Granted Patent B2

US 11,789,833 · App. 17/247,710 · Granted Oct 17, 2023

Inventors: Raymond Hicks (Chicago, IL); Ryan Michael Pisani (Burlington, WI); Thomas James McNeela (Streamwood, IL)

Assignee: UncommonX Inc.

G06F11/26G06F11/076G06F11/079G06F11/0709G06F11/0793G06F11/3006G06F11/3409G06F11/3476G06F11/3495G06F11/3668G06F16/2379G06F21/577G06Q10/06393H04L63/1416H04L63/1425H04L63/1433H04L63/20G06F2221/034

Abstract

Claims (141)

1. A method comprises:

determining, by an analysis system that includes one or more computing entities, a system aspect of an enterprise system for an issue recovery evaluation;

determining, by the analysis system, at least one evaluation perspective for use in performing the issue recovery evaluation on the system aspect;

determining, by the analysis system, at least one evaluation viewpoint for use in performing the issue recovery evaluation on the system aspect;

obtaining, by the analysis system, issue recovery data regarding the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective and the at least one evaluation viewpoint; and

calculating, by the analysis system, an issue recovery rating as a measure of system issue recovery maturity for the system aspect based on the issue recovery data, the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and at least one evaluation rating metric.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the determining the system aspect comprises:

determining at least one system element of the enterprise system;

determining at least one system criteria of the enterprise system;

determining at least one system mode of the enterprise system; and

determining the system aspect based on the at least one system element, the at least one system criteria, and the at least one system mode.

3. The method of claim 2 further comprises:

a system element of the at least one system element includes an enterprise identifier, an organization identifier, a division identifier, a department identifier, a group identifier, a sub-group identifier, a device identifier, a software identifier, or an internet protocol address identifier;

a system criteria of the at least one system criteria being system guidelines, system requirements, system design, system build, or resulting system; and

a system mode of the at least one system mode being assets, system functions, or security functions.

4. The method of claim 1 further comprises:

an evaluation perspective of the at least one evaluation perspective being an understanding perspective, an implementation perspective, an operation perspective, or a self-analysis perspective.

5. The method of claim 1 further comprises:

an evaluation viewpoint of the at least one evaluation viewpoint being a disclosed viewpoint, a discovered viewpoint, or a desired viewpoint.

6. The method of claim 1 further comprises:

an evaluation rating metric of the at least one evaluation rating metric being a process rating metric, a policy rating metric, a procedure rating metric, a certification rating, a documentation rating metric, or an automation rating metric.

7. The method of claim 1 , wherein the obtaining the issue recovery data comprises:

determining data gathering parameters regarding the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and the least one evaluation rating metric;

identifying system elements of the system aspect based on the data gathering parameters;

obtaining issue recovery information from the system elements in accordance with the data gathering parameters; and

recording the issue recovery information from the system elements to produce the issue recovery data.

8. The method of claim 7 , wherein the determining the data gathering parameters comprises:

for the system aspect, ascertaining identity of at least one system element of the enterprise system; and

for the at least one system element:

determining a first data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on at least one system criteria of the system aspect;

determining a second data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on at least one system mode of the system aspect;

determining a third data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on the at least one evaluation perspective;

determining a fourth data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on the at least one evaluation viewpoint; and

determining a fifth data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on the at least one evaluation rating metric.

9. The method of claim 7 , wherein the identifying the system elements comprises:

activating at least one detection tool based on the system aspect;

when the at least one detection tool identifies a potential system element, determining whether the potential system element is already identified as being a part of the system aspect;

when the potential system element is not identified as being a part of the system aspect, determining whether the potential system element is cataloged as being a part of the enterprise system; and

when the potential system element is cataloged as being a part of the enterprise system, adding the potential system element as a part of the system aspect.

10. The method of claim 9 further comprises:

when the potential system element is not cataloged as being a part of the enterprise system:

obtaining data regarding the potential system element; verifying the potential system element based on the data; when the potential system element is verified, adding the potential system element as a part of the system aspect.

