IP Library Granted Patent US 12,224,973
Granted Patent B2
US 12,224,973 · App. 18/660,423 · Granted Feb 11, 2025

Misdirected email data loss prevention

Inventors: Shalini Kamalapuram Sundaram (Sunnyvale, CA); Chris Moores (Owen Sound, CA); Durgaprasad Velagaleti (Sunnyvale, CA); Srikanth Konjarla (Sunnyvale, CA); Harsh Doshi (Sunnyvale, CA)
Assignee: Proofpoint, Inc.
H04L51/23G06F21/606H04L51/21H04L51/42H04L51/56
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 12,224,973
App. No.
18/660,423
Granted
Feb 11, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Aspects of the disclosure relate to data loss prevention. A computing platform may detect input of a first target recipient domain into a first email message. The computing platform may identify, in real time and prior to sending the first email message, that the first target recipient domain comprises an unintended recipient domain instead of an intended recipient domain. The computing platform may send, based on the identification of the unintended recipient domain and to a user device, a notification that the first target recipient domain is flagged as an unintended recipient domain and one or more commands directing the user device to display the notification.

Claims (109)

1. A computing platform, comprising:

at least one processor;

a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor; and

memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:

identify, in real time and prior to sending a first email message, that a first target recipient domain comprises an unintended recipient domain instead of an intended recipient domain, wherein the identification comprises:

identifying, using a plurality of machine learning algorithms, first context information for the first email message, wherein identifying the first context information for the first email message comprises:

identifying, using latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA), one or more topics in the first email message,

identifying, using named entity recognition (NER), one or more named entities in the first email message, and

identifying, using text summarization, a predetermined number of most frequently used keywords in the first email message; and

send, based on identifying that the first context information does not match historical context information from historical messages for a sender of the first email message, a notification that the first target recipient domain is flagged as the unintended recipient domain and one or more commands directing a user device to display the notification.

2. The computing platform of claim 1 , wherein the identification further comprises:

identifying, using a user graph, a plurality of nearest neighbor recipients for a message sender.

3. The computing platform of claim 2 , wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to:

detect input of a second target recipient domain into a second email message;

identify, in real time and prior to sending the second email message, that the second target recipient domain comprises the intended recipient domain, wherein the identification comprises:

identifying, using the user graph, the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients for the message sender,

identifying, using the plurality of machine learning algorithms, context information for the second email message, and

identifying that the context information is a first level match with the historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and a message recipient, of the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients, corresponding to the second target recipient domain; and

send, based on the identification of the intended recipient domain and to a user device of the message recipient, the second email message.

4. The computing platform of claim 2 , wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to:

detect input of a second target recipient domain into a second email message;

identify, in real time and prior to sending the second email message, that the second target recipient domain comprises a potentially unintended recipient domain instead of the intended recipient domain, wherein the identification comprises:

identifying, using the user graph, the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients for the message sender,

identifying, using the plurality of machine learning algorithms, second context information for the second email message,

identifying that the second context information is not a first level match with the historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and a second message recipient corresponding to the second target recipient domain,

based on identifying that the second context information does not match the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the second message recipient:

identifying whether a message recipient domain is included in the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients, and

identifying whether there is a second level match between the second context information and the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the second message recipient; and

send, based on an identification that the second message recipient is included in the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients and that there is the second level match between the second context information and the historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and the second message recipient, a second notification indicating that the second email message includes a new context for the second message recipient and one or more commands directing the user device to display the second notification, wherein the notification includes an option to correct the potentially unintended recipient domain or to send the second email message.

5. The computing platform of claim 4 , wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to:

based on an identification of one or more of: a) that the second message recipient is not included in the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients, or b) that there is not the second level match between the second context information and the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the second message recipient:

identify whether the second context information is a third level match with the historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients; and

send, based on an identification that the second context information is the third level match with the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients:

a third notification indicating that the second email message includes: a) the new context for the second message recipient, and b) historical messages between the message sender and at least one of the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients, different than the second message recipient, includes the new context, and

one or more commands directing the user device to display the third notification, wherein the third notification includes the option to correct the potentially unintended recipient domain or to send the second email message.

