Attack-Path Security Control Matching for Feasible Risk Treatment

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing security threat analysis and risk assessment methods lack efficient mechanisms for matching security controls to attack paths and optimizing their implementation based on cost and feasibility, leading to suboptimal security measures.

Innovation Solution

A security threat treatment method that receives risk analysis information, matches security controls to attack steps of attack paths, and outputs information on selected controls considering expenditure and feasibility data, using a system comprising a management subsystem, control association, template matching, and optimization subsystems.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If security controls are matched to attack paths using manual analysis methods, then security experts can identify threats and risks, but the process is time-consuming and lacks efficiency

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity analysis efficiencyVSAvoidtime for threat analysis
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical analysis processes with an automated computer-based system that uses algorithms to match security controls to attack paths. The system automatically processes threat data, retrieves relevant security controls from a database, and generates matching results without requiring manual intervention for each analysis step.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The system enables self-service by allowing security controls to be automatically selected and matched based on predefined criteria and algorithms. The automated process retrieves controls from the database and performs matching operations independently, reducing the need for continuous expert intervention and enabling faster analysis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Reliability

If comprehensive security controls are implemented to cover all attack paths, then security coverage is improved, but resource expenditure and implementation complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity coverageVSAvoidsecurity control implementation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by matching specific security controls to specific attack paths based on their characteristics and requirements. Rather than applying uniform security measures across all paths, the system identifies and applies the most appropriate controls for each particular threat scenario, optimizing both coverage and resource utilization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes parameters by evaluating multiple attributes of security controls (effectiveness, cost, complexity, implementation effort) and selecting controls that optimize the balance between security coverage and resource expenditure. The matching process dynamically adjusts based on these varying parameters to find the optimal control set.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If all identified security controls are implemented, then maximum security protection is achieved, but implementation cost and effort increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity protection levelVSAvoidresource expenditure
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial action by selecting and implementing only the most relevant and effective security controls for each attack path rather than implementing all possible controls. The system identifies a subset of controls that provide sufficient protection while minimizing resource expenditure, avoiding the waste of implementing unnecessary or redundant security measures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system optimizes the balance between protection level and resource expenditure by evaluating multiple parameters including control effectiveness, implementation cost, and expected threat reduction. This enables selective implementation of controls that provide the best return on investment rather than uniformly implementing all available controls.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Reliability

If security control matching is performed without considering feasibility data, then comprehensive control selection is achieved, but implementation feasibility and success rate decrease

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol selection completenessVSAvoidcontrol implementation feasibility
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent incorporates feasibility parameters into the control selection process by evaluating attributes such as implementation complexity, resource requirements, and organizational readiness. The system adjusts its matching criteria to prioritize controls that are both effective and feasible to implement, balancing ideal security requirements with practical constraints.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP4476649B1Security control system and method
Publication Date: 2025.10.15 C2A SEC LTD
  • EP4476649B1 patent drawingFigure 1A
  • EP4476649B1 patent drawingFigure 1B
  • EP4476649B1 patent drawingFigure 1C

AI summary

A security control method, constituted of: receiving risk analysis information comprising data regarding a plurality of threats, each of the plurality of threats associated with a respective asset; loading a control database comprising data regarding a plurality of security controls; for each of the plurality of threats, matching one or more of the plurality of security controls to one or more attack steps of one or more attack paths associated with the respective threat; for each of the plurality of threats, selecting at least a subset of the matched security controls; and for each of the plurality of threats, outputting information regarding the selected security controls.