IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,266,209
Granted Patent B1
US 12,266,209 · App. 18/587,267 · Granted Apr 1, 2025

Image classifier automated testing and outlier detection

Inventors: Jason B. Bryslawskyj (San Diego, CA); Yi Zhang (Santa Clara, CA); Emanoel Daryoush (San Jose, CA); Ari Azarafrooz (Rancho Santa Margarita, CA); Wayne Xin (Santa Clara, CA); Yihua Liao (Palo Alto, CA); Niranjan Koduri (Pleasanton, CA)
Assignee: Netskope, Inc.
G06V40/1365G06V10/762G06V20/70G06V40/1347
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 12,266,209
App. No.
18/587,267
Filed
Feb 26, 2024
Granted
Apr 1, 2025
Kind
B1
Art Unit
2675
USPC
382/124
Abstract

A system to generate an image classifier and test it nearly instantaneously is described herein. Image embeddings generated by an image fingerprinting model are indexed and an associated approximate nearest neighbors (ANN) model is generated. The embeddings in the index are clustered and the clusters are labeled. Users can provide just a few images to add to the index as a labeled cluster. The ANN model is trained to receive an image embedding as input and return a score and label of the most similar identified embedding. The label may be applied if the score exceeds a threshold value. The image classifier can be tested efficiently using Leave One Out Cross Validation (“LOOCV”) to provide near-instantaneous quality indications of the image classifier to the user. Near-instantaneous indications of outliers in the provided images can also be provided to the user using a distance to the centroid calculation.

Claims (100)

1. A computer-implemented method of determining a quality an image classifier, the method comprising:

receiving a plurality of images provided by a user and a user-defined label for the plurality of images;

generating, with an image fingerprint model, a plurality of image fingerprint embeddings, wherein each image fingerprint embedding of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings represents an associated image of the plurality of images;

creating the image classifier using each image fingerprint embedding in the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings and a plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings;

creating a plurality of test classifiers, wherein the creating comprises creating one test classifier of the plurality of test classifiers for each image fingerprint embedding in the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings, wherein creating each test classifier of the plurality of test classifiers comprises:

selecting an image fingerprint embedding of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings as a test embedding for which to create the respective test classifier, and

creating the respective test classifier using the plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings and each of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings except the selected image fingerprint embedding;

applying each of the plurality of test classifiers to its respective test embedding to obtain a plurality of recall results; and

assessing the quality of the image classifier based on the plurality of recall results.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the creating the respective test classifier for a respective image fingerprint embedding comprises:

generating an index and an approximate nearest neighbor model associated with the index using the plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings and each of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings except the respective image fingerprint embedding;

clustering the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings in the index into a user embedding cluster; and

applying the user-defined label to the user embedding cluster.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the applying each of the plurality of test classifiers to its respective test embedding comprises:

providing the respective test embedding as input to the respective approximate nearest neighbor model trained to retrieve a label of a most similar image fingerprint embedding from the associated index and generate a score indicating a similarity of the associated image fingerprint embedding to the most similar image fingerprint embedding; and

receiving, from the respective approximate nearest neighbor model in response to the input, the label and the score.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 3 , wherein the applying each of the plurality of test classifiers to its respective test embedding further comprises:

providing a second plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings as input to the respective approximate nearest neighbor model; and

receiving, from the respective approximate nearest neighbor model in response to the input, the label and the score for each of the second plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the creating the respective test classifier for a respective image fingerprint embedding further comprises:

clustering the plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings into a negative embedding cluster; and

applying a negative label to the negative embedding cluster.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the assessing the quality of the image classifier comprises:

for each test classifier of the plurality of test classifiers, after applying the test classifier to its respective test embedding, calculating a recall value of the respective test classifier; and

generating an average recall value using recall values generated based on each of the plurality of test classifiers.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 6 , wherein the assessing the quality of the image classifier further comprises:

in response to determining the average recall value falls below a threshold quality value, transmitting a notification to the user providing an indication of the quality of the image classifier.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the notification further comprises one of:

a suggestion to provide additional images that can be classified with the user-defined label;

a suggestion to provide higher quality images associated with the user-defined label;