6. The computing platform of claim 5 , wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to:

based on an identification that the second context information is not the third level match with the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients:

identify whether there is a fourth level match between the second context information and the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients; and

based on identifying that there is the fourth level match between the second context information and the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and at least one of the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients:

generate a spelling mistake recommendation indicating a difference between the second target recipient domain and a domain of the at least one of the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients; and

send, to the message sender, a fourth notification indicating the spelling mistake recommendation and one or more commands directing the user device to display the fourth notification, wherein the fourth notification includes the option to correct the potentially unintended recipient domain or to send the second email message.

7. The computing platform of claim 1 , wherein identifying that the first target recipient domain comprises the unintended recipient domain instead of the intended recipient domain further comprises determining a page rank indicating a trustworthiness of the unintended recipient domain.

8. The computing platform of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of machine learning algorithms includes: the LDA, the NER, and the text summarization.

9. The computing platform of claim 1 , wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to:

detect input of the first target recipient domain into the first email message.

10. The computing platform of claim 1 , wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to:

input, into a data loss prevention model, the first email message, wherein:

the data loss prevention model includes one or more user defined rules,

inputting the first email message into the data loss prevention model causes a data loss prevention result to be output, and

the data loss prevention result indicates whether or not any of the one or more user defined rules are violated.

11. The computing platform of claim 10 , wherein the data loss prevention result indicates that at least one of the one or more user defined rules are violated, and wherein sending the notification that the first target recipient domain is flagged as the unintended recipient domain is further based on the data loss prevention result.

12. The computing platform of claim 10 , wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the computing platform to:

detect input of a second target recipient domain into a second email message;

identify, in real time and prior to sending the second email message, that the second target recipient domain comprises the unintended recipient domain instead of the intended recipient domain;

determine that the data loss prevention result indicates that none of the one or more user defined rules are violated; and

based on determining that the data loss prevention result indicates that none of the one or more user defined rules are violated, route the second email message to the second target recipient domain.

13. The computing platform of claim 1 , wherein the notification includes an option to engage in email security compliance training.

14. The computing platform of claim 2 , wherein the identification further comprises:

identifying that the first context information does not match historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients.

15. A method, comprising:

at a computing platform comprising at least one processor, a communication interface, and memory:

detecting input of a first target recipient domain into a first email message;

identifying, in real time and prior to sending the first email message, that the first target recipient domain comprises an intended recipient domain, wherein the identification comprises:

identifying, using a user graph, a plurality of nearest neighbor recipients for a message sender,

identifying, using a plurality of machine learning algorithms, first context information for the first email message, wherein identifying the first context information for the first email message comprises:

identifying, using latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA), one or more topics in the first email message,

identifying, using named entity recognition (NER), one or more named entities in the first email message, and

identifying, using text summarization, a predetermined number of most frequently used keywords in the first email message, and

identifying that the first context information is a first level match with historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and a message recipient, of the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients, corresponding to the first target recipient domain; and

sending, based on the identification of the intended recipient domain and to a user device of the message recipient, the first email message.

16. The method of claim 15 , further comprising:

detecting input of a second target recipient domain into a second email message;

identifying, in real time and prior to sending the second email message, that the second target recipient domain comprises an unintended recipient domain instead of the intended recipient domain, wherein the identification comprises:

identifying, using the user graph, the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients for the message sender,

identifying, using the plurality of machine learning algorithms, first context information for the second email message, and

identifying that the first context information does not match historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients; and

sending, based on the identification of the unintended recipient domain and to a user device of the message sender, a notification that the first target recipient domain is flagged as the unintended recipient domain and one or more commands directing the user device to display the notification.

