IP Library Patent Application 17458008
Patent Application
App. No. 17/458,008

DETECTION AND BLOCKING OF MESSAGES BASED ON URL BRAND PHISHING OR SMISHING

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 None
App. No.
17/458,008
Abstract

Systems and methods for processing messages to determine if the message is potentially fraudulent. The system determines if a word in the message matches a known fraudulent word or a known safe word and labels the message as potentially fraudulent in response the word matching a known fraudulent word. Otherwise, the system determines a probability that the word is potentially fraudulent based on message context. In response to determining that the probability exceeds a first threshold, the system determines distances for each pair of word/known safe words (e.g., known brands). The system labels the message as potentially fraudulent in response to the distance of a pair exceeding a second threshold. If the message is labeled as potentially fraudulent it is discarded, otherwise it is forwarded towards the destination.

Claims (86)

1 . A method, comprising:

receiving a message having at least one target word intended for a destination;

for each target word in the message:

determining if the target word matches a known fraudulent word or a known safe word;

in response to determining that the target word matches a known fraudulent word, labeling the message as potentially fraudulent; and

in response to determining that the target word does not match a known fraudulent word or a known safe word:

determining a probability that the target word is potentially fraudulent based on context of the target word in the message;

in response to determining that the probability exceeds a first threshold:

determining grammatical distance values between the target word and each known safe word from a list of known safe words for each target word/known safe word pair; and

in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair exceeding a second threshold, labeling the message as potentially fraudulent;

in response to labeling the message as potentially fraudulent, discarding the message; and

in response to not labeling the message as potentially fraudulent, forwarding the message towards the destination.

2 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

in response to determining that the target word matches a known safe word, labeling the target word as non-fraudulent.

3 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

labeling the target word as non-fraudulent in response to determining that the target word matches a known safe word; and

processing a next target word in the message in response to labeling the target word as non-fraudulent.

4 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding a third threshold, labeling the target word as non-fraudulent.

5 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

labeling the target word as safe in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding a third threshold; and

processing a next target word in the message in response to labeling the target word as non-fraudulent.

6 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding the second threshold but exceeding a third threshold, performing additional fraudulent metrics on the target word.

7 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

determining an aggregated number of previous events associated with the target word in other messages;

generating a combined value for each target word/known safe word pair by combining the grammatical distance values with the aggregated number of previous events for each target word/known safe word pair; and

in response to the combined value for a target word/known safe word pair exceeding the second threshold, labeling the message as potentially fraudulent.

8 . The method of claim 7 , further comprising:

in response to the combined value for a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding the second threshold but exceeding a third threshold, performing additional fraudulent metrics on the target word.

9 . A computing device, comprising:

a memory that stores computer instructions; and

a processor configured to execute the computer instructions to:

receive a message having at least one target word intended for a destination;

for each target word in the message:

determine if the target word matches a known fraudulent word or a known safe word;

label the message as potentially fraudulent in response to determining that the target word matches a known fraudulent word; and

in response to determining that the target word does not match a known fraudulent word or a known safe word:

determine a probability that the target word is potentially fraudulent based on context of the target word in the message; and

in response to determining that the probability exceeds the first threshold:

 determine grammatical distance values between the target word and each known safe word from a list of known safe words for each target word/known safe word pair; and

 label the message as potentially fraudulent in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair exceeding a second threshold;

discard the message in response to labeling the message as potentially fraudulent; and

forward the message towards the destination in response to not labeling the message as potentially fraudulent.

10 . The computing device of claim 9 , wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to:

in response to determining that the target word matches a known safe word, label the target word as non-fraudulent.

11 . The computing device of claim 9 , wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to:

label the target word as non-fraudulent in response to determining that the target word matches a known safe word; and

process a next target word in the message in response to labeling the target word as non-fraudulent.

12 . The computing device of claim 9 , wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to:

in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding a third threshold, label the target word as non-fraudulent.

13 . The computing device of claim 9 , wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to:

label the target word as safe in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding a third threshold.

process a next target word in the message in response to labeling the target word as non-fraudulent.

14 . The computing device of claim 9 , wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to:

in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding the second threshold but exceeding a third threshold, perform additional fraudulent metrics on the target word.

15 . The computing device of claim 9 , wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to:

determine an aggregated number of previous events associated with the target word in other messages;

generate a combined value for each target word/known safe word pair by combining the grammatical distance values with the aggregated number of previous events for each target word/known safe word pair; and

in response to the combined value for a target word/known safe word pair exceeding the second threshold, label the message as potentially fraudulent.

16 . The computing device of claim 15 , wherein the processor is configured to further execute the computer instructions to:

in response to the combined value for a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding the second threshold but exceeding a third threshold, perform additional fraudulent metrics on the target word.

17 . A system, comprising:

pre-check circuitry configured to:

receive a message having a target word intended for a destination;

determine if the target word matches a known fraudulent word or a known safe word; and

label the message as potentially fraudulent in response to determining that the target word matches a known fraudulent word;

candidate creation circuitry configured to:

determine a probability that the target word is potentially fraudulent based on context of the target word in the message in response to determining that the target word does not match a known fraudulent word or a known safe word; and

distance calculation circuitry configured to:

determine grammatical distance values between the target word and each known safe word from a list of known safe words for each target word/known safe word pair in response to determining that the probability does exceeds the first threshold; and

spam decision circuitry configured to:

label the message as potentially fraudulent in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair exceeding a second threshold;

discard the message in response to labeling the message as potentially fraudulent; and

forward the message towards the destination in response to not labeling the message as potentially fraudulent.

18 . The system of claim 17 , wherein the pre-check circuitry is further configured to:

label the target word as non-fraudulent in response to determining that the target word matches a known safe word; and

process a next target word in the message in response to labeling the target word as non-fraudulent.

19 . The system of claim 17 , wherein the distance calculation circuitry is further configured to:

label the target word as safe in response to the grammatical distance value of a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding a third threshold; and

process a next target word in the message in response to labeling the target word as non-fraudulent.

20 . The system of claim 17 , wherein the spam decision circuitry is further configured to:

determine an aggregated number of previous events associated with the target word in other messages;

generate a combined value for each target word/known safe word pair by combining the grammatical distance values with the aggregated number of previous events for each target word/known safe word pair;

label the message as potentially fraudulent in response to the combined value for a target word/known safe word pair exceeding the second threshold; and

perform additional fraudulent metrics on the target word in response to the combined value for a target word/known safe word pair not exceeding the second threshold but exceeding a third threshold.

Assignments (2)
MERGER AND CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Feb 13, 2023
From: REALNETWORKS, INC.; GREATER HEIGHTS ACQUISITION LLC
To: REALNETWORKS LLC
Reel/Frame 062746/0554 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 3, 2021
From: CORIC, MIRKO; MELUCCI, STEFANO; BORDASH, MICHAEL J.
To: REALNETWORKS, INC.
Reel/Frame 058009/0995 →