a suggestion to reduce a threshold value used to determine whether subject images are classified with the user-defined label; or

a combination thereof.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the creating the image classifier comprises:

generating an index and an approximate nearest neighbor model associated with the index using the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings;

clustering the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings into a user embedding cluster; and

applying the user-defined label to the user embedding cluster.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9 , wherein the creating the image classifier further comprises:

clustering the plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings into a negative embedding cluster; and

applying a negative label to the negative embedding cluster.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 9 , further comprising:

identifying outliers of the plurality of the images, the identifying the outliers comprising:

calculating a centroid of the user embedding cluster; and

for each image fingerprint embedding of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings:

calculating a distance between the respective image fingerprint embedding and the centroid,

calculating a z-score of the distance for the respective image fingerprint embedding, and

based on a comparison of the z-score to a threshold score:

identifying the respective image fingerprint embedding as an outlier when the z-score meets or exceeds the threshold score; and

identifying the respective image fingerprint embedding as an inlier when the z-score is below the threshold score.

12. The computer-implemented method of claim 11 , further comprising:

based on identifying the outliers, transmitting a notification to the user indicating images of the plurality of images associated with the image fingerprint embeddings that are identified as the outliers.

13. The computer-implemented method of claim 11 , further comprising:

recreating the image classifier using the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings after removing image fingerprint embeddings that are identified as the outliers from the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings.

14. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the image fingerprint model is trained to generate an image fingerprint embedding comprising a multi-dimensional feature vector representing visual aspects of the associated image input to the image fingerprint model.

15. A system for determining a quality of an image classifier, the system comprising:

one or more processors; and

one or more memories having stored thereon instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:

receive, via a user interface, a plurality of images provided by a user and a user-defined label for the plurality of images;

generate, with an image fingerprint model of the system, a plurality of image fingerprint embeddings, wherein each image fingerprint embedding of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings represents an associated image of the plurality of images;

create the image classifier using each image fingerprint embedding in the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings and a plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings;

create a plurality of test classifiers comprising one test classifier of the plurality of test classifiers for each image fingerprint embedding in the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings, wherein the instructions to create each test classifier of the plurality of test classifiers comprises instructions that further cause the one or more processors to:

select an image fingerprint embedding of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings as a test embedding for which to create the respective test classifier, and

create the respective test classifier using the plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings and each of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings except the selected image fingerprint embedding;

apply each of the plurality of test classifiers to its respective test embedding to obtain a plurality of recall results; and

assess the quality of the image classifier based on the recall results.

16. The system of claim 15 , wherein:

the instructions to create the respective test classifier for a respective image fingerprint embedding comprise further instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:

generate an index and an approximate nearest neighbor model associated with the index using the plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings and each of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings except the respective image fingerprint embedding,

cluster the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings in the index into a user embedding cluster, and

apply the user-defined label to the user embedding cluster; and

the instructions to apply each of the plurality of test classifiers to its respective test embedding comprise further instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors cause the one or more processors to:

provide the respective test embedding as input to the respective approximate nearest neighbor model trained to retrieve a label of a most similar image fingerprint embedding from the associated index and generate a score indicating a similarity of the associated image fingerprint embedding to the most similar image fingerprint embedding, and

receive, from the respective approximate nearest neighbor model in response to the input, the label and the score.

17. The system of claim 15 , wherein the instructions to assess the quality of the image classifier comprise further instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:

for each test classifier of the plurality of test classifiers, after applying the test classifier to its respective test embedding, calculate a recall value of the respective test classifier;

generate an average recall value using recall values generated based on each of the plurality of test classifiers; and

in response to determining the average recall value falls below a threshold value, transmitting a notification to the user providing an indication of the quality of the image classifier, wherein the notification further comprises one of:

a suggestion to provide additional images that can be classified with the user-defined label;

a suggestion to provide higher quality images associated with the user-defined label;

a suggestion to reduce a threshold value used to determine whether subject images are classified with the user-defined label; or

a combination thereof.

18. The system of claim 15 , wherein the instructions to create the image classifier comprise further instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:

generate an index and an approximate nearest neighbor model associated with the index using the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings;

cluster the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings into a user embedding cluster; and

apply the user-defined label to the user embedding cluster.