17. The method of claim 15 , further comprising:

detecting input of a second target recipient domain into a second email message;

identifying, in real time and prior to sending the second email message, that the second target recipient domain comprises a potentially unintended recipient domain instead of the intended recipient domain, wherein the identification comprises:

identifying, using the user graph, the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients for the message sender,

identifying, using the plurality of machine learning algorithms, second context information for the second email message,

identifying that the second context information is not the first level match with historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and a second message recipient corresponding to the second target recipient domain,

based on identifying that the second context information does not match the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the second message recipient:

identifying whether a message recipient domain is included in the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients, and

identifying whether there is a second level match between the second context information and the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the second message recipient; and

sending, based on an identification that the second message recipient is included in the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients and that there is the second level match between the second context information and the historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and the second message recipient, a second notification indicating that the second email message includes a new context for the second message recipient and one or more commands directing the user device to display the second notification, wherein the notification includes an option to correct the potentially unintended recipient domain or to send the second email message.

18. The method of claim 17 , further comprising:

based on an identification of one or more of: a) that the second message recipient is not included in the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients, or b) that there is not the second level match between the second context information and the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the second message recipient:

identifying whether the second context information is a third level match with the historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients; and

sending, based on an identification that the second context information is the third level match with the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients:

a third notification indicating that the second email message includes: a) the new context for the second message recipient, and b) historical messages between the message sender and at least one of the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients, different than the second message recipient, includes the new context, and

one or more commands directing the user device to display the third notification, wherein the third notification includes the option to correct the potentially unintended recipient domain or to send the second email message.

19. The method of claim 18 , further comprising:

based on an identification that the second context information is not the third level match with the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients:

identifying whether there is a fourth level match between the second context information and the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients; and

based on identifying that there is the fourth level match between the second context information and the historical context information from the historical messages between the message sender and at least one of the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients:

generating a spelling mistake recommendation indicating a difference between the second target recipient domain and a domain of the at least one of the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients; and

sending, to the message sender, a fourth notification indicating the spelling mistake recommendation and one or more commands directing the user device to display the fourth notification, wherein the fourth notification includes the option to correct the potentially unintended recipient domain or to send the second email message.

20. One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by a computing platform comprising at least one processor, a communication interface, and memory, cause the computing platform to:

detect input of a first target recipient domain into a first email message;

identify, in real time and prior to sending the first email message, that the first target recipient domain comprises an unintended recipient domain instead of an intended recipient domain, wherein the identification comprises:

identifying, using a user graph, a plurality of nearest neighbor recipients for a message sender,

identifying, using a plurality of machine learning algorithms, first context information for the first email message, wherein identifying the first context information for the first email message comprises:

identifying, using latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA), one or more topics in the first email message,

identifying, using named entity recognition (NER), one or more named entities in the first email message, and

identifying, using text summarization, a predetermined number of most frequently used keywords in the first email message, and

identifying that the first context information does not match historical context information from historical messages between the message sender and the plurality of nearest neighbor recipients; and

send, based on the identification of the unintended recipient domain and to a user device, a notification that the first target recipient domain is flagged as the unintended recipient domain and one or more commands directing the user device to display the notification.