11. The method of claim 7 , wherein the obtaining the issue recovery information from a system element of the system elements comprises:

probing the system element in accordance with the data gathering parameters to obtain a system element data recovery;

identifying vendor information from the system element data recovery; and

tagging the system element data recovery with the vendor information.

12. The method of claim 1 , wherein the calculating the issue recovery rating comprises:

selecting and performing at least two of:

based on the issue recovery data and process analysis parameters, generating a process rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and at least one evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue recovery data and policy analysis parameters, generating a policy rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and at least one evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue recovery data and documentation analysis parameters, generating a documentation rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and at least one evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue recovery data and automation analysis parameters, generating an automation rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and at least one evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue recovery data and procedure analysis parameters, generating a procedure rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and at least one evaluation rating metric; and

based on the issue recovery data and certification analysis parameters, generating a certification rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and at least one evaluation rating metric; and

generating the issue recovery rating based on the selected and performed at least two of the processing rating, the policy rating, the documentation rating, the automation rating, the procedure rating, and the certification rating.

13. The method of claim 12 , where the generating the process rating comprises:

generating a first process rating based on a first combination of a system criteria of the system aspect, of a system mode of the system aspect, of an evaluation perspective of the least one evaluation perspective, and of an evaluation viewpoint of the at least one evaluation viewpoint;

generating a second process rating based on a second combination of a system criteria of the system aspect, of a system mode of the system aspect, of an evaluation perspective of the least one evaluation perspective, and of an evaluation viewpoint of the at least one evaluation viewpoint; and

generating the process rating based on the first and second process ratings.

14. The method of claim 1 further comprises at least one of:

determining, by the analysis system, a system criteria deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data;

determining, by the analysis system, a system mode deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data;

determining, by the analysis system, an evaluation perspective deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data; and

determining, by the analysis system, an evaluation viewpoint deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data.

15. The method of claim 1 further comprises:

determining, by the analysis system, a deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data;

determining, by the analysis system, whether the deficiency is auto-correctable; and

when the deficiency is auto-correctable, auto-correcting, by the analysis system, the deficiency.

16. A computer readable memory comprises:

a first memory section for storing operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to:

determine a system aspect of a system for an issue recovery evaluation;

determine at least one evaluation perspective for use in performing the issue recovery evaluation on the system aspect;

determine at least one evaluation viewpoint for use in performing the issue recovery evaluation on the system aspect;

a second memory section for storing operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, cause the computing entity to:

obtain issue recovery data regarding the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective and the at least one evaluation viewpoint; and

a third memory section for storing operational instructions that, when executed by the computing entity, cause the computing entity to:

calculate an issue recovery rating as a measure of system issue recovery maturity for the system aspect based on the issue recovery data, the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and at least one evaluation rating metric.

17. The computer readable memory of claim 16 , wherein the first memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to determine the system aspect by:

determining at least one system element of the system;

determining at least one system criteria of the system;

determining at least one system mode of the system; and

determining the system aspect based on the at least one system element, the at least one system criteria, and the at least one system mode.

18. The computer readable memory of claim 17 further comprises:

a system element of the at least one system element includes an enterprise identifier, an organization identifier, a division identifier, a department identifier, a group identifier, a sub-group identifier, a device identifier, a software identifier, or an internet protocol address identifier;

a system criteria of the at least one system criteria being system guidelines, system requirements, system design, system build, or resulting system; and

a system mode of the at least one system mode being assets, system functions, or system security.

19. The computing readable memory of claim 16 further comprises:

an evaluation perspective of the at least one evaluation perspective being an understanding perspective, an implementation perspective, an operation perspective, or a self-analysis perspective.

20. The computer readable memory of claim 16 further comprises:

an evaluation viewpoint of the at least one evaluation viewpoint being a disclosed viewpoint, a discovered viewpoint, or a desired viewpoint.

