Capability-Based Access Control for Secure Device Interoperability

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Connected devices lack robust security and operational resilience, leading to potential system failures and high maintenance costs, and are hindered by interoperability issues, which impede market growth and user adoption.

Innovation Solution

Implement a capability-restricted system control scheme where entities are granted specific capabilities upon instantiation, with communication and resource sharing managed through a message server to limit unauthorized access and ensure secure, controlled interactions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Power

If connected devices use traditional PC-oriented operating systems with kernel-loaded drivers, then performance is improved, but security and operational resilience deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedevice performanceVSAvoidsecurity and operational resilience

Core Design Contradiction:

PowerVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments capabilities into discrete, grantable units that can be individually controlled. The capability manager divides system resources and permissions into separate capability objects that are granted to entities on demand, rather than providing broad kernel-level access. This segmentation limits the attack surface while maintaining performance for authorized operations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The capability manager acts as an intermediary between entities and system resources. Instead of entities directly accessing hardware or system functions, they must obtain capabilities through the capability manager, which verifies and controls access. This intermediary layer enforces security policies while allowing efficient resource utilization when capabilities are granted.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Adaptability or versatility

If connected devices grant broad system access to applications, then functionality is improved, but security vulnerabilities increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedevice functionalityVSAvoidsecurity vulnerabilities

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

Capabilities are dynamically granted and revoked based on operational context. The capability manager can issue temporary capabilities for specific tasks, then revoke them when no longer needed. This dynamic approach allows high functionality when capabilities are granted, while automatically reducing the attack surface when capabilities are revoked, preventing persistent vulnerabilities.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameter of access control from static (fixed permissions) to dynamic (time-limited, task-specific capabilities). Capabilities include parameters such as validity period, scope of access, and conditions of use. By changing these parameters based on operational needs, the system provides full functionality when required while minimizing security exposure during other periods.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of operation

If connected devices use manufacturer-specific platforms, then device control is improved, but interoperability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedevice controlVSAvoidinteroperability

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The capability manager implements a universal interface for accessing diverse system resources and capabilities. Different device types and manufacturers can issue standardized capability requests, and the capability manager translates these into appropriate device-specific operations. This universal layer maintains ease of control through consistent interfaces while enabling interoperability across diverse device ecosystems.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Object-affected harmful factors

If connected devices require physical presence for maintenance, then security is improved, but operational resilience deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesecurity protectionVSAvoidoperational resilience

Core Design Contradiction:

Object-affected harmful factorsVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service capability management where entities can autonomously request, receive, and manage their own capabilities without physical intervention. The capability manager provides automated verification and granting of capabilities, allowing remote maintenance and operation. This self-service approach maintains security through automated verification while achieving operational resilience through remote capability management.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS20260044594A1Capability-restricted system control

Publication Date: 2026.02.12 KRY10 LTD

AI summary

Systems and methods are directed to capability-restricted system control. In some embodiments, during the instantiation of a requesting entity in a system, the requesting entity is granted a specific set of capabilities. In these examples, capabilities used by a responding entity to fulfil a request from a requesting entity are limited to the capabilities granted the responding entity by the requesting entity. When granting the capabilities to the responding entity, the granted capabilities are restricted from use by the requesting entity. Once the request is fulfilled by the responding entity, the restrictions on the capabilities are removed, allowing the requesting entity to use those capabilities in a further request.