19. The system of claim 18 , wherein the instructions comprise further instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:

identify outliers of the plurality of the images, the instructions to identify the outliers comprising further instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:

calculate a centroid of the user embedding cluster, and

for each image fingerprint embedding of the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings:

calculate a distance between the respective image fingerprint embedding and the centroid;

calculate a z-score of the distance for the respective image fingerprint embedding; and

based on a comparison of the z-score to a threshold score:

identify the respective image fingerprint embedding as an outlier when the z-score meets or exceeds the threshold score, and

identify the respective image fingerprint embedding as an inlier when the z-score is below the threshold score; and

based on identifying the outliers, perform one of:

transmit a notification to the user indicating images of the plurality of images associated with the image fingerprint embeddings that are identified as the outliers,

recreate the image classifier using the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings after removing image fingerprint embeddings that are identified as the outliers from the plurality of image fingerprint embeddings, or

a combination thereof.

20. The system of claim 18 , wherein the instructions to create the image classifier further comprise instructions that, upon execution by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:

cluster the plurality of negative image fingerprint embeddings into a negative embedding cluster; and

apply a negative label to the negative embedding cluster.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Apr 12, 2024
From: BRYSLAWSKYJ, JASON B.; ZHANG, YI; DARYOUSH, EMANOEL; AZARAFROOZ, ARI; XIN, WAYNE; LIAO, YIHUA; KODURI, NIRANJAN
To: NETSKOPE, INC.
Reel/Frame 067088/0190 →
References Cited (152)
US 5440723A · Arnold et al. · 1995 [cited by applicant]
US 6513122B1 · Magdych et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 6622248B1 · Hirai · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 7080408B1 · Pak et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 7298864B2 · Jones · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7376719B1 · Shafer et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7735116B1 · Gauvin · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7966654B2 · Crawford · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8000329B2 · Fendick et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8296178B2 · Hudis et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8793151B2 · DelZoppo et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8839417B1 · Jordan · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9197601B2 · Pasdar · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9225734B1 · Hastings · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9231968B2 · Fang et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9280678B2 · Redberg · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9811662B2 · Sharpe et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 10025950B1 · Avasarala et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10084825B1 · Xu · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10237282B2 · Nelson et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10334442B2 · Vaughn et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10382468B2 · Dods · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10484334B1 · Lee et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10826941B2 · Jain et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10832062B1 · Evans et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 11030726B1 · Minor · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11032301B2 · Mandrychenko et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11036856B2 · Graun et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11200454B1 · Qian · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 11281775B2 · Burdett et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11676298B1 · Portail et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11687841B2 · Hagen · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20020099666A1 · Dryer et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20030055994A1 · Herrmann et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20030063321A1 · Inoue et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20030172292A1 · Judge · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20030204632A1 · Willebeek-LeMair et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20040015719A1 · Lee et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20050010593A1 · Fellenstein et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050271246A1 · Sharma et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20060156401A1 · Newstadt et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060251338A1 · Gokturk et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20070204018A1 · Chandra et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070237147A1 · Quinn et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20080069480A1 · Aarabi et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080134332A1 · Keohane et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080144943A1 · Gokturk et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090144818A1 · Kumar et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090249470A1 · Litvin et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090300351A1 · Lei et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100017436A1 · Wolge · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100066822A1 · Steinberg et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110119481A1 · Auradkar