Dynamic Remote Access Approval for Restricted User Actions

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing remote access solutions for IoT devices lack real-time control over user actions, leading to tedious and error-prone processes for administrators, as users are often required to communicate actions verbally or through text, which can result in incorrect execution and frequent interruptions.

Innovation Solution

Implementing real-time granular administrator approval by intercepting user actions and allowing users to perform low-level interactions, with admin approval required before executing critical actions, using visual and textual indications, and leveraging machine learning for automated approval mechanisms.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If static constraints are configured prior to user session, then security against dangerous actions is improved, but real-time control over specific user actions is lost

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesecurityVSAvoidreal-time control
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system transitions from static pre-configured constraints to dynamic real-time approval mechanisms. The approval interface dynamically presents user actions to administrators for case-by-case approval or denial, allowing security policies to adapt to actual runtime conditions rather than relying on predetermined static rules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

An intermediary approval interface is introduced between the user and the remote device. When a user attempts a restricted action, the system intercepts the action, presents it through an approval interface to the administrator, and only executes it after approval. This mediator enables real-time control without completely blocking user productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If admin terminates remote session to revoke access, then security is improved, but user experience deteriorates due to frequent interruptions

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesecurityVSAvoiduser experience
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments access control into granular individual actions rather than treating the entire session as a single unit. Instead of terminating the whole session to revoke access, the system can deny specific restricted actions while allowing other permitted actions to continue, maintaining session continuity and improving user experience.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial control by selectively approving or denying specific user actions rather than completely revoking access. This partial action approach maintains security for critical operations while allowing non-critical operations to proceed uninterrupted, reducing the impact on user experience.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Reliability

If highlight-and-communicate approach is used, then security control is improved, but productivity decreases due to tedious communication process

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity controlVSAvoidefficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables user self-service by allowing users to directly initiate and execute actions on the remote device through the approval interface. Users can type commands, click elements, and perform operations themselves rather than having to communicate each action verbally or via text to the administrator, who would then execute it manually.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces the manual mechanical process of highlight-and-communicate with an automated digital approval workflow. Instead of users highlighting screen portions and administrators manually typing commands, the system captures user actions programmatically, presents them for approval through an interface, and executes approved actions automatically, eliminating the tedious communication loop.

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

4Reliability

If admin executes each action manually, then security against incorrect actions is improved, but time consumption increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveaccuracyVSAvoidtime consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary validation and presentation of user actions before execution. The approval interface pre-processes captured user actions, presents them to administrators for review, and only executes actions that receive approval. This preliminary action mechanism ensures accuracy while reducing time consumption by automating the execution of approved actions rather than requiring manual re-typing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback loop where user actions are captured, presented to administrators for approval, and execution status is fed back to users. This real-time feedback mechanism maintains security through administrator oversight while significantly reducing time consumption by automatically executing approved actions and immediately notifying users of the outcome, eliminating the need for repeated communication cycles.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS20250323915A1Granular administrator approval of user commands and actions in remote access sessions
Publication Date: 2025.10.16 CISCO TECHNOLOGY INC
  • US20250323915A1 patent drawing
  • US20250323915A1 patent drawing
  • US20250323915A1 patent drawing

AI summary

In one embodiment, a method for granular administrator approval of user commands and actions in remote access sessions includes providing, by a device, a remote access session to a remote device for both a user device and an overseeing device. The overseeing device may display user device actions on the remote access session. In addition, such methods can further include determining, by the device, a set of permitted actions and a set of restricted actions that the user device is allowed to perform on the remote device in the remote access session, allowing, by the device, user device actions when permitted, and requesting by the device, real-time permission from the overseeing device when user device action is restricted.