Cyber Security Posture Validation via Dynamic Attack Simulation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current cyber security assessment platforms fail to effectively validate organizational network security posture, particularly in compliance with regulations and against realistic attacks, due to limited resource constraints and incomplete risk assessments, focusing mainly on external penetration risks and lacking real-time validation and remediation strategies.

Innovation Solution

A system that assesses and validates the security posture of computer networks by simulating real-world attack scenarios, collecting attack intelligence, and deploying scenarios across network assets to identify vulnerabilities and recommend remediation strategies, enabling real-time compliance validation and holistic defensive measure evaluation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If conventional perimeter-focused security assessment methods are used, then external penetration risk assessment is improved, but real-time validation and holistic defensive measure evaluation deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveexternal penetration risk assessmentVSAvoidreal-time validation capability

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system transitions from static, periodic vulnerability scanning to dynamic, real-time security posture validation. Attack scenarios are executed continuously or near-continuously against the target environment, allowing the system to adapt to changing security conditions and provide up-to-date assessment of defensive measures against realistic attack techniques.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system pre-configures comprehensive attack scenarios incorporating realistic attack techniques, adversary modeling, and multiple attack vectors before execution. These scenarios are prepared in advance with defined phases and validation criteria, enabling rapid deployment and execution when validation is needed without requiring on-demand scenario creation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If comprehensive attack scenario execution is implemented, then security posture validation accuracy is improved, but resource consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesecurity posture validation accuracyVSAvoidcomputational resource consumption

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system divides comprehensive security validation into discrete, modular attack scenarios, each representing specific attack vectors or techniques. Each scenario is further segmented into phases with individual validation criteria. This segmentation allows selective execution of relevant scenarios based on risk priority and resource availability, rather than running all possible scenarios simultaneously.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies different validation intensities and scenario complexities to different portions of the target environment based on risk assessment. High-value assets receive more comprehensive scenario execution, while lower-risk areas use simplified validation. This local differentiation optimizes resource utilization while maintaining overall validation effectiveness.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

3Adaptability or versatility

If multiple attack scenarios are executed simultaneously, then validation comprehensiveness is improved, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvevalidation comprehensivenessVSAvoidscenario management complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system employs a universal scenario execution framework that handles diverse attack scenarios through common infrastructure components. The execution engine, result aggregation system, and reporting mechanisms serve multiple scenario types simultaneously, reducing the complexity increment that would otherwise result from implementing separate validation systems for each attack vector.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Speed

If real-time security validation is implemented, then breach response time is improved, but assessment depth deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvebreach response timeVSAvoidsecurity assessment depth

Core Design Contradiction:

SpeedVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements periodic execution of attack scenarios at scheduled intervals or triggered by specific events. This periodic action balances real-time validation needs with comprehensive assessment requirements, allowing sufficient time for thorough scenario execution and analysis while maintaining current security posture awareness through regular validation cycles.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #19Periodic action

Data Source

PatentUS11637851B2Cyber security posture validation platform

Publication Date: 2023.04.25 ATTACKIQ

AI summary

A cyber security assessment platform is provided. The platform can assess the security posture of a network by deploying one or more scenarios to be executed on one or more assets on the network and analyzing the outcomes of the scenarios. A scenario can be configured to validate a device or network status, and/or mimic an unauthorized cyber-attack. Each scenario can include one or more phases defining an execution path. Related method, apparatus, systems, techniques and articles are also described.