Assignments (3)
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT SUPPLEMENT Recorded Dec 9, 2025
From: PROOFPOINT, INC.
To: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 073910/0027 →
SECOND LIEN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Dec 8, 2025
From: PROOFPOINT, INC.
To: U.S. BANK TRUST COMPANY, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 073889/0677 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 11, 2024
From: SUNDARAM, SHALINI KAMALAPURAM; MOORES, CHRIS; VELAGALETI, DURGAPRASAD; KONJARLA, SRIKANTH; DOSHI, HARSH
To: PROOFPOINT, INC.
Reel/Frame 069197/0320 →
Continuity (3)
Continuation 17834887 · Jun 7, 2022
Provisional Application 63208481 · Jun 8, 2021
Related Publication 20240291792A1 · Aug 29, 2024
References Cited (83)
US 6671718B1 · Meister et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 7249175B1 · Donaldson · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7499976B2 · Cato · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7970834B2 · Daniels et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8185592B2 · Christensen et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8250160B2 · Hirota et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8769022B2 · Tivyan · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8892672B1 · Rackliffe · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9137048B2 · Tokuda et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9378487B2 · Meister · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9406048B2 · Meister et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9418238B2 · Ito et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 10560412B2 · Smith · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10614364B2 · Krumm et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10862838B1 · Bodapati · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 10868787B2 · Bishop et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 11088982B1 · Agarwal et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11943193B2 · Sundaram et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 12021817B2 · Sundaram et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20050278430A1 · Cato · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20070005702A1 · Tokuda et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070226300A1 · Smith et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20110055334A1 · Tivyan · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120011192A1 · Meister et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120180134A1 · Coughtrey et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130060863A1 · D'Eri et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130110955A1 · Brady · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20140007182A1 · Qureshi et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150312197A1 · Dong · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20160308814A1 · Meister et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170076217A1 · Krumm et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170351855A1 · Allen · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180131805A1 · Byrne · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190281004A1 · White · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190364001A1 · Dotan-Cohen · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200053035A1 · Mukherjee · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200059447A1 · Bahar · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200137110A1 · Tyler et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200151620A1 · Chao · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210126944A1 · Lesperance et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210286633A1 · Bar-On · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220239633A1 · Dupont et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220394007A1 · Sundaram et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220394008A1 · Sundaram et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20240171536A1 · Sundaram et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240291792A1 · Sundaram et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2022046029A1 · 2022 [cited by examiner]
Cite Seer X The College of Information Sciences and Technology; https://;http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/index; 2016. [cited by applicant]
T.H. Haveliwala: “Topic-Sensitive Page Rank”: A Context-Sensitive Ranking Algorithm for Web Search https://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/˜pxt/IDA/topic_pagerank.pdf IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 15, No. … [cited by applicant]
Farshad Rabib:“University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Resear ennessee Research and Cr ch and Creative Exchange. Supplier Ranking System and Its Effect on the Reliability of the Supply Chain” Dec. 2020 https… [cited by applicant]
Daniel Fogaras et al.: “Towards Scaling Fully Personalized Page Rank: Algorithms, Lower Bounds, and Experiments” Internet Mathematics vol. 2 No. 3 333-358, https://projecteuclid.org/journals/internet-mathematics/volume-… [cited by applicant]
