Automated DOM Event Replay for Web Vulnerability Validation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for validating security vulnerabilities in online web applications are time-consuming and inefficient, allowing potential vulnerabilities to remain unaddressed for extended periods, as they rely on manual reporting and validation by security researchers.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that records and replays Document Object Model (DOM) events, API requests, and network traffic within a web browser to automatically verify security vulnerabilities and generate detection scripts, enabling faster patch validation and deployment.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual validation by security researchers is used, then vulnerability identification can be performed, but the validation process is time-consuming and delays patch deployment

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevulnerability validation accuracyVSAvoidvalidation time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system creates automated copies of the vulnerability detection and validation process through software agents that replicate researcher actions. These agents record DOM events, API requests, and network traffic to reproduce the vulnerability exploit path, eliminating the need for manual re-validation while maintaining accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical validation processes with automated computer-based systems. Software agents perform the validation tasks that previously required human researchers to manually execute steps, thereby reducing validation time while maintaining thoroughness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Reliability

If manual vulnerability reporting and validation is performed, then security vulnerabilities can be identified, but the process is inefficient and allows vulnerabilities to remain unaddressed for extended periods

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity vulnerability detectionVSAvoidvulnerability patching speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables continuous automated vulnerability detection and validation through persistent software agents that operate continuously. Rather than periodic manual checks, the system maintains ongoing monitoring and immediate validation, accelerating the patching cycle and reducing the time vulnerabilities remain unaddressed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements automated feedback loops where vulnerability detections trigger immediate validation through software agents. The validation results feed back into the system to confirm patch effectiveness or indicate need for additional testing, creating a rapid iterative cycle that improves patching speed while maintaining detection reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If researchers manually validate vulnerability reports, then validation can be performed thoroughly, but the researcher cannot actively identify other vulnerabilities simultaneously

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevalidation thoroughnessVSAvoidvulnerability identification rate
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the validation task into independent automated software agents that can operate simultaneously with other vulnerability identification activities. This allows validation to be performed in parallel without blocking the researcher's ability to identify new vulnerabilities, maintaining both thoroughness and productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The validation process becomes self-service through automated agents that independently execute validation tasks without requiring researcher intervention. This frees the researcher to focus on identifying new vulnerabilities while the system handles validation autonomously, improving overall productivity without sacrificing validation thoroughness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Reliability

If manual validation processes are used, then vulnerability reports can be reviewed carefully, but significant delays occur between report receipt and validation completion

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevalidation accuracyVSAvoidvalidation duration
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDuration of action of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary automated validation actions immediately upon receiving a vulnerability report. Software agents are deployed to execute validation steps right away, rather than waiting for manual review, thereby reducing the overall validation duration while maintaining accuracy through comprehensive testing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS9660870B1Systems and methods of soft patching security vulnerabilities
Publication Date: 2017.05.23 SYNACK
  • US9660870B1 patent drawing
  • US9660870B1 patent drawing
  • US9660870B1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method and apparatus for soft patching security vulnerabilities is provided. A method comprises: receiving, from a first researcher computer, a report of a security vulnerability that was identified in a computer program application that the first researcher computer accessed via a first web browser, the report comprising a record of actions performed by the first researcher computer and Document Object Model (DOM) events that the application outputted when the record of actions was generated; automatically generating a detection script comprising a set of requests associated with the security vulnerability from the record of actions, wherein the detection script, when executed by an intermediary computer that is between a network and a second researcher computer, causes the intermediary computer to detect that the second researcher computer is performing actions that are recorded in the record of actions in the application accessed via the first web browser, and, in response, causing the intermediary computer to drop at least some network traffic that is forwarded in the network toward the second researcher computer; sending the detection script to the intermediary computer.