21. The computer readable memory of claim 16 further comprises:

an evaluation rating metric of the at least one evaluation rating metric being a process rating metric, a policy rating metric, a procedure rating metric, a certification rating, a documentation rating metric, or an automation rating metric.

22. The computer readable memory of claim 16 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to obtain the issue recovery data by:

determining data gathering parameters regarding the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and the least one evaluation rating metric;

identifying system elements of the system aspect based on the data gathering parameters;

obtaining issue recovery information from the system elements in accordance with the data gathering parameters; and

recording the issue recovery information from the system elements to produce the issue recovery data.

23. The computer readable memory of claim 22 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to determine the data gathering parameters by:

for the system aspect, ascertaining identity of at least one system element of the system; and

for the at least one system element:

determining a first data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on at least one system criteria of the system aspect;

determining a second data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on at least one system mode of the system aspect;

determining a third data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on the at least one evaluation perspective;

determining a fourth data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on the at least one evaluation viewpoint; and

determining a fifth data gathering parameter of the data gather parameters based on the at least one evaluation rating metric.

24. The computer readable memory of claim 22 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to identify the system elements by:

activating at least one recovery tool based on the system aspect;

when the at least one recovery tool identifies a potential system element, determining whether the potential system element is already identified as being a part of the system aspect;

when the potential system element is not identified as being a part of the system aspect, determining whether the potential system element is cataloged as being a part of the system; and

when the potential system element is cataloged as being a part of the system, adding the potential system element as a part of the system aspect.

25. The computer readable memory of claim 24 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to:

when the potential system element is not cataloged as being a part of the system:

obtaining data regarding the potential system element;

verifying the potential system element based on the data; and

when the potential system element is verified, adding the potential system element as a part of the system aspect.

26. The computer readable memory of claim 22 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to obtain the issue recovery information from a system element of the system elements by:

probing the system element in accordance with the data gathering parameters to obtain a system element data recovery;

identifying vendor information from the system element data recovery; and

tagging the system element data recovery with the vendor information.

27. The computer readable memory of claim 16 , wherein the third memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to calculate the issue recovery rating by:

selecting and performing at least two of:

based on the issue recovery data and process analysis parameters, generating a process rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and process as the evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue recovery data and policy analysis parameters, generating a policy rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and policy as the evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue recovery data and documentation analysis parameters, generating a documentation rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and documentation as the evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue recovery data and automation analysis parameters, generating an automation rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and automation as the evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue recovery data and procedure analysis parameters, generating a procedure rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and procedure as the evaluation rating metric; and

based on the issue recovery data and certification analysis parameters, generating a certification rating for the system aspect in accordance with the at least one evaluation perspective, the at least one evaluation viewpoint, and certification as the evaluation rating metric; and

generating the issue recovery rating based on the selected and performed at least two of the process rating, the policy rating, the documentation rating, the automation rating, the procedure rating, and the certification rating.

28. The computer readable memory of claim 27 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to generate the process rating by:

generating a first process rating based on a first combination of a system criteria of the system aspect, of a system mode of the system aspect, of an evaluation perspective of the least one evaluation perspective, and of an evaluation viewpoint of the at least one evaluation viewpoint;

generating a second process rating based on a second combination of a system criteria of the system aspect, of a system mode of the system aspect, of an evaluation perspective of the least one evaluation perspective, and of an evaluation viewpoint of the at least one evaluation viewpoint; and

generating the process rating based on the first and second process ratings.

29. The computer readable memory of claim 16 , wherein a fourth memory section stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to perform at least one of:

determine a system criteria deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data;

determine a system mode deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data;

determine an evaluation perspective deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data; and

determine an evaluation viewpoint deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data.

30. The computer readable memory of claim 16 , wherein a fourth memory section stores operational instructions that, when executed by a computing entity, cause the computing entity to:

determine a deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue recovery rating and the issue recovery data;

determine whether the deficiency is auto-correctable; and

when the deficiency is auto-correctable, auto-correcting the deficiency.

Assignments (10)

Continuity (2)