IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,591,506
Granted Patent B2
US 12,591,506 · App. 18/798,411 · Granted Mar 31, 2026

Testing agent for application dependency discovery, reporting, and management tool

Inventors: Muralidharan Balasubramanian (Gaithersburg, MD); Eric K. Barnum (Midlothian, VA); Julie Dallen (Vienna, VA); David Watson (Alexandria, VA)
Assignee: Capital One Services, LLC
G06F11/3692G06F9/546G06F11/302G06F11/3495G06F11/3684G06F11/3688
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 12,591,506
App. No.
18/798,411
Filed
Aug 8, 2024
Granted
Mar 31, 2026
Kind
B2
Art Unit
2113
USPC
714/38.1
Abstract

Techniques for monitoring operating statuses of an application and its dependencies are provided. A monitoring application may collect and report the operating status of the monitored application and each dependency. Through use of existing monitoring interfaces, the monitoring application can collect operating status without requiring modification of the underlying monitored application or dependencies. The monitoring application may determine a problem service that is a root cause of an unhealthy state of the monitored application. Dependency analyzer and discovery crawler techniques may automatically configure and update the monitoring application. Machine learning techniques may be used to determine patterns of performance based on system state information associated with performance events and provide health reports relative to a baseline status of the monitored application. Also provided are techniques for testing a response of the monitored application through modifications to API calls. Such tests may be used to train the machine learning model.

Claims (72)

1 . A computer-implemented method comprising:

initiating a testing period for a first application;

intercepting, by a testing agent and during the testing period, a first call in a computing system to a first Application Programming Interface (API) based on determining that the first call originated from the first application;

caching, by the testing agent, the first call prior to modifying the first call;

modifying, by the testing agent, the first call by mutating at least one attribute of the first call, wherein the mutation to the at least one attribute comprises at least one of:

a change to a function name associated with the first API,

a change to a parameter included in the first call, or

a change to a destination, container, or scope associated with the first API;

causing the computing system to process the modified first call and return a result to the first application based on the mutation to the at least one attribute;

determining an impact of the modified first call on the operating status of the first application;

determining whether the first application was able to recover from the result based on the modified first call; and

based on determining that the first application was not able to recover, causing the computing system to process the cached first call and return an unmodified result to the first application,

wherein a second call to the first API by a second application during the testing period is unaffected by modifying the first call.

2 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the result returned based on the modified first call simulates an artificial unhealthy operating status of the first API.

3 . The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the impact of the modified first call on the operating status of the first application comprises:

determining, by a monitoring application, the operating status of the first application using one or more monitoring interfaces; and

determining that the first application has an unhealthy operating status based on at least one metric provided by a first monitoring interface associated with the first application satisfying at least one unhealthy operating status threshold.

4 . The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the impact of the modified first call on the operating status of the first application comprises:

determining whether the first application was able to retrieve information associated with the first API from another source.

5 . The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the impact of the modified first call on the operating status of the first application comprises:

determining whether the first application was able to partially complete processing despite not receiving the information requested from the first API.

6 . The method of claim 1 , wherein intercepting the first call to the first API is further based on determining that the first API is a dependency of the first application.

7 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the testing agent is part of a monitoring application configured to monitor the first application using a plurality of monitoring interfaces,

wherein intercepting the first call to the first API is further based on determining that the monitoring application is configured to monitor the first API.

8 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the testing agent is part of a monitoring application configured to monitor the first application using a plurality of monitoring interfaces,

wherein initiating the test period is based on the monitoring application being configured to monitor the first application.

9 . One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause a computing device to perform steps comprising:

initiating a testing period for a first application;

intercepting, by a testing agent and during the testing period, a first call in a computing system to a first Application Programming Interface (API) based on determining that the first call originated from the first application;

caching, by the testing agent, the first call prior to modifying the first call;

modifying, by the testing agent, the first call by mutating at least one attribute of the first call, wherein the mutation to the at least one attribute comprises at least one of:

a change to a function name associated with the first API,

a change to a parameter included in the first call, or

a change to a destination, container, or scope associated with the first API;

causing the computing system to process the modified first call and return a result to the first application based on the mutation to the at least one attribute;

determining an impact of the modified first call on the operating status of the first application;

determining whether the first application was able to recover from the result based on the modified first call; and

based on determining that the first application was not able to recover, causing the computing system to process the cached first call and return an unmodified result to the first application,

wherein a second call to the first API by a second application during the testing period is unaffected by modifying the first call.

