Automated Secure Design Pattern Selection via Graph Analysis
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing manual threat modeling and design pattern selection methods in distributed systems are prone to errors, time-consuming, and fail to keep pace with changing security threats and policies, leading to potential vulnerabilities and compliance issues.
Innovation Solution
An automated system that uses graph analysis and rules engines to model threats and select secure design patterns, continuously updating graphs based on events and applying rules to identify vulnerabilities and ensure policy compliance, thereby reducing human error and increasing efficiency.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If manual threat modeling and design pattern selection methods are used, then human expertise can be applied to security analysis, but the process is time-consuming and prone to human error
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces manual mechanical analysis with automated computational analysis. A graph analysis engine automatically traverses software product graphs, applies threat modeling rules, and identifies security patterns without human intervention, thereby eliminating human error while significantly reducing analysis time through algorithmic efficiency
Solution Approach 2:
The system enables self-service security analysis by automatically performing threat modeling and design pattern selection. The graph analysis engine autonomously traverses software graphs, applies security rules, and generates threat models without requiring human experts to manually analyze each software product, thus reducing both time and human error
2Adaptability or versatility
If manual design pattern selection is used, then security experts can make informed decisions, but the process cannot keep pace with changing security threats and policies
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements dynamic security analysis where the graph analysis engine continuously traverses software product graphs and re-applies threat modeling rules as new threats and policies emerge. This dynamic automated process can rapidly adapt to changing security requirements without the delays inherent in manual expert review, maintaining both adaptability and high productivity
Solution Approach 2:
The system incorporates feedback mechanisms where threat modeling results and security pattern analyses are continuously fed back into the graph analysis engine. This enables automatic updating of threat models and design pattern selections based on new security threats and policies, allowing the system to adapt rapidly while maintaining high assessment speed through automated rule refinement
3Reliability
If comprehensive threat modeling is performed on all software components, then security coverage is maximized, but the complexity of analysis increases significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the software product into discrete graph components (nodes and edges) that can be independently analyzed. The graph analysis engine traverses this segmented structure systematically, applying threat modeling rules to specific sub-graphs rather than treating the entire system as one complex unit, thereby maintaining comprehensive security coverage while managing analysis complexity through modular graph-based decomposition
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces a graph representation as an intermediary layer between the software product and the threat modeling analysis. This graph structure serves as a mediator that simplifies the complexity of the underlying software system by representing it in a standardized, traversable format, enabling comprehensive security analysis without directly grappling with the full complexity of the original software architecture
Data Source
AI summary
Methods, systems, and computer-readable media for automated selection of secure design patterns are disclosed. One or more graphs comprising a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges are generated. At least a portion of the nodes represent software components and at least a portion of the edges represent relationships, and the one or more graphs comprise a plurality of sub-graphs. Using a graph analysis engine, the sub-graphs are analyzed for compliance with one or more security policies. A particular sub-graph is selected based at least in part on respective policy compliance of the sub-graphs. A design template is determined based at least in part on one or more software components in the particular sub-graph. The design template comprises a configuration compliant with the one or more security policies and is provided in a development environment.