IP Library Granted Patent US 10,027,696
Granted Patent B1
US 10,027,696 · App. 15/470,816 · Granted Jul 17, 2018

System and method for determining a threat based on correlation of indicators of compromise from other sources

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 10,027,696
App. No.
15/470,816
Granted
Jul 17, 2018
Kind
B1
Abstract

According to one embodiment, an electronic device features processing circuitry and memory that includes a first logic and a second logic. When executed by the processing circuitry, the first logic organizes (i) a first plurality of indicators of compromise (IOCs) received from a first source, where the first plurality of IOCs being caused by a known origin of a malicious attack, and (ii) one or more IOCs received from a second source that is different from the first source and an origin of the one or more IOCs is unknown. The second logic conducts a predictive analysis that evaluates whether the one or more IOCs have at least a degree of correlation with the first plurality of IOCs, and determines a threat level. The threat level signifies a degree of confidence that IOCs received from the second source are caused by the known origin of the first plurality of IOCs.

Claims (45)

1. An electronic device, comprising:

a communication interface;

processing circuitry; and

a memory coupled to the processing circuitry, the memory includes

a first logic that, when executed by the processing circuitry, organizes (i) a first plurality of indicators of compromise (IOCs) received from a first source via the communication interface, where each of the first plurality of IOCs being caused by a known origin of a malicious attack, and (ii) one or more IOCs received from a second source via the communication interface, the second source being different from the first source where an origin of the one or more IOCs is unknown, and

a second logic that, when executed by the processing circuitry, (i) conducts an analysis that evaluates whether the one or more IOCs have at least a degree of correlation with the first plurality of IOCs, and (ii) determine a threat level signifying a degree of confidence that the one or more IOCs received from the second source are caused by the known origin of the first plurality of IOCs.

2. The electronic device of claim 1 , wherein the known origin of the malicious attack corresponds to an electronic mail message detected by the first source as including potential malware.

3. The electronic device of claim 2 , wherein the known origin of the malicious attack corresponds to a text message detected by the first source as including potential malware.

4. The electronic device of claim 1 , wherein the communication interface includes a wireless transceiver for establishing a communicative coupling to a network and receiving at least one the first plurality of IOCs or the one or more IOCs via the network.

5. The electronic device of claim 1 , wherein the second logic determines whether the one or more IOCs received from the second source have the degree of correlation to the first plurality of IOCs received from the first source in response to a triggering event that signifies a likelihood that the one or more IOCs from the second source are caused by an undetected malicious electronic message present at the second source.

6. The electronic device of claim 5 , wherein the triggering event includes a shift in volume of a given type of IOC at the second source.

7. The electronic device of claim 1 , wherein the degree of correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs that is set for the analysis is varied based on an operating state of the electronic device.

8. The electronic device of claim 1 , wherein the degree of correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs for the analysis is set to a first level when the electronic device is in a first operating state, the first level requires the one or more IOCs to be in a same chronological order and present within the first plurality of IOCs.

9. The electronic device of claim 8 , wherein the degree of correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs for the analysis is set to a second level when the electronic device is in a second operating state, the second level requires a portion of the one or more IOCs to be present within the first plurality of IOCs without the portion of the one or more IOCs being in the same chronological order as present within the first plurality of IOCs.

10. The electronic device of claim 1 further comprising alert generation logic to (i) determine a first type of response to be initiated in response to determining a first threat level in which the correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs during the analysis is equal to or exceeds the first level and (ii) determine a second type of response to be initiated in response to determining a second threat level in which the correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs during the analysis is equal to or exceeds the second threat level and is less than the first threat level, the second type of response including an alert to security personnel of the second source and the first type of response includes a plurality of alerts sent through different mediums.

11. A method for detecting a malicious attack, comprising:

organizing, by a first logic executed by processing circuitry, both (i) a first plurality of indicators of compromise (IOCs) received from a first source, the first plurality of IOCs being caused by a known origin of a malicious attack, and (ii) one or more IOCs received from a second source being different from the first source where an origin of the one or more IOCs is unknown, and

conducting, by a second logic executed by the processing circuitry, an analysis that evaluates whether the one or more IOCs have at least a degree of correlation with the first plurality of IOCs; and

determining a threat level by the second logic executed by the processing circuitry, the threat level signifying a degree of confidence that the one or more IOCs received from the second source are caused by the known origin of the first plurality of IOCs.

12. The method of claim 11 , wherein the known origin of the malicious attack corresponds to an electronic mail message detected by the first source as including potential malware.

13. The method of claim 12 , wherein the known origin of the malicious attack corresponds to a text message detected by the first source as including potential malware.

14. The method of claim 11 , wherein the determining whether the one or more IOCs received from the second source have the degree of correlation to the first plurality of IOCs received from the first source occurs in response to a triggering event that signifies a likelihood that the one or more IOCs from the second source are caused by an undetected malicious electronic message present at the second source.

15. The method of claim 14 , wherein the triggering event includes a shift in volume of a given type of IOC at the second source.

16. The method of claim 11 , wherein the degree of correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs that is set for the analysis is varied based on an operating state of the electronic device.