10 . The computer-readable media of claim 9 , wherein the result returned based on the modified first call simulates an artificial unhealthy operating status of the first API.

11 . The computer-readable media of claim 9 , wherein determining the impact of the modified first call on the operating status of the first application comprises:

determining, by a monitoring application, the operating status of the first application using one or more monitoring interfaces; and

determining that the first application has an unhealthy operating status based on at least one metric provided by a first monitoring interface associated with the first application satisfying at least one unhealthy operating status threshold.

12 . The computer-readable media of claim 9 , wherein intercepting the first call to the first API is further based on determining that the first API is a dependency of the first application.

13 . The computer-readable media of claim 9 , wherein the testing agent is part of a monitoring application configured to monitor the first application using a plurality of monitoring interfaces,

wherein intercepting the first call to the first API is further based on determining that the monitoring application is configured to monitor the first API.

14 . The computer-readable media of claim 9 , wherein the testing agent is part of a monitoring application configured to monitor the first application using a plurality of monitoring interfaces,

wherein initiating the test period is based on the monitoring application being configured to monitor the first application.

15 . A monitoring system comprising:

one or more processors; and

memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the monitoring system to:

initiate a testing period for a first application;

intercept, by a testing agent and during the testing period, a first call in a computing system to a first Application Programming Interface (API) based on determining that the first call originated from the first application;

cache, by the testing agent, the first call prior to modifying the first call;

modify, by the testing agent, the first call by mutating at least one attribute of the first call, wherein the mutation to the at least one attribute comprises at least one of:

a change to a function name associated with the first API,

a change to a parameter included in the first call, or

a change to a destination, container, or scope associated with the first API;

cause the computing system to process the modified first call and return a result to the first application based on the mutation to the at least one attribute;

determine an impact of the modified first call on the operating status of the first application;

determine whether the first application was able to recover from the result based on the modified first call; and

based on determining that the first application was not able to recover, cause the computing system to process the cached first call and return an unmodified result to the first application,

wherein a second call to the first API by a second application during the testing period is unaffected by modifying the first call.

16 . The monitoring system of claim 15 , wherein the result returned based on the modified first call simulates an artificial unhealthy operating status of the first API.

17 . The monitoring system of claim 15 , wherein the instructions cause the monitoring system to determine the impact of the modified first call on the operating status of the first application by causing the monitoring system to:

determine, by a monitoring application, the operating status of the first application using one or more monitoring interfaces; and

determine that the first application has an unhealthy operating status based on at least one metric provided by a first monitoring interface associated with the first application satisfying at least one unhealthy operating status threshold.

18 . The monitoring system of claim 15 , wherein the instructions cause the monitoring system to intercept the first call to the first API further based on determining that the first API is a dependency of the first application.

19 . The monitoring system of claim 15 , wherein the testing agent is part of a monitoring application configured to monitor the first application using a plurality of monitoring interfaces,

wherein the instructions cause the monitoring system to intercept the first call to the first API further based on determining that the monitoring application is configured to monitor the first API.

20 . The monitoring system of claim 15 , wherein the testing agent is part of a monitoring application configured to monitor the first application using a plurality of monitoring interfaces,

