Attack Volume Ranking for Optimal Network Security Configurations
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current solutions for improving the security of networked systems fail to effectively manage the complex relationships between configuration parameters of interconnected components, neglecting vulnerabilities not at the system perimeter and dependencies among components, which can lead to cascading failures and improper measurement of the attack surface.
Innovation Solution
A system that determines vulnerability and dependency nodes in a graph representing a system of components, calculates a score indicating the attack volume using a metric based on likelihoods of exploitation, exposure factors, and loss of utility, and selects optimal configurations to optimize system security.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If current solutions focus only on exposed vulnerabilities at the system perimeter, then the measurement of attack surface is simplified, but the security assessment becomes incomplete and fails to account for cascading failures from non-exposed vulnerabilities
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the attack surface measurement into two distinct components: exposed vulnerabilities at the system perimeter and non-exposed vulnerabilities internal to the system. This segmentation allows for a more comprehensive security assessment by separately evaluating and aggregating the attack volume from both sources, thereby achieving complete measurement precision without being overwhelmed by system complexity
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces a new dimension to attack surface measurement by incorporating the attack volume from non-exposed vulnerabilities that are not accessible from the system perimeter. This dimensional expansion transforms the traditional two-dimensional attack surface (external only) into a three-dimensional assessment that includes internal vulnerabilities, enabling a more accurate security posture evaluation
2Reliability
If the system considers all vulnerabilities including non-exposed ones and their dependencies, then the security assessment becomes more accurate, but the computational complexity and analysis time increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The patent performs preliminary actions by pre-calculating and storing the attack volume contributions of individual vulnerabilities and their dependencies before conducting the overall security assessment. This preliminary computation allows the system to quickly aggregate results for different configurations without re-analyzing the entire dependency chain each time, thereby maintaining high reliability while reducing analysis time
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies partial action by focusing the comprehensive analysis only on the necessary vulnerability-path-component relationships that actually contribute to the attack volume. Rather than exhaustively analyzing all possible combinations, the system identifies and evaluates only the relevant paths and dependencies, achieving accurate security assessment with reduced computational overhead
3Reliability
If the system optimizes for security by adjusting configuration parameters, then the security posture improves, but the operational flexibility and system functionality may be reduced
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements dynamics by providing a flexible framework that can evaluate security posture across multiple configuration scenarios and dynamically identify optimal configurations. The system allows configuration parameters to be adjusted and re-evaluated, enabling the organization to find the right balance between security optimization and operational flexibility rather than being locked into a static, overly restrictive configuration
Solution Approach 2:
The patent utilizes parameter changes by systematically varying configuration parameters to their secure values while measuring the impact on attack volume. The system identifies which parameter changes provide the greatest security improvement and presents these as recommended optimizations, allowing the organization to make informed decisions about which parameter adjustments to implement based on their security needs and operational requirements
Data Source
AI summary
A system determines, in a graph which represents a system of components: vulnerability nodes representing known vulnerabilities to the system, including exposed and non-exposed vulnerability nodes associated with an exploitation likelihood; and dependency nodes representing components in the system, including direct and indirect dependency nodes associated with an exposure factor indicating an amount of degradation based on exploitation of an associated vulnerability. The system calculates, across all non-exposed vulnerability nodes and all direct dependency nodes, a score which indicates an attack volume based on at least: a respective second likelihood associated with a non-exposed vulnerability node; an exposure factor associated with a dependency node which represents a component directly degraded based on exploitation of a vulnerability; and a loss of utility of the component. The score is calculated for one or more configurations of the system, and the system selects an optimal configuration based on the calculated score.