Bahman Bahmani et al.: “Fast Incremental and Personalized PageRank” http://snap.stanford.edu/class p. 173-184. [cited by applicant]
Jianshu Weng et al.: Singapore Management University. Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. Research Collection School of Information Systems. Feb. 2010. https://ink.library.smu.edu. [cited by applicant]
J Weng et al.: “Singapore Management University” Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University, Feb. 2010. https://www.cs.cornell.edu/˜bindel//blurbs/edge. [cited by applicant]
Xiaoming Liu et al.: “Co-Authorship Networks in the Digital Library Research Community” Preprint submitted to Elsevier Science. Feb. 1, 2008. https://arxiv.org. [cited by applicant]
Rada Tarau: TextRank: Bringing Order into Texts Rada Mihalcea and Paul Tarau Department of Computer Science University of North Texas, https://web.eecs.umich.edu/˜mihalcea/papers/mihalcea.emnlp04.pdf. [cited by applicant]
Gartner, Market Guide for Email Security, Oct. 7, 2021, Mark Harris, Peter Firstbrook, Ravisha Chugh, Mario de Boer https://wiki.proofpoint.com/wiki/display/SOLENG/Misdirected+Email. [cited by applicant]
Baeza-Yates, R et al.: Jun. 1996 “A faster algorithm for approximate string matching”. In Dan Hirchsberg; Gene Myers (eds.). Combinatorial Pattern Matching (CPM'96), LNCS 1075. Irvine, CA. pp. 1-23. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.42.… [cited by applicant]
Sergey Brin et al.: “The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine” Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 30 1998 107-117. Published 1998 , by http://www.cse.fau.edu/xqzhu/courses/cap6777/google.search.engine… [cited by applicant]
Neo4j Graph Data Science Graph Algorithms Centrality PageRank 2022 https://neo4j.com/docs/graph-data-science/current/algorithms/page-rank/. [cited by applicant]
Neo4j Graph Data Science Graph Algorithms Centrality. 2022. https://neo4j.com/docs/graph-data-science/current/algorithms/centrality/. [cited by applicant]
Spark 3.2.1:“GraphX Programming Guide” https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/graphx-programming-guide.html#pagerank. [cited by applicant]
Spark 1.6.1 Quick Start “Interactive Analysis with the Spark Shell” https://spark.apache.org/docs/1.6.1/api/java/org/apache/spark/graphx/lib/PageRank.html. [cited by applicant]
Briggsby “Personalized Page Rank with Edge Weights” Feb. 23, 2021 by Justin https://www.briggsby.com/personalized-pagerank. [cited by applicant]
Mimecast vs Proofpoint https://hq-stash.corp.proofpoint.com/projects/SOLUENG/repos/mde-email-poc-workspace/browse/mde-engine-service. [cited by applicant]
Pranay Chandekar: “Evaluate your Recommendation Engine using NDCG” Jan. 13, 2020 https://towardsdatascience.com/evaluate-your-recommendation-engine-using-ndcg-759a851452d1. [cited by applicant]
Stephen E. Robertson et al. “Okapi BM25” 1970s and 1980 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okapi_BM25. [cited by applicant]
Algorithm used by Google Search: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank. [cited by applicant]
Christopher J.C. Burges et al. : “Learning to Rank with Nonsmooth Cost Functions” https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/lambdarank.pdf. [cited by applicant]
Chris Burges et al.: “Learning to Rank using Gradient Descent” https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2005/08/icml_ranking.pdf. [cited by applicant]
Ying Ding:“Applying weighted Page Rank to author citation networks” https://arxiv.org/pdf/1102.1760.pdf. [cited by applicant]
Lars Backstrom et al. : Supervised Random Walks: “Predicting and Recommending Links in Social Networks” https://cs.stanford.edu/˜jure/pubs/linkpred-wsdm11.pdf. [cited by applicant]
B. Gao, T.-Y.Liu, W. Wei, T. Wang, and H. Li. Semi-supervised ranking on very large graphs with rich metadata. In KDD, 2011. [cited by applicant]
Pnkaj Gupta et al.: “WTF: The Who to Follow Service at Twitter” http://www.vldb.org/conf/2004/RS15P2.PDF. [cited by applicant]
Very Large Data Bases Endowment Inc.; hosted by Bluehost; May 28, 2021; http://www.vldb.org/conf/2004/RS15P2.PDF. [cited by applicant]
Standford University ;https://stanford.edu/˜rezab/papers/wtf_overview.pdf Mar. 27, 2019. [cited by applicant]
Andrew Disney :“Social network analysis 101: centrality measures explained” Jan. 2, 2020, https://cambridge-intelligence.com/keylines-faqs-social-network-analysis/. [cited by applicant]
Feb. 14, 2023—(US) Non Final Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 17/834,902. [cited by applicant]
Jun. 29, 2023—(US) Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 17/834,902. [cited by applicant]
Oct. 25, 2023—(US) Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 17/834,887. [cited by applicant]
Nov. 13, 2023—(US) Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 17/834,902. [cited by applicant]
Feb. 12, 2024—(US) Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 17/834,887. [cited by applicant]
Sep. 16, 2024—(US) Office Action—U.S. Appl. No. 18/426,550. [cited by applicant]