Entity Interaction Risk Analysis System Using Segmented Modules

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing technologies face challenges in effectively determining the extent of security risk associated with entity interactions, particularly in verifying the identity of entities and distinguishing between sanctioned and non-sanctioned interactions.

Innovation Solution

A method and system for performing an entity interaction risk analysis operation, which involves monitoring entities, identifying interactions, analyzing these interactions, determining if they are non-sanctioned, and performing appropriate security operations in response.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If entity interaction monitoring and analysis is performed to determine security risk, then security risk assessment capability is improved, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity risk assessment capabilityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the security risk assessment process into distinct functional modules: entity monitoring module, interaction identification module, analysis module, and security operation module. Each module handles a specific aspect of the risk assessment process, making the overall complex system more manageable and maintainable while improving reliability through specialized processing at each stage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary analysis module that sits between the monitoring/identification components and the security operation components. This intermediary layer processes interaction data, determines sanctioned vs. non-sanctioned status, and decides on appropriate security operations, thereby mediating the complexity between data collection and response execution.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If real-time entity identity resolution is performed to prevent unauthorized access, then security response time is improved, but processing speed requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity response timeVSAvoidprocessing speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSSpeed

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by pre-establishing entity profiles, interaction histories, and sanctioned interaction frameworks before actual security incidents occur. When an interaction is detected, the system can quickly compare it against pre-existing data structures and decision trees, enabling real-time responses without requiring complex real-time analysis from scratch.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where interaction outcomes and entity behavior patterns are continuously fed back into the monitoring and analysis components. This enables the system to learn from past interactions and improve its real-time decision-making capability, gradually reducing processing time requirements as the system becomes more efficient at pattern recognition.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Measurement precision

If comprehensive interaction analysis is performed to distinguish sanctioned and non-sanctioned interactions, then security accuracy is improved, but data processing volume increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity accuracyVSAvoiddata processing volume
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies local quality by tailoring the depth and scope of interaction analysis to the specific context and risk level of each interaction. High-risk interactions receive comprehensive analysis with multiple verification steps, while low-risk interactions undergo simplified processing. This selective approach maintains high security accuracy for critical cases while reducing overall data processing volume.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically changes analysis parameters based on interaction characteristics, entity risk profiles, and contextual factors. By adjusting the number of verification steps, depth of analysis, and types of data consulted based on the specific interaction being evaluated, the system achieves high accuracy without uniformly processing all interactions at maximum depth, thereby reducing overall data processing volume.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20250150481A1Security Analytics System for Performing a Non-Sanctioned Entity Interaction Analysis Operation When Determining Entity Risk
Publication Date: 2025.05.08 FORCEPOINT FEDERAL
  • US20250150481A1 patent drawing
  • US20250150481A1 patent drawing
  • US20250150481A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A system, method, and computer-readable medium for performing entity interaction risk analysis operation. The entity interaction risk analysis operation includes: monitoring an entity, the monitoring observing an electronically-observable data source; identifying an interaction between the entity and another entity based upon the monitoring; analyzing the interaction between the entity and the another entity; determining whether the interaction between the entity