys in VM-Based Hosts for Crimeware Detection”, in Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, Springer ISBN: 978-3-642-15511-6 (pp. 118-137) (Sep. 15, 2010).Applicant
- Chaudet, C., et al., “Optimal Positioning of Active and Passive Monitoring Devices”, International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Conference on Emerging Network Experiment and Technology, CoNEXT '05, Toulousse, France, (Oct. 2005), pp. 71-82.Applicant
- Cisco “Intrusion Prevention for the Cisco ASA 5500-x Series” Data Sheet (2012).Applicant
- Cisco, Configuring the Catalyst Switched Port Analyzer (SPAN) (“Cisco”), (1992-2003).Applicant
- Clark, John, Sylvian Leblanc,and Scott Knight. “Risks associated with usb hardware trojan devices used by insiders.” Systems Conference (SysCon), 2011 IEEE International. IEEE, 2011.Applicant
- Cohen, M.I., “PyFlag—An advanced network forensic framework”, Digital investigation 5, Elsevier, (2008), pp. S112-S120.Applicant
- Costa, M., et al., “Vigilante: End-to-End Containment of Internet Worms”, SOSP '05 Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., Brighton U.K., (Oct. 23-26, 2005).Applicant
- Crandall, J.R., et al., “Minos:Control Data Attack Prevention Orthogonal to Memory Model”, 37th International Symposium on Microarchitecture, Portland, Oregon, (Dec. 2004).Applicant
- Deutsch, P., ““Zlib compressed data format specification version 3.3” RFC 1950, (1996)”.Applicant
- Distler, “Malware Analysis: An Introduction”, SANS Institute InfoSec Reading Room, SANS Institute, (2007).Applicant
- Dunlap, George W. , et al., “ReVirt: Enabling Intrusion Analysis through Virtual-Machine Logging and Replay”, Proceeding of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX Association, (“Dunlap”), (Dec. 9, 2002).Applicant
- Excerpt regarding First Printing Date for Merike Kaeo, Designing Network Security (“Kaeo”), (2005).Applicant
- Filiol, Eric , et al., “Combinatorial Optimisation of Worm Propagation on an Unknown Network”, International Journal of Computer Science 2.2 (2007).Applicant
- FireEye Malware Analysis & Exchange Network, Malware Protection System, FireEye Inc., 2010.Applicant
- FireEye Malware Analysis, Modern Malware Forensics, FireEye Inc., 2010.Applicant
- FireEye v.6.0 Security Target, pp. 1-35, Version 1.1, FireEye Inc., May 2011.Applicant
- Gibler, Clint, et al. AndroidLeaks: automatically detecting potential privacy leaks in android applications on a large scale. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012.Applicant
- Goel, et al., Reconstructing System State for Intrusion Analysis, Apr. 2008 SIGOPS Operating Systems Review vol. 42 Issue 3, pp. 21-28.Applicant
- Gregg Keizer: “Microsoft's HoneyMonkeys Show Patching Windows Works”, Aug. 8, 2005, XP055143386, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://www.informationweek.com/microsofts-honeymonkeys-show-patching-windows-works/d/d-id/1035069? [retrieved on Jun. 1, 2016].Applicant
- Heng Yin et al, Panorama: Capturing System-Wide Information Flow for Malware Detection and Analysis, Research Showcase @ CMU, Carnegie Mellon University, 2007.Applicant
- Hjelmvik, Erik, “Passive Network Security Analysis with NetworkMiner”, (IN)SECURE, Issue 18, (Oct. 2008), pp. 1-100.Applicant
- Idika et al., A-Survey-of-Malware-Detection-Techniques, Feb. 2, 2007, Department of Computer Science, Purdue University.Applicant
- IEEE Xplore Digital Library Sear Results (subset) for “detection of unknown computer worms”. Http//ieeexplore.ieee.org/searchresult.jsp?SortField=Score&SortOrder=desc&ResultC . . . (Accessed on Aug. 28, 2009).Applicant
- Isohara, Takamasa, Keisuke Takemori, and Ayumu Kubota. “Kernel-based behavior analysis for android malware detection.” Computational intelligence and Security (CIS), 2011 Seventh International Conference on. IEEE, 2011.Applicant
- Kaeo, Merike, “Designing Network Security”, (“Kaeo”), (Nov. 2003).Applicant
