IP Library › Granted Patent US 11,509,685
Granted Patent B2
US 11,509,685 · App. 17/171,809 · Granted Nov 22, 2022

Cyberattack prevention system

Inventors: Kishore Jaladi (Fremont, CA); Jeffrey Alan Edelen (Fort Collins, CO); Sundar Amalan Vincent (San Jose, CA); Lakshmikanth Raghavan (Milipitas, CA); Santhosh Jagadeesan (San Jose, CA); Hari Hara Balan Shanmugasundaram (Tracy, CA); Abhishek Chhibber (Sunnyvale, CA); Darshan Desai (Fremont, CA); Oliver J. Reyes (San Jose, CA)
Assignee: PayPal, Inc.
H04L63/1458G06F8/65H04L63/1416H04L63/067
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 11,509,685
App. No.
17/171,809
Filed
Feb 9, 2021
Granted
Nov 22, 2022
Kind
B2
Examiner
KING, JOHN B
Art Unit
2498
USPC
726/23
Abstract

A self-updating system for defending against a cyberattack requests connected devices to solve a problem that is created in a random manner. The problems are created in a manner such that the system can determine whether the client device is being used as part of a cyberattack based on how the client device responds to the problems.

Claims (43)

1. A system comprising:

a non-transitory memory storing instructions; and

one or more hardware processors coupled to the non-transitory memory and configured to read the instructions from the non-transitory memory to cause the system to perform operations comprising:

monitoring metrics associated with network communications;

determining that one or more of the metrics has deviated from an average;

in response to determining the deviation from the average, updating a cyber defense system with a predetermined update; and

removing the predetermined update in response to determining that the deviation from the average is not part of a cyberattack.

2. The system of claim 1 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of the cyberattack comprises:

updating the cyber defense system with at least a second predetermined update; and

determining that the deviation from the average has not changed after updating the cyber defense system with the predetermined update and the second predetermined update.

3. The system of claim 1 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of the cyberattack is based on a confidence score.

4. The system of claim 3 , wherein the confidence score is based on a number of updates made to the cyber defense system in response to determining the one or more metrics has deviated from the average.

5. The system of claim 1 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of a cyberattack is based at least in part on determining that the one or more metrics are beyond a threshold deviation from the average after the updating.

6. The system of claim 1 , wherein the operations further comprise:

determining that the predetermined update did not affect the one or more metrics that has deviated from the average, and in response, implementing a second predetermined update.

7. The system of claim 6 , wherein implementing the second predetermined update is also in response to determining that a cyberattack confidence was not passed after implementing the predetermined update.

8. A method comprising:

monitoring metrics associated with network communications;

determining that one or more of the metrics has deviated from an average;

in response to determining the deviation from the average, updating a cyber defense system with a predetermined update; and

removing the predetermined update in response to determining that the deviation from the average is not part of a cyberattack.

9. The method of claim 8 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of the cyberattack comprises:

updating the cyber defense system with at least a second predetermined update; and

determining that the deviation from the average has not changed after updating the cyber defense system with the predetermined update and the second predetermined update.

10. The method of claim 8 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of the cyberattack is based on a confidence score.

11. The method of claim 10 , wherein the confidence score is based on a number of updates made to the cyber defense system in response to determining the one or more metrics has deviated from the average.

12. The method of claim 8 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of a cyberattack is based at least in part on determining that the one or more metrics are beyond a threshold deviation from the average after the updating.

13. The method of claim 8 , further comprising:

determining that the predetermined update did not affect the one or more metrics that has deviated from the average, and in response, implementing a second predetermined update.

14. The method of claim 13 , wherein implementing the second predetermined update is also in response to determining that a cyberattack confidence was not passed after implementing the predetermined update.

15. A non-transitory machine readable medium having stored thereon machine readable instructions executable to cause a machine to perform operations comprising:

monitoring metrics associated with network communications;

determining that one or more of the metrics has deviated from an average;

in response to determining the deviation from the average, updating a cyber defense system with a predetermined update; and

removing the predetermined update in response to determining that the deviation from the average is not part of a cyberattack.

16. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 15 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of the cyberattack comprises:

updating the cyber defense system with at least a second predetermined update; and

determining that the deviation from the average has not changed after updating the cyber defense system with the predetermined update and the second predetermined update.

17. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 15 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of the cyberattack is based on a confidence score.

18. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 17 , wherein the confidence score is based on a number of updates made to the cyber defense system in response to determining the one or more metrics has deviated from the average.

19. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 15 , wherein determining that the deviation from the average is not part of a cyberattack is based at least in part on determining that the one or more metrics are beyond a threshold deviation from the average after the updating.

20. The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim 15 , further comprising:

determining that the predetermined update did not affect the one or more metrics that has deviated from the average, and in response, implementing a second predetermined update.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Feb 9, 2021
From: JALADI, KISHORE; EDELEN, JEFFREY ALAN; VINCENT, SUNDAR AMALAN; RAGHAVAN, LAKSHMIKANTH; JAGADEESAN, SANTHOSH; SHANMUGASUNDARAM, HARI HARA BALAN; CHHIBBER, ABHISHEK; DESAI, DARSHAN; REYES, OLIVER J.
To: PAYPAL, INC.
Reel/Frame 055203/0544 →
Continuity (4)
Continuation 16254325 · Jan 22, 2019
Continuation 15199863 · Jun 30, 2016
Provisional Application 62346490 · Jun 6, 2016
Related Publication 20210258341A1 · Aug 19, 2021