Command Injection Detection via Execution Tree Analysis
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Automated processes that utilize dynamic input are vulnerable to security risks, particularly command line injection attacks, as they execute operating system commands with user-supplied or dynamically generated arguments, which can introduce unauthorized commands.
Innovation Solution
An automation process analyzes generated operating system commands by creating an execution tree to identify security risks, comparing metrics against a behavior definitions dataset to determine if the commands align with authorized or unauthorized behaviors, and takes measures such as blocking execution or quarantining suspicious commands.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If automated processes execute operating system commands with dynamic user-supplied arguments, then processing efficiency and automation capability are improved, but security vulnerability to command injection attacks increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary analysis of automation scripts before execution by parsing them into execution trees and evaluating predicted behaviors against authorized behavior definitions. This advance security check prevents malicious commands from executing while allowing legitimate automated processes to run efficiently.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary security analysis layer between the automated process and the operating system command execution. This intermediary evaluates the automation script, predicts its behavior, and compares it against authorized behavior definitions before allowing command execution, thus mediating between automation efficiency and security requirements.
2Reliability
If security analysis is performed on automation scripts before execution, then security risk is reduced, but processing time and system complexity increase
Solution Approach 1:
The security analysis is performed as a preliminary step before script execution, parsing the automation script into an execution tree and evaluating predicted behaviors in advance. This upfront analysis ensures security reliability is established before the actual automated process runs, preventing security issues during execution.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces traditional manual security review processes with automated static analysis mechanisms. The system automatically parses scripts, generates execution trees, predicts behaviors, and compares them against authorized definitions without requiring manual intervention, thus reducing the time loss associated with security analysis.
3Measurement precision
If comprehensive behavior analysis is performed on automation commands, then detection precision of unauthorized commands is improved, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The security analysis system segments the automation script into an execution tree structure, breaking down complex commands into individual nodes representing specific operations. Each node is analyzed separately against authorized behavior definitions, enabling precise detection of unauthorized commands while managing system complexity through structured decomposition.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback by comparing predicted script behaviors against authorized behavior definitions and using the results to determine whether to allow or block execution. This feedback mechanism enables precise detection of unauthorized commands while maintaining a manageable system through rule-based decision making.
Data Source
AI summary
Input data for an operating system command of an automation process is received. The operating system command is generated based on the received input data. The generated operating system command is parsed to identify one or more metrics. The identified one or more metrics are automatically evaluated to determine a security risk associated with the generated operating system command.