et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110145594A1 · Jho et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120278896A1 · Fang et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130159694A1 · Chiueh et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130298190A1 · Sikka et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130347085A1 · Hawthorn et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140007184A1 · Porras · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140013112A1 · Cidon et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140029839A1 · Mensink et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140068030A1 · Chambers et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140068705A1 · Chambers et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140259093A1 · Narayanaswamy et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140282843A1 · Buruganahalli et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140359282A1 · Shikfa et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140366079A1 · Pasdar · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150100357A1 · Seese et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150254532A1 · Talathi et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160323318A1 · Terrill et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160350145A1 · Botzer et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170064005A1 · Lee · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170093917A1 · Chandra et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170250951A1 · Wang et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180053042A1 · Philbin · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190095464A1 · Xie et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200050686A1 · Kamalapuram et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200311616A1 · Rajkumar et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200336802A1 · Russell et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210141896A1 · Streit · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210209207A1 · Lee · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210358164A1 · Liu et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210382937A1 · Jie et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220027758A1 · Kreshpa · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220083445A1 · Nyati · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220138439A1 · Tambi · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220215205A1 · Swaminathan et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220318229A1 · Shreve et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220318354A1 · Park et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220327189A1 · Belli et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220383037A1 · Pham et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220398348A1 · Voloshynovskiy et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20230177816A1 · Li et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230222762A1 · Andriushchenko et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230222841A1 · Chen et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230350880A1 · Shreve · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20240177838A1 · Liu · 2024 [cited by examiner]
EP 1063833A2 · 2000 [cited by applicant]
Chen et al., “A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representations,” Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning, Vienna, Austria, PMLR 119, Jul. 2020, 20 pages. [cited by applicant]
Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 18/451,010, mailed Apr. 17, 2024, 25 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 18/450,999, mailed Sep. 28, 2023, 17 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 18/451,010, mailed Dec. 8, 2023, 20 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action in U.S. Appl. No. 18/451,014, mailed Dec. 8, 2023, 17 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 18/450,999, mailed Jan. 19, 2024, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Tan et al., “EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networks,” Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning, Long Beach, California, PMLR 97, Sep. 2020, 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
Yang et al., “Progressive Open Space Expansion for Open-Set Model Attribution.” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.06877. Mar. 2023, 16 pages. [cited by applicant]
Yu, Ning. “Human-Centric Deep Generative Models: The Blessing and the Curse.” Dissertation. University of Maryland, College Park, 2021, 191 pages. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 18/451,010 Advisory Action dated Jul. 2, 2024, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Martin, Victoria “Cooperative Security Fabric,” The Fortinet Cookbook, Jun. 8, 2016, 6 pgs., archived Jul. 28, 2016 at https://web.archive.org/web/20160728170025/http://cookbook.fortinet.com/cooperative-security-fabric-… [cited by applicant]
Huckaby, Jeff “Ending Clear Text Protocols,” Rackaid.com, Dec. 9, 2008, 3 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Newton, Harry “fabric,” Newton's Telecom Dictionary, 30th Updated, Expanded, Anniversary Edition, 2016, 3 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Fortinet, “Fortinet Security Fabric Earns 100% Detection Scores Across Several Attack Vectors in NSS Labs' Latest Breach Detection Group Test [press release]”, Aug. 2, 2016, 4 pgs, available at https://www.fortinet.com/… [cited by applicant]
Fortinet, “Fortinet Security Fabric Named 2016 CRN Network Security Product of the Year [press release]”, Dec. 5, 2016, 4 pgs, available at https://www.fortinet.com/corporate/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/2016/fortin… [cited by applicant]
