IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,373,568
Granted Patent B2
US 12,373,568 · App. 17/853,312 · Granted Jul 29, 2025

Malicious activity probability determinations for autonomous systems

Inventors: Shay Chriba Sakazi (Herzliya, IL); Andrey Karpovsky (Kiryat Motzkin, IL); Moshe Israel (Ramat Gan, IL)
Assignee: MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC
G06F21/577H04L41/142H04L63/1408H04L63/1425
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 12,373,568
App. No.
17/853,312
Filed
Jun 29, 2022
Granted
Jul 29, 2025
Kind
B2
Art Unit
2447
USPC
726/22
Abstract

According to examples, an apparatus may include a processor that may calculate a normalized threat intelligence score (TIS) for an autonomous system (AS) based on a sum of threat intelligence (TI) signals associated with Internet protocol (IP) addresses controlled by the AS and a count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS. The processor may also determine, based on the normalized TIS for the AS, a probability that activities associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS are likely to be malicious. The processor may further output the determined probability that the activities associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS are likely to be malicious.

Claims (72)

1. An apparatus comprising:

a processor; and

a memory on which is stored machine-readable instructions that when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:

determine a count of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses controlled by an autonomous system (AS);

generate threat intelligence (TI) signals for a subset of the IP addresses controlled by the AS based on detected malicious activity;

calculate a normalized threat intelligence score (TIS) for the AS based on a sum of the TI signals associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS and the determined count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS;

determine, based on the normalized TIS for the AS, a probability that activities associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS are likely to be malicious; and

output the determined probability that the activities associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS are likely to be malicious.

2. The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

calculate the normalized TIS for the AS using a logistic transformation of the sum of TI signals associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS and the determined count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS.

3. The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

calculate the normalized TIS for the AS using a logistic transformation of a weighted sum of TI signals associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS and the determined count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS.

4. The apparatus of claim 3 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

apply different levels of weights to the TI signals dependent upon types of the TI signals; and

determine the weighted sum of TI signals based on the levels of weights applied to the TI signals.

5. The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

apply a scaling parameter to the determined count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS, wherein the scaling parameter controls an impact of the count of the IP addresses on the TIS.

6. The apparatus of claim 5 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

apply a certain scaling parameter to the count of the IP addresses based on a geographic location of the AS.

7. The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

calculate normalized TIS's for a plurality of AS's;

determine, based on the normalized TIS's for the plurality of AS's and for each of the plurality of AS's, a probability that activities associated with IP addresses controlled by the AS are likely to be malicious; and

output the determined probabilities of the activities associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS's are likely to be malicious.

8. The apparatus of claim 7 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

generate a histogram of the AS's according to the normalized TIS's for the plurality of AS's;

determine groups of the plurality of AS's from the histogram; and

assign reputation levels to each of the plurality of AS's according to the groups in which the plurality of AS's are determined to belong.

9. The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

determine whether the determined probability that the activities associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS are likely to be malicious exceeds a predefined threshold level; and

output the determined probability based on the determined probability exceeding the predefined threshold level.

10. A method comprising:

accessing, by a processor, a count of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses controlled by an autonomous system (AS);

generating, by a processor, threat intelligence (TI) signals for a subset of IP addresses controlled by the AS based on detected malicious activity;

accessing, by a processor, information regarding the AS, the information including the TI signals associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS and a count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS;

calculating, by the processor, a normalized threat intelligence score (TIS) for the AS based on a weighted sum of the TI signals and the count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS;

determining, by the processor, a reputation level of the AS based on the normalized TIS for the AS; and

outputting, by the processor, the determined reputation level of the AS.

11. The method of claim 10 , further comprising:

determining whether the determined reputation level falls below a predefined reputation threshold level; and

outputting the determined reputation level of the AS in response to a determination that the determined reputation level falls below the predefined reputation threshold level.

12. The method of claim 10 , further comprising:

calculating the normalized TIS for the AS using a logistic transformation of the weighted sum of TI signals associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS and the count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS.

13. The method of claim 12 , further comprising:

applying different levels of weights to the TI signals depending upon the types of the TI signals; and

determine the weighted sum of TI signals based on the levels of weights applied to the TI signals.

14. The method of claim 12 , further comprising:

applying a scaling parameter to the count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS, wherein the scaling parameter controls an impact of the count of the IP addresses on the TIS.

15. The method of claim 10 , further comprising:

accessing information regarding a plurality of AS's, the information including TI signals associated with IP addresses controlled by the plurality of AS's and counts of the IP addresses controlled by the plurality of AS's;

calculating normalized TIS's for the plurality of AS's;

determining, based on the normalized TIS's for the plurality of AS's and for each of the plurality of AS's, a reputation level of the AS; and

outputting the determined reputation levels of the AS's.

16. The method of claim 15 , further comprising:

generating a histogram of the AS's according to the normalized TIS's for the plurality of AS's;

determining groups of the plurality of AS's from the histogram; and

assigning reputation levels to each of the plurality of AS's according to the groups in which the plurality of AS's are determined to belong.

17. A non-transitory computer-readable medium on which is stored a plurality of instructions that when executed by a processor, cause the processor to:

access a count of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses controlled by an autonomous system (AS);

generate threat intelligence (TI) signals for a subset of the IP addresses controlled by the AS based on detected malicious activity;

access information regarding the AS, the information including the TI signals associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS and a count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS;

calculate a normalized threat intelligence score (TIS) for the AS based on a weighted sum of the TI signals and the count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS;

determine a reputation level of the AS based on the normalized TIS for the AS; and

output the determined reputation level of the AS.

18. The computer-readable medium of claim 17 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

determine whether the determined reputation level falls below a predefined reputation threshold level; and

output the determined reputation level of the AS in response to a determination that the determined reputation level falls below the predefined reputation threshold level.

19. The computer-readable medium of claim 17 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

apply different levels of weights to the TI signals depending upon the types of the TI signals;

determine the weighted sum of TI signals based on the levels of weights applied to the TI signals; and

calculate the normalized TIS for the AS using a logistic transformation of the weighted sum of TI signals associated with the IP addresses controlled by the AS and the count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS.

20. The computer-readable medium of claim 17 , wherein the instructions cause the processor to:

apply a scaling parameter to the count of the IP addresses controlled by the AS, wherein the scaling parameter controls an impact of the count of the IP addresses on the TIS.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 29, 2022
From: SAKAZI, SHAY CHRIBA; KARPOVSKY, ANDREY; ISRAEL, MOSHE
To: MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC
Reel/Frame 060358/0686 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20240007490A1 · Jan 4, 2024
References Cited (9)
US 10003607B1 · Kolman · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20140007238A1 · Magee et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
CN 116827940A · 2023 [cited by examiner]
EP 3793165A1 · 2021 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2016164403A1 · 2016 [cited by examiner]
WO 2018164701A1 · 2018 [cited by applicant]
“Bad Ases”, Retrieved From: https://www.silentpush.com/blog/bad-ases, Retrieved On: Jun. 29, 2022, 5 Pages. [cited by applicant]
Hu, et al., “An Alliance Based Reputation Model for Internet Autonomous System Trust Evaluation”, In Proceedings of International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing with Applications, Aug. 10, 2009, pp. 30… [cited by applicant]
“International Search Report and Written Opinion Issued in PCT Application No. PCT/US23/022797”, Mailed Date: Aug. 25, 2023, 11 Pages. [cited by applicant]