Container Instance Startup Verification for Secure Execution Constraints
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing methods for commissioning container instances in execution environments do not adequately ensure secure and flexible deployment, particularly in dynamic and security-critical environments, risking improper execution restrictions and potential malicious use.
Innovation Solution
A method involving a configurable test function that logs and checks execution constraints during commissioning, using cryptographic fingerprints to verify compliance with admissibility criteria, and initiates alarms or prevents commissioning if criteria are not met, ensuring secure and flexible deployment of container instances.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If container instances are deployed in dynamic environments with flexible adaptability, then the system can cope with changing conditions and support downloadable applications, but the security risk increases due to potential improper execution restrictions and malicious use
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies preliminary action by performing security verification before the container instance is actually started. The method logs each step of setting up execution constraints and verifies them using cryptographic fingerprints prior to commissioning, ensuring that security checks are completed in advance to prevent malicious execution while maintaining flexible deployment capabilities
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary verification mechanism that acts as a mediator between the container deployment process and the execution environment. The logging and verification function serves as this intermediary, independently checking execution constraints and cryptographic fingerprints to ensure security without preventing the flexible adaptability of the container system
2Productivity
If traditional commissioning methods are used without verification functions, then the deployment process is simple and fast, but execution restrictions may be improperly implemented allowing too many or too few privileges
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements feedback by logging each step of execution constraint setup and verifying it against expected cryptographic fingerprints. This feedback mechanism provides confirmation that execution restrictions are properly implemented, ensuring manufacturing precision in execution restriction accuracy while maintaining deployment productivity through automated verification
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual verification methods with cryptographic verification mechanisms. Instead of relying on traditional mechanical or manual checking processes, the system uses cryptographic fingerprints and hash-based verification to automatically confirm execution restrictions, achieving both high precision and maintained productivity
3Manufacturing precision
If cryptographic verification of execution constraints is implemented, then security and manufacturing precision are improved, but the commissioning process complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies self-service by designing the verification system to automatically log and verify execution constraints without requiring external intervention. The system performs self-verification of cryptographic fingerprints and execution restrictions, reducing the perceived complexity for users while maintaining high manufacturing precision in execution restriction accuracy
4Reliability
If monitoring functions are added to verify execution environment conformity, then security is improved by detecting improper deployment, but the system complexity and resource consumption increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts the monitoring function as a separate, modular component that can be independently implemented. By taking out the verification logic into a distinct logging and verification module, the system achieves improved security through comprehensive monitoring while managing system complexity through modular design that allows the monitoring function to be added or removed based on security requirements
Data Source
AI summary
The invention relates to a method for securely starting up a container instance (C) in one or more execution environments for one or more components of a technical system, such an execution environment being designed to run the container instance. The method is characterized by the following steps: a) providing a configurable test function (PF) which is carried out prior to and/or while starting up the container instance, b) recording each step for setting up at least one execution limitation required for starting up and/or running the container instance, c) checking each recorded step using at least one permissibility criterion configured in the test function, and d) completing the start-up process and optionally running the container instance if the at least one permissibility criterion is satisfied or e) initiating a measure which provides an alarm signal or which counteracts the start-up process if at least one of the possible permissibility criteria has not been satisfied.