- Kevin A Roundy et al: “Hybrid Analysis and Control of Malware”, Sep. 15, 2010, Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 317-338, XP019150454 ISBN:978-3-642-15511-6.Applicant
- Kim, H., et al., “Autograph: Toward Automated, Distributed Worm Signature Detection”, Proceedings of the 13th Usenix Security Symposium (Security 2004), San Diego, (Aug. 2004), pp. 271-286.Applicant
- King, Samuel T., et al., “Operating System Support for Virtual Machines”, (“King”), (Dec. 2002).Applicant
- Krasnyansky, Max, et al., Universal TUN/TAP driver, available at https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/tuntap.txt (2002) (“Krasnyansky”).Applicant
- Kreibich, C., et al., “Honeycomb-Creating Intrusion Detection Signatures Using Honeypots”, 2nd Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-11), Boston, USA, (2003).Applicant
- Kristoff, J., “Botnets, Detection and Mitigation: DNS-Based Techniques”, NU Security Day, (2005), 23 pages.Applicant
- Leading Colleges Select FireEye to Stop Malware-Related Data Breaches, FireEye Inc., 2009.Applicant
- Li et al., A VMM-Based System Call Interposition Framework for Program Monitoring, Dec. 2010, IEEE 16th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems, pp. 706-711.Applicant
- Liljenstam, Michael, et al., “Simulating Realistic Network Traffic for Worm Warning System Design and Testing”, Institute for Security Technology studies, Dartmouth College, (“Liljenstam”), (Oct. 27, 2003).Applicant
- Lindorfer, Martina, Clemens Kolbitsch, and Paolo Milani Compare& “Detecting environment-sensitive malware.” Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.Applicant
- Lok Kwong et al: “DroidScope: Seamlessly Reconstructing the OS and Dalvik Semantic Views for Dynamic Android Malware Analysis”, Aug. 10, 2012, XP055158513, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurity12/sec12--final107.pdf [retrieved on Dec. 15, 2014].Applicant
- Marchette, David J., Computer Intrusion Detection and Network Monitoring: A Statistical (“Marchette”), (2001).Applicant
- Margolis, P.E., “Random House Webster's Computer & Internet Dictionary 3rd Edition”, ISBN 0375703519, p. 595 (Dec. 1998).Applicant
- Moore, D., et al., “Internet Quarantine: Requirements for Containing Self-Propagating Code”, INFOCOM, vol. 3, (Mar. 30-Apr. 3, 2003), pp. 1901-1910.Applicant
- Morales, Jose A., et al., ““Analyzing and exploiting network behaviors of malware.””, Security and Privacy in Communication Networks. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. 20-34.Applicant
- Mori, Detecting Unknown Computer Viruses, 2004, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.Applicant
- Natvig, Kurt, “Sandboxii: Internet”, Virus Bulletin Conference, (“Natvig”), (Sep. 2002).Applicant
- NetBIOS Working Group. Protocol Standard for a NetBIOS Service on a TCP/UDP transport: Concepts and Methods. STD 19, RFC 1001, Mar. 1987.Applicant
- Newsome, J., et al., “Dynamic Taint Analysis for Automatic Detection, Analysis, and Signature Generation of Exploits on Commodity Software”, In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security, Symposium (NDSS '05), (Feb. 2005).Applicant
- Newsome, J., et al., “Polygraph: Automatically Generating Signatures for Polymorphic Worms”, In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, (May 2005).Applicant
- Nojiri, D. , et al., “Cooperation Response Strategies for Large Scale Attack Mitigation”, DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition, vol. 1, (Apr. 22-24, 2003), pp. 293-302.Applicant
- Oberheide et al., CloudAV.sub.—N-Version Antivirus in the Network Cloud, 17th USENIX Security Symposium USENIX Security '08 Jul. 28-Aug. 1, 2008 San Jose, CA.Applicant
- PCT/US2014/043726 filed Jun. 23, 2014 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Oct. 9, 2014.Applicant
- PCT/US2015/067082 filed Dec. 21, 2015 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Feb. 24, 2016.Applicant
