Granted Patent B2

US 11,693,751 · App. 17/304,783 · Granted Jul 4, 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 (101)

1. A method comprises:

determining, by an analysis system that includes one or more computing entities, a system aspect of a system for an issue response analysis evaluation, wherein the system aspect includes at least one system element of the system, at least one system criteria of the system, and at least one system mode of the system;

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

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

obtaining, by the analysis system, issue response analysis 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 response analysis rating as a measure of issue response analysis maturity for the system aspect based on the issue response analysis 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 further comprises:

receiving, by the analysis system, an input, wherein the input identifies at least one of:

the system aspect;

the at least one evaluation perspective; and

the at least one evaluation viewpoint.

3. The method of claim 1 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 response analysis 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 the at least one system element of the system aspect based on the data gathering parameters;

obtaining issue response analysis information from the at least one system element in accordance with the data gathering parameters; and

recording the issue response analysis information from the at least one system element to produce the issue response analysis data.

8. The method of claim 7 , wherein the data gathering parameters is regarding at least one of:

notification investigation implementation related to the system aspect;

incident impact understanding implementation related to the system aspect;

forensics implementation related to the system aspect; and

incident categorization implementation related to the system aspect.

9. The method of claim 1 , wherein the calculating the issue response analysis rating comprises:

selecting and performing at least two of:

based on the issue response analysis 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 the at least one evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue response analysis 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 the at least one evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue response analysis 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 the at least one evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue response analysis 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 the at least one evaluation rating metric;

based on the issue response analysis 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 the at least one evaluation rating metric; and

based on the issue response analysis 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 the at least one evaluation rating metric; and

generating the issue response analysis 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.

10. 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 response analysis rating and the issue response analysis data;

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

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

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

11. The method of claim 1 further comprises:

determining, by the analysis system, a deficiency of the system aspect based on the issue response analysis rating and the issue response analysis 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.

12. A computer readable memory comprises:

a first memory section for storing operational instructions that, when executed by an analysis system, cause the analysis system to:

determine a system aspect of a system for an issue response analysis evaluation wherein the system aspect includes at least one system element of the system, at least one system criteria of the system, and at least one system mode of the system;

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

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

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

obtain issue response analysis 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 analysis system, cause the analysis system to:

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

13. The computer readable memory of claim 12 , wherein the first memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the analysis system, cause the analysis system to:

receive an input, wherein the input identifies at least one of:

the system aspect;

the at least one evaluation perspective; and

the at least one evaluation viewpoint.

14. The computer readable memory of claim 12 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.

15. The computing computer readable memory of claim 12 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.

16. The computer readable memory of claim 12 further comprises:

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

17. The computer readable memory of claim 12 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.

18. The computer readable memory of claim 12 , wherein the second memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the analysis system, cause the analysis system to obtain the issue response analysis 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 response analysis information from the system elements in accordance with the data gathering parameters; and

recording the issue response analysis information from the system elements to produce the issue response analysis data.

19. The computer readable memory of claim 18 , wherein the data gathering parameters is regarding at least one of:

notification investigation implementation related to the system aspect;

incident impact understanding implementation related to the system aspect;

forensics implementation related to the system aspect; and

incident categorization implementation related to the system aspect.

20. The computer readable memory of claim 12 , wherein the third memory section further stores operational instructions that, when executed by the analysis system, cause the analysis system to calculate the issue response analysis rating by:

selecting and performing at least two of:

based on the issue response analysis 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 response analysis 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 response analysis 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 response analysis 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 response analysis 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 response analysis 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 response analysis 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.

21. The computer readable memory of claim 12 , wherein a fourth memory section stores operational instructions that, when executed by the analysis system, cause the analysis system to perform at least one of:

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

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

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

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

22. The computer readable memory of claim 12 , wherein a fourth memory section stores operational instructions that, when executed by the analysis system, cause the analysis system to:

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

determine whether the deficiency is auto-correctable; and

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

Assignments (10)

Continuity (3)