McCullagh, Declan, “How safe is instant messaging? A security and privacy survey,” CNET, Jun. 9, 2008, 14 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Beck et al., “IBM and Cisco: Together for a World Class Data Center,” IBM Redbooks, Jul. 2013, 654 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Martin, Victoria “Installing internal FortiGates and enabling a security fabric,” The Fortinet Cookbook, Jun. 8, 2016, 11 pgs, archived Aug. 28, 2016 at https://web.archive.org/web/20160828235831/http://cookbook.fortine… [cited by applicant]
Zetter, Kim, “Revealed: The Internet's Biggest Security Hole,” Wired, Aug. 26, 2008, 13 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Adya et al., “Farsite: Federated, available, and reliable storage for an incompletely trusted environment,” SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 36, SI, Dec. 2002, pp. 1-14. [cited by applicant]
Agrawal et al., “Order preserving encryption for numeric data,” In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, Jun. 2004, pp. 563-574. [cited by applicant]
Balakrishnan et al., “A layered naming architecture for the Internet,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 34(4), 2004, pp. 343-352. [cited by applicant]
Downing et al., Naming Dictionary of Computer and Internet Terms, (11th Ed.) Barron's, 2013, 6 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Downing et al., Dictionary of Computer and Internet Terms, (10th Ed.) Barron's, 2009, 4 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Zoho Mail, “Email Protocols: What they are & their different types,” 2006, 7 pgs. available at https://www.zoho.com/mail/glossary/email-protocols.html#:˜: text=mode of communication.-, What are the different email proto… [cited by applicant]
Niit, Special Edition Using Storage Area Networks, Que, 2002, 6 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Chapple, Mike, “Firewall redundancy: Deployment scenarios and benefits,” TechTarget, 2005, 5 pgs. available at https://www.techtarget.com/searchsecurity/tip/Firewall-redundancy-Deployment-scenarios-and-benefits? Offer=a… [cited by applicant]
Fortinet, FortiGate—3600 User Manual (vol. 1, Version 2.50 MR2) Sep. 5, 2003, 329 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Fortinet, FortiGate SOHO and SMB Configuration Example, (Version 3.0 MR5), Aug. 24, 2007, 54 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Fortinet, FortiSandbox—Administration Guide, (Version 2.3.2), Nov. 9, 2016, 191 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Fortinet, FortiSandbox Administration Guide, (Version 4.2.4) Jun. 12, 2023, 245 pgs. available at https://fortinetweb.s3.amazonaws.com/docs.fortinet.com/v2/attachments/fba32b46-b7c0-11ed-8e6d-fa163e15d75b/FortiSandbox-4… [cited by applicant]
Fortinet, FortiOS—Administration Guide, (Versions 6.4.0), Jun. 3, 2021, 1638 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Heady et al., “The Architecture of a Network Level Intrusion Detection System,” University of New Mexico, Aug. 15, 1990, 21 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Kephart et al., “Fighting Computer Viruses,” Scientific American (vol. 277, No. 5) Nov. 1997, pp. 88-93. [cited by applicant]
Wang, L., Chapter 5: Cooperative Security in D2D Communications, “Physical Layer Security in Wireless Cooperative Networks,” 41 pgs. first online on Sep. 1, 2017 at https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-61… [cited by applicant]
Lee et al., “A Data Mining Framework for Building Intrusion Detection Models,” Columbia University, n.d. 13 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2004, 5 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Microsoft Computer Dictionary, (5th Ed.), Microsoft Press, 2002, 8 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Microsoft Computer Dictionary, (4th Ed.), Microsoft Press, 1999, 5 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Mika et al., “Metadata Statistics for a Large Web Corpus,” LDOW2012, Apr. 16, 2012, 6 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Oxford Dictionary of Computing (6th Ed.), 2008, 5 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Paxson, Vern, “Bro: a System for Detecting Network Intruders in Real-Time,” Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Security Symposium, Jan. 1998, 22 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Fortinet Inc., U.S. Appl. No. 62/503,252, “Building a Cooperative Security Fabric of Hierarchically Interconnected Network Security Devices.” n.d., 87 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Song et al., “Practical techniques for searches on encrypted data,” In Proceeding 2000 IEEE symposium on security and privacy. S&P. 2000, May 2000, pp. 44-55. [cited by applicant]
Dean, Tamara, Guide to Telecommunications Technology, Course Technology, 2003, 5 pgs. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 60/520,577, “Device, System, and Method for Defending a Computer Network,” Nov. 17, 2003, 21 pgs. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 60/552,457, “Fortinet Security Update Technology,” Mar. 2004, 6 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Tittel, Ed, Unified Threat Management For Dummies, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2012, 76 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Fortinet, FortiOS Handbook: UTM Guide (Version 2), Oct. 15, 2010, 188 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Full Definition of Security, Wayback Machine Archive of Merriam-Webster on Nov. 17, 2016, 1 pg. [cited by applicant]
Definition of Cooperative, Wayback Machine Archive of Merriam-Webster on Nov. 26, 2016, 1 pg. [cited by applicant]
Pfaffenberger, Bryan, Webster's New World Computer Dictionary, (10th Ed.), 2003, 5 pgs. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 18/451,010 Non-Final Office Action dated Sep. 10, 2024, 27 pages. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 18/451,014—Notice of Allowance dated Aug. 6, 2024, 10 pages . [cited by applicant]
Cited By (1)
US 12,511,925