- Peter M. Chen, and Brian D. Noble, “When Virtual Is Better Than Real, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science”, University of Michigan (“Chen”), (2001).Applicant
- Reiner Sailer, Enriquillo Valdez, Trent Jaeger, Roonald Perez, Leendert van Doom, John Linwood Griffin, Stefan Berger., sHype: Secure Hypervisor Approach to Trusted Virtualized Systems (Feb. 2, 2005) (“Sailer”).Applicant
- Silicon Defense, “Worm Containment in the Internal Network”, (Mar. 2003), pp. 1-25.Applicant
- Singh, S., et al., “Automated Worm Fingerprinting”, Proceedings of the ACM/USENIX Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation, San Francisco, California, (Dec. 2004).Applicant
- Spitzner, Lance, “Honeypots: Tracking Hackers”, (“Spizner”), (Sep. 17, 2002).Applicant
- The Sniffers's Guide to Raw Traffic available at: yuba.stanford.edu/˜casado/pcap/sectionl.html, (Jan. 6, 2014).Applicant
- Thomas H. Ptacek, and Timothy N. Newsham , “Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection”, Secure Networks, (“Ptacek”), (Jan. 1998).Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 11/717,475, filed Mar. 12, 2007 Final Office Action dated Feb. 27, 2013.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 11/717,475, filed Mar. 12, 2007 Final Office Action dated Nov. 22, 2010.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 11/717,475, filed Mar. 12, 2007 Non-Final Office Action dated Aug. 28, 2012.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 11/717,475, filed Mar. 12, 2007 Non-Final Office Action dated May 6, 2010.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 13/925,688, filed Jun. 24, 2013 Final Office Action dated Jan. 12, 2017.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 13/925,688, filed Jun. 24, 2013 Final Office Action dated Mar. 11, 2016.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 13/925,688, filed Jun. 24, 2013 Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 2, 2015.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 13/925,688, filed Jun. 24, 2013 Non-Final Office Action dated Sep. 16, 2016.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 14/059,381, filed Oct. 21, 2013 Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 29, 2014.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 14/229,541, filed Mar. 28, 2014 Non-Final Office Action dated Apr. 20, 2016.Applicant
- U.S. Appl. No. 14/620,060, filed Feb. 11, 2015, Non-Final Office Action dated Apr. 3, 2015.Applicant
- U.S. Pat. No. 8,171,553 filed Apr. 20, 2006, Inter Parties Review Decision dated Jul. 10, 2015.Applicant
- U.S. Pat. No. 8,291,499 filed Mar. 16, 2012, Inter Parties Review Decision dated Jul. 10, 2015.Applicant
- Venezia, Paul, “NetDetector Captures Intrusions”, InfoWorld Issue 27, (“Venezia”), (Jul. 14, 2003).Applicant
- Wahid et al., Characterising the Evolution in Scanning Activity of Suspicious Hosts, Oct. 2009, Third International conference on Network and System Security, pp. 344-350.Applicant
- Whyte, et al., “DNS-Based Detection of Scanning Works in an Enterprise Network”, Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, (Feb. 2005), 15 pages.Applicant
- Williamson, Mathew M., “Throttling Virses: Restricting Propagation to Defeat Malicious Mobile Code”, ACSAC Conference, Las Vegas, NV, USA, (Dec. 2002), pp. 1-9.Applicant
- Yuhei Kawakoya et al: “Memory behavior-based automatic malware unpacking in stealth debugging environment”, Malicious and Unwanted Software (Malware), 2010 5th International Conference on, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, Oct. 19, 2010, pp. 39-46, XP031833827, ISBN:978-1-4244-8-9353-1.Applicant
- Zhang et al., The Effects of Threading, Infection Time, and Multiple-Attacker Collaboration on Malware Propagation, Sep. 2009, IEEE 28th International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, pp. 73-82.Applicant