17. The method of claim 11 , wherein the degree of correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs for the analysis is set to a first level when the electronic device is in a first operating state, the first level requires the one or more IOCs to be in a same chronological order and present within the first plurality of IOCs.

18. The method of claim 17 , wherein the degree of correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs for the analysis is set to a second level when the electronic device is in a second operating state, the second level requires a portion of the one or more IOCs to be present within the first plurality of IOCs without the portion of the one or more IOCs being in the same chronological order as present within the first plurality of IOCs.

19. The method of claim 11 further comprising:

determining a first type of response to be initiated in response to determining a first threat level in which the correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs during the analysis is equal to or exceeds the first level; and

determining a second type of response to be initiated in response to determining a second threat level in which the correlation between the one or more IOCs and the first plurality of IOCs during the analysis is equal to or exceeds the second threat level and is less than the first threat level, the second type of response including an alert to security personnel of the second source and the first type of response includes a plurality of alerts sent through different mediums.

20. The electronic device of claim 1 , wherein each of the first plurality of IOCs being malicious behaviors that suggest a presence of malware on a particular network device or particular network devices.

21. The electronic device of claim 1 , wherein the first plurality of IOCs include anomalous behaviors associated with a previously detected malicious electronic message.

22. The electronic device of claim 21 , wherein the first plurality of IOCs include metadata associated with one or more previously detected malicious electronic messages.

23. The electronic device of claim 22 , wherein the metadata includes profile information associated with one or more intended recipients of the one or more previously detected malicious electronic messages.

24. The electronic device of claim 23 , wherein the profile information comprises information associated identifying a type of company and a type of industry targeted by each of the one or more previously detected malicious electronic messages.

25. The electronic device of claim 22 , wherein the metadata includes an arrival time.

26. The method of claim 11 , wherein each of the first plurality of IOCs being malicious behaviors that suggest a presence of malware on a particular network device or particular network devices.

27. The method of claim 11 , wherein the first plurality of IOCs include anomalous behaviors associated with a previously detected malicious electronic message.

28. The method of claim 27 , wherein the first plurality of IOCs include metadata associated with one or more previously detected malicious electronic messages.

29. The method of claim 28 , wherein the metadata includes profile information associated with one or more intended recipients of the one or more previously detected malicious electronic messages.

30. The method of claim 29 , wherein the profile information comprises information associated identifying a type of company and a type of industry targeted by each of the one or more previously detected malicious electronic messages.

31. The method of claim 28 , wherein the metadata includes an arrival time.

32. The electronic device of claim 1 further comprising remediation logic that operates to generate actions to remediate the malicious attack.

33. The electronic device of claim 10 , wherein the memory further comprises the alert generation logic and remediation logic that operates to generate actions to remediate the malicious attack.

34. The method of claim 11 further comprising:

generating actions to remediate the malicious attack by remediation logic within the first source.

Assignments (13)
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Aug 16, 2024
From: STG PARTNERS, LLC
To: MUSARUBRA US LLC; SKYHIGH SECURITY LLC
Reel/Frame 068671/0435 →
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT Recorded Aug 15, 2024
From: MUSARUBRA US LLC
To: MAGENTA SECURITY INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS LLC
Reel/Frame 068656/0098 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 15, 2024
From: MAGENTA SECURITY INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS LLC
To: MAGENTA SECURITY HOLDINGS LLC
Reel/Frame 068657/0843 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 15, 2024
From: MUSARUBRA US LLC
To: MAGENTA SECURITY INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS LLC
Reel/Frame 068657/0764 →
FIRST LIEN PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Aug 15, 2024
From: MAGENTA SECURITY HOLDINGS LLC; SKYHIGH SECURITY LLC
To: UBS AG, STAMFORD BRANCH, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 068657/0666 →
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT Recorded Aug 15, 2024
From: MAGENTA SECURITY INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS LLC
To: MAGENTA SECURITY HOLDINGS LLC
Reel/Frame 068656/0920 →
MERGER Recorded Aug 13, 2024
From: FIREEYE SECURITY HOLDINGS US LLC
To: MUSARUBRA US LLC
Reel/Frame 068581/0279 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Aug 1, 2024
From: MUSARUBRA US LLC; SKYHIGH SECURITY LLC
To: STG PARTNERS, LLC
Reel/Frame 068324/0731 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 16, 2023
From: MANDIANT, INC.
To: FIREEYE SECURITY HOLDINGS US LLC
Reel/Frame 063113/0150 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Mar 16, 2023
From: FIREEYE, INC.
To: MANDIANT, INC.
Reel/Frame 063113/0140 →
SECOND LIEN PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Oct 11, 2021
From: FIREEYE SECURITY HOLDINGS US LLC
To: UBS AG, STAMFORD BRANCH, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 057772/0791 →
FIRST LIEN PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Oct 11, 2021
From: FIREEYE SECURITY HOLDINGS US LLC
To: UBS AG, STAMFORD BRANCH, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 057772/0681 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 3, 2017
From: RIVLIN, ALEXANDR; MEHRA, DIVYESH; UYENO, HENRY; PIDATHALA, VINAY
To: FIREEYE, INC.
Reel/Frame 043191/0150 →