Application Control Rule Conflict Resolution via Priority Reconfiguration

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Modern application control systems face conflicts and inaccuracies when new and existing rules interact, leading to unclear permissions and potential security breaches due to applications being categorized incorrectly, resulting in incorrect verdicts and administrative challenges.

Innovation Solution

A system and method for testing new application control rules across a network, identifying conflicts with existing rules, and reconfiguring them to eliminate conflicts by transmitting information from computing devices, including application metadata and priority settings, to ensure accurate permissions and security policies.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If new application control rules are added to enhance security coverage, then security protection capability is improved, but rule conflicts and verification complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity protection capabilityVSAvoidrule verification complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary verification of new application control rules against existing rules before they are activated. This pre-check mechanism identifies potential conflicts in advance, allowing administrators to resolve them before deployment, thus improving security reliability without overwhelming complexity during operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system provides feedback to administrators about detected rule conflicts and their implications. This feedback loop enables informed decision-making about rule modifications, helping to maintain security coverage while managing rule complexity through iterative refinement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Measurement precision

If comprehensive rule testing is performed to eliminate conflicts, then rule accuracy is improved, but processing time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverule accuracyVSAvoidrule processing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs partial testing by focusing verification efforts on specific aspects of rule conflicts rather than exhaustive testing of all possible scenarios. This targeted approach achieves sufficient rule accuracy while significantly reducing processing time compared to complete verification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Measurement precision

If administrators manually verify each new rule against existing rules, then rule conflict detection accuracy is improved, but administrative workload increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconflict detection accuracyVSAvoidadministrative workload
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs automatic self-verification of new rules against the existing rule base, eliminating the need for administrators to manually check each rule. This automated conflict detection maintains high accuracy while dramatically reducing administrative workload.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The manual mechanical process of administrative verification is replaced with an automated computational system that uses algorithmic comparison and conflict detection mechanisms. This substitution maintains detection accuracy while removing the burden of manual work.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Adaptability or versatility

If application categories are expanded to improve control flexibility, then control versatility is improved, but rule conflict probability increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol flexibilityVSAvoidrule conflict probability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

When new application categories are introduced to enhance control flexibility, the system performs preliminary verification to identify potential conflicts with existing rules. This advance checking allows the system to maintain versatility while managing conflict probability through proactive detection and resolution.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS9432406B2System and method for resolving conflicts between application control rules
Publication Date: 2016.08.30 AO KASPERSKY LAB
  • US9432406B2 patent drawing
  • US9432406B2 patent drawing
  • US9432406B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Disclosed are systems, methods and computer program products for configuring application control rules. An example method includes, in response to testing a new application control rule, transmitting, from each of a plurality of computing devices in a network, information relating to software applications deployed on each computing device and one or more application control rules including the new application control rule associated with the software applications, each of the one or more application control rules having a priority, the collected information identifying at least one conflict between at least one application control rule and the new application control rule in executing one of the software applications; and receiving, by at least one of the plurality of computing devices, the new application control rule reconfigured with a lower priority to eliminate the at least one conflict.