IP Library Granted Patent US 9,384,349
Granted Patent B2
US 9,384,349 · App. 13/476,869 · Granted Jul 5, 2016

Negative light-weight rules

View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 9,384,349
App. No.
13/476,869
Granted
Jul 5, 2016
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method for securing an electronic device includes, at a level below all of the operating systems of an electronic device, trapping a first attempt and second attempt to access sensitive system resources of the electronic device. The method also includes identifying the first attempt and second attempt as representing a potential malware attack, comparing the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against a first anti-malware rule, and, based on the comparison of the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against the first anti-malware rule, allowing the second attempt. The first attempt and second attempt originate from code of the same operating entity. The first anti-malware rule includes a requirement of a sequence of attempts including the first attempt followed by the second attempt.

Claims (67)

1. A method for securing an electronic device, comprising:

trapping, at a level below all of the operating systems of an electronic device, a first attempt to access sensitive system resources of the electronic device;

identifying the first attempt as malicious;

trapping, at a level below all of the operating systems of an electronic device, a second attempt to access sensitive system resources of the electronic device, the second attempt trapped after the first attempt, the first attempt and second attempt originating from code of the same operating entity;

identifying the second attempt as malicious;

comparing the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against a first anti-malware rule, the first anti-malware rule including a requirement of a sequence of attempts including the first attempt followed by the second attempt; and

based on the comparison of the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against the first anti-malware rule, allowing the second attempt.

2. The method according to claim 1 , further comprising:

trapping, at a level below all of the operating systems of an electronic device, a third attempt to access sensitive system resources of the electronic device, the third attempt trapped after the second attempt, the third attempt and second attempt originating from code of the same operating entity;

based on the comparison of the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against the first anti-malware rule, allowing the third attempt.

3. The method according to claim 1 , further comprising:

trapping, at a level below all of the operating systems of an electronic device, a third attempt and a fourth attempt to access sensitive system resources of the electronic device, the third and fourth attempt originating from code of the same operating entity;

identifying the third attempt and fourth attempt as potential malware attacks on the electronic device;

determining that a malware status of the fourth attempt is unknown;

comparing the sequence of the third attempt and fourth attempt against a second anti-malware rule, the anti-malware rule including a requirement of a sequence of attempts including the third attempt followed by the fourth attempt followed by a fifth attempt, the fifth attempt identified as accessing a designated portion of the sensitive system resources of the electronic device;

determining that the fifth attempt has not occurred; and

based upon the determination that the fifth attempt has not occurred and upon the determination that the malware status of the fourth attempt is unknown and upon the second anti-malware rule, taking a default action upon the fourth attempt.

4. The method according to claim 1 , further comprising determining that the first attempt and the second attempt are not known to be safe.

5. The method according to claim 1 , wherein the sequence of attempts included within the first anti-malware rule is an ordered sequence of attempts.

6. The method according to claim 1 , further comprising, based on the comparison of the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against the first anti-malware rule, determining that a source of the first attempt and the second attempt is not malicious.

7. A system for securing an electronic device, comprising:

a memory;

a processor;

a plurality of sensitive system resources; and

one or more security agents including instructions resident in the memory and operable for execution by the processor, wherein:

one of the security agents is configured to:

trap, at a level below all of the operating systems of the electronic device, a first attempt to access one of the sensitive system resources; and

trap, at a level below all of the operating systems of the electronic device, a second attempt to access one of the sensitive system resources, the second attempt trapped after the first attempt, the first attempt and second attempt originating from code of the same operating entity; and

one of the security agents is configured to:

identify the first attempt as malicious;

identify the second attempt as malicious;

compare the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against a first anti-malware rule, the first anti-malware rule including a requirement of a sequence of attempts including the first attempt followed by the second attempt; and

based on the comparison of the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against the first anti-malware rule, allow the second attempt.

8. The system according to claim 7 , wherein:

one of the security agents is further configured to trap, at a level below all of the operating systems of the electronic device, a third attempt to access one of the sensitive system resources, the third attempt trapped after the second attempt, the third attempt and second attempt originating from code of the same operating entity; and

one of the security agents is configured to, based on the comparison of the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against the first anti-malware rule, allow the third attempt.

9. The system according to claim 7 , wherein:

one of the security agents is further configured to:

trap, at a level below all of the operating systems of the electronic device, a third attempt and a fourth attempt to the access sensitive system resources, the third attempt and fourth attempt originating from code of the same operating entity; and

one of the security agents is further configured to:

identify the third attempt and fourth attempt as representing a potential malware attack on the electronic device;

determine that a malware status of the fourth attempt is unknown;

compare the sequence of the third attempt and fourth attempt against a second anti-malware rule, the anti-malware rule including a requirement of a sequence of attempts including the third attempt followed by the fourth attempt followed by a fifth attempt, the fifth attempt identified as accessing a designated portion of the sensitive system resources of the electronic device;

determine that the fifth attempt has not occurred; and

based upon the determination that the fifth attempt has not occurred and upon the determination that the malware status of the fourth attempt is unknown and upon the second anti-malware rule, take a default action upon the fourth attempt.

10. The system according to claim 7 , wherein one of the security agents is configured to determine that the first attempt and the second attempt are not known to be safe.

11. The system according to claim 7 , wherein the sequence of attempts included within the first anti-malware rule is an ordered sequence of attempts.

12. At least one non-transitory computer readable medium, comprising

computer-executable instructions, the instructions readable by a processor, the instructions, when executed, for causing the processor to:

trap, at a level below all of the operating systems of an electronic device, a first attempt to access one of a plurality of sensitive system resources of the electronic device; and

trap, at a level below all of the operating systems of the electronic device, a second attempt to access one of the sensitive system resources, the second attempt trapped after the first attempt, the first attempt and second attempt originating from code of the same operating entity; and

identify the first attempt as malicious;

identify the second attempt as malicious;

compare the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against a first anti-malware rule, the first anti-malware rule including a requirement of a sequence of attempts including the first attempt followed by the second attempt; and

based on the comparison of the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against the first anti-malware rule, allow the second attempt.

13. The medium according to claim 12 , wherein the processor is further caused to:

trap, at a level below all of the operating systems of the electronic device, a third attempt to access one of the sensitive system resources, the third attempt trapped after the second attempt, the third attempt and second attempt originating from code of the same operating entity; and

based on the comparison of the sequence of the first attempt and second attempt against the first anti-malware rule, allow the third attempt.

14. The medium according to claim 12 , wherein the processor is further caused to:

trap, at a level below all of the operating systems of the electronic device, a third attempt and a fourth attempt to the access sensitive system resources, the third attempt and fourth attempt originating from code of the same operating entity; and

identify the third attempt and fourth attempt as representing a potential malware attack on the electronic device;

determine that a malware status of the fourth attempt is unknown;

compare the sequence of the third attempt and fourth attempt against a second anti-malware rule, the anti-malware rule including a requirement of a sequence of attempts including the third attempt followed by the fourth attempt followed by a fifth attempt, the fifth attempt identified as accessing a designated portion of the sensitive system resources of the electronic device;

determine that the fifth attempt has not occurred; and

based upon the determination that the fifth attempt has not occurred and upon the determination that the malware status of the fourth attempt is unknown and upon the second anti-malware rule, take a default action upon the fourth attempt.

15. The medium according to claim 12 , wherein the processor is further caused to determine that the first attempt and the second attempt are not known to be safe.

16. The medium according to claim 12 , wherein the sequence of attempts included within the first anti-malware rule is an ordered sequence of attempts.

Assignments (10)
CORRECTIVE ASSIGNMENT TO CORRECT THE THE PATENT TITLES AND REMOVE DUPLICATES IN THE SCHEDULE PREVIOUSLY RECORDED AT REEL: 059354 FRAME: 0335. ASSIGNOR(S) HEREBY CONFIRMS THE ASSIGNMENT. Recorded Jun 23, 2022
From: MCAFEE, LLC
To: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT
Reel/Frame 060792/0307 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Mar 3, 2022
From: MCAFEE, LLC
To: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT AND COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 059354/0335 →
RELEASE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COLLATERAL - REEL/FRAME 045056/0676 Recorded Mar 2, 2022
From: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC., AS COLLATERAL AGENT
To: MCAFEE, LLC
Reel/Frame 059354/0213 →
RELEASE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COLLATERAL - REEL/FRAME 045055/0786 Recorded Oct 26, 2020
From: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS COLLATERAL AGENT
To: MCAFEE, LLC
Reel/Frame 054238/0001 →
CORRECTIVE ASSIGNMENT TO CORRECT THE REMOVE PATENT 6336186 PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ON REEL 045056 FRAME 0676. ASSIGNOR(S) HEREBY CONFIRMS THE SECURITY INTEREST. Recorded Oct 22, 2020
From: MCAFEE, LLC
To: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC.
Reel/Frame 054206/0593 →
CORRECTIVE ASSIGNMENT TO CORRECT THE REMOVE PATENT 6336186 PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ON REEL 045055 FRAME 786. ASSIGNOR(S) HEREBY CONFIRMS THE SECURITY INTEREST. Recorded Oct 22, 2020
From: MCAFEE, LLC
To: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
Reel/Frame 055854/0047 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Jan 12, 2018
From: MCAFEE, LLC
To: MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC.
Reel/Frame 045056/0676 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Jan 12, 2018
From: MCAFEE, LLC
To: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
Reel/Frame 045055/0786 →
CHANGE OF NAME AND ENTITY CONVERSION Recorded Aug 24, 2017
From: MCAFEE, INC.
To: MCAFEE, LLC
Reel/Frame 043665/0918 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded May 21, 2012
From: KAPOOR, ADITYA; ROBERTS, GUY
To: MCAFEE, INC.
Reel/Frame 028243/0747 →