wherein the instructions cause the monitoring system to initiate the test period based on the monitoring application being configured to monitor the first application.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 12, 2024
From: BALASUBRAMANIAN, MURALIDHARAN; BARNUM, ERIC K.; DALLEN, JULIE; WATSON, DAVID
To: CAPITAL ONE SERVICES, LLC
Reel/Frame 068246/0265 →
Continuity (4)
Continuation 18140712 · Apr 28, 2023
Continuation 17400720 · Aug 12, 2021
Continuation 16454601 · Jun 27, 2019
Related Publication 20250045193A1 · Feb 6, 2025
References Cited (157)
US 6138122A · Smith et al. · 2000 [cited by applicant]
US 6971048B1 · Hanson et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 7409676B2 · Agarwal et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 8001527B1 · Qureshi et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8170975B1 · Qureshi et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8812417B2 · Martinez et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9240016B2 · Cronin et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9253054B2 · Maturana et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9274758B1 · Qin et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9286179B1 · Shalla · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9959198B1 · Jha et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10230597B2 · Parandehgheibi et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10230601B1 · Qin et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10289959B2 · Kakhandiki et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10305758B1 · Bhide et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10326672B2 · Scheib et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10333820B1 · Wang et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10346277B2 · Mermoud et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10354201B1 · Roy et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10417120B2 · Maag et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10560309B1 · Chitalia et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10628243B1 · Cramer et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10664696B2 · Patil · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10733072B2 · Lu et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10817757B2 · Sainani et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10862774B2 · Palamari et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10983895B2 · Babu et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 10990516B1 · Merritt · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11030134B2 · Hagdahl et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11093378B2 · Balasubramanian · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 11093518B1 · Lu et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11106442B1 · Hsiao et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11256596B2 · Lee et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11429627B2 · Burnett et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11487643B1 · Bade · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11615340B2 · Mallick et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11650909B2 · Balasubramanian · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 11663547B2 · Krishnamoorthy et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11675692B2 · Balasubramanian · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20030005416A1 · Henftling et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20040049565A1 · Keller et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20060095895A1 · K. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060233114A1 · Alam et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20070294364A1 · Mohindra et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20090235172A1 · Gandhi et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100091676A1 · Moran et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20120072887A1 · Basak · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120151277A1 · Jung et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120159449A1 · Arnold et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130304677A1 · Gupta et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130336104A1 · Talla et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140324867A1 · Tee et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150195157A1 · Nayyar et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150355959A1 · Kogan-Katz et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160328224A1 · Babey et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160359678A1 · Madani et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160359680A1 · Parandehgheibi et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160359878A1 · Prasad et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160378615A1 · Cohen et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170004433A1 · Raghavan et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170060715A1 · Ye et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170104658A1 · Sykes · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170109636A1 · Marcu et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170109657A1 · Marcu et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170147681A1 · Tankersley et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170289307A1 · Thompson et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180032941A1 · Naous et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180069948A1 · Blank · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180157524A1 · Saxena et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180165177A1 · Gupta et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180181451A1 · Saxena et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180189128A1 · Qiao et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180285767A1 · Chew · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180287907A1 · Kulshreshtha et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180288129A1 · Joshi et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180336123A1 · Benes et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180365093A1 · Musuvathi et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190004873A1 · Liu et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190005022A1 · Deshpande et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190007290A1 · He et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190028909A1 · Mermoud et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190089577A1 · Misra et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190097902A1 · Hardin et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190114551A1 · Chereshnev · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190179738A1 · Hawthorne et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190220262A1 · Fox · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190342397A1 · Laibson · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190356535A1 · Li et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200104401A1 · Burnett et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200133817A1 · Schornack · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200167630A1 · Cronin et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200233790A1 · Battaglia · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200394122A1 · Burde · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200394462A1 · Hild · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210027205A1 · Sevakula et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210165708A1 · Vijayaraghavan et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210174253A1 · Moore et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210224145A1 · Warmack · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210303378A1 · Sethi et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210406041A1 · Saraiya et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220091923A1 · O'Toole et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20250103475A1 · Balasubramanian · 2025 [cited by examiner]
WO 9966398A1 · 1999 [cited by applicant]
Google Scholar/Patents search—text refined (Year: 2025). [cited by examiner]
Siem, AlOps, Application Management, Log Management, Machine Learning, and Compliance | Splunk, https://www.splunk.com/, downloaded Jun. 26, 2019, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
ELK Stack: Elasticsearch, Logstash, Kibana | Elastic, https://www.elastic.co/elk-stack, downloaded Jun. 26, 2019, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Chaos engineering—Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_engineering, downloaded Jun. 26, 2019, 7 pages. [cited by applicant]
Netflix attacks own network with “Chaos Monkey”—and now you can too | Ars Technica, https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/07/netflix-attacks-own-network-with-chaos-monkey-and-now-you-can-too/, downloaded J… [cited by applicant]
ChAP: Chaos Automation Platform—Netflix TechBlog—Medium, https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/chap-chaos-automation-platform-53e6d528371f, downloaded Jun. 26, 2019, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Malin et al., Continuous monitoring and cyber security for high performance computing, 6 pages (Year: 2013). [cited by applicant]
Klein et al., Runtime Performance Challenges in Big Data Systems, 6 pages (Year:2015). [cited by applicant]
Deeplog: Anomaly Detection and Diagnosis from System Logs through Deep Learning, 14 pages (Year:2017). [cited by applicant]
Clifton et al., Machine learning and software engineering in health informatics, 5 pages (Year: 2012). [cited by applicant]
Mar. 4, 2020—Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 16/454,579. [cited by applicant]
Malhotra et al., “Fault Prediction Using Statistical and Machine Learning Methods for Improving Software Quality”, published by Journal of Information Processing Systems, vol. 8, No. 2, Jun. 2012, pp. 241-262 (Year: 201… [cited by applicant]
Moeyersoms et al., “Comprehensible software fault and effort prediction: A data mining approach”, published by The Journal of Systems and Software 100 (2015) 80-90, pp. 80-90 (Year: 2015). [cited by applicant]
Dasari et al., Application Performance Monitoring in Software Defined Networks, 6 pages (Year: 2016). [cited by applicant]
Oct. 21, 2020—Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 16/793,659. [cited by applicant]
Kar et al. “Managing application services over service provider networks: Architecture and dependency analysis.” In: NOMS 2000. 2000 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium ‘The Networked Planet: Managemen… [cited by applicant]
Oct. 26, 2020—International Search Report and Written Opinion—PCT/US2020/039855. [cited by applicant]
Apr. 13, 2021—Notice of Allowance—U.S. Appl. No. 16/454,601. [cited by applicant]
Duchesne et al., “Using Machine Learning to Enable Probalistic Reliability Assessment in Operation Planning” Montefiore Institute - Department of EE&CS, University of Liege, Belgium, 2018, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
K.Z. Sultana “Towards a software vulnerability prediction model using traceable code patterns and software metrics” Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Mississippi State University, 4 pages, 2017. [cited by applicant]
Xu, et al., Dependency Tracking for Risk Mitigation in Machine Learning (ML) Systems, 2 pages (Year: 2022). [cited by applicant]
Jun. 22, 2023—Extended European Search Report—EP 20832144.8. [cited by applicant]
“IBM Application Discovery and Delivery Intelligence” https://www.ibm.com/products/app-discovery-and-delivery-intelligence, pp. 1-11, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
Michael Gerstenhaber “Introducing the Service Map in Datadog” https://www.datadoghq.com/blog/service-map/, pp. 1-15, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“Application Dependency Mapping” https://www.dynatrace.com/monitoring/platform/application-dependency-mapping/, pp. 1-20, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“Meet Davis, our powerful AI-engine” https://web.archive.org/web/20190604094320/https:/www.dynatrace.com/platform/artificial-intelligence/, pp. 1-11, Archive.org capture from Jun. 4, 2019, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“Application Discovery and Dependency Mapping Software” https://www.solarwinds.com/server-application-monitor/use-cases/application-dependency-mapping, pp. 1-8, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“Dependencies analysis” https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/dependencies-analysis.html, pp. 1-16, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“Vulnerable Dependencies” https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/package-analysis.html, pp. 1-8, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“Dependency Analyzer—User's documentation” http://project-ncl.github.io/dependency-analysis/users-documentation. html, pp. 1-6, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“OWASP Dependency-Check” https://owasp.org/www-project-dependency-check/, pp. 1-6, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“Dependency Analytics” https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=redhat.fabric8-analytics, pp. 1-14, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
“10 Best Application Dependency Mapping Tools: Free, Open Source, and Paid” https://www.dnsstuff.com/application-dependency-mapping-tools, pp. 1-23, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
Julia Hauri “Intelligent rule mining and data dependency analysis powered by SAP Data Intelligence” https://blogs.sap.com/2020/11/13/intelligent-rule-mining-and-data-dependency-analysis-powered-by-sap-data-intelligence/… [cited by applicant]
“Application Dependency Mapping” https://www.device42.com/features/application-mappings/, pp. 1-14, accessed Aug. 17, 2023. [cited by applicant]
Lohmuller et al. “SON Function Performance Prediction in a Cognitive SON Management System” 2018 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference Workshops, 7th International Workshop on Self-Organizing Networks, … [cited by applicant]
Oct. 24, 2023—(EP) Partial European Search Report—App No. 23184645.2. [cited by applicant]
“Datadog Integration Guide” pagerduty https://web.archive.org/web/20190328043811/https:/www.pagerduty.com/docs/guides/datadog-integration-guide/, website catpured on the wayback machine on Mar. 28, 2019, 20 pages. [cited by applicant]
Michael Gerstenhaber, “Introducing the Service Map in Datadog” Datadog, https://www.datadoghq.com/blog/service-map/, Aug. 16, 2018, 15 pages. [cited by applicant]
Michael Gerstenhaber, “Introducing the Service Map in Datadog” Datadog, https://web.archive.org/web/20190610211804/https:/www.datadoghq.com/blog/service-map/, captured on the wayback machine on Jun. 10, 2019, 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
“PagerDuty” https://www.pagerduty.com/platform/devops/, website visited Nov. 30, 2023, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Oct. 27, 2023—(EP) Search Report—App No. 23184633.8. [cited by applicant]
Ira Cohen et al. “Correlating instrumentation data to system states: A building block for automated diagnosis and control” Usenix, Usenix, The Advanced Computing Systems Association, Nov. 20, 2004, pp. 1-14, XP061012414. [cited by applicant]
Binbin Qu et al., “A Developed Dynamic Environment Fault Injection Tool for Component Security Testing” published by IEEE, 2009 Third IEEE International Conference on Secure Software Integration and Reliability Improvem… [cited by applicant]
Tanakorn Leesatapornwongsa et al., “The Case for Drill-Ready Cloud Computing” Proceedings of the 10th ACM International on Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, Conext 14, ACM Press, New York, … [cited by applicant]
Victor Heorhiadi et al., “Gremlin: Systematic Resilience Testing of Microservices” Proceedings of the International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, IEEE Computer Society, US, Jun. 27, 2016, XP032939875, pp.… [cited by applicant]
Mar. 15, 2024—(EP) Extended European Search Report—App No. 23184645.2. [cited by applicant]
“Best practices for creating dashboards in Splunk Observability Cloud” Splunk a Cisco Company, https://docs.splunk.com/observability/en/data-visualization/dashboards/dashboards-best-practices.html, website visited Jun. … [cited by applicant]
“Share, clone, and mirror dashboards in Splunk Observability Cloud” Splunk a Cisco Company, https://docs.splunk.com/observability/en/data-visualization/dashboards/dashboard-share-clone-mirror.html, website visited Jun. … [cited by applicant]
“Import and export modern dashboards” SolarWinds Customer Success, https://documentation.solarwinds.com/en/success_center/orionplatform/content/core-fusion-dashboard-import-export.htm, website visited Jun. 24, 2024, 5 p… [cited by applicant]
Louise de Leyritz “The Struggles Scaling Data Teams Face” castordoc, https://www.castordoc.com/blog/the-struggles-scaling-data-teams-face, May 9, 2023, 26 pages. [cited by applicant]
Abby Curtis et al., “Asset & Application Discovery: How it Works” Splunk a Cisco Company, https://www.splunk.com/en_us/blog/learn/asset-application-discovery.html, Apr. 5, 2024, 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
Sara Alspaugh “Understanding Data Analysis Activity via Log Analysis” Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences University of California at Berkeley, Aug. 3, 2017, 213 pages. [cited by applicant]
Pilsung Kang, “Function call interception techniques”, published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Survey Paper, pp. 385-401, Year 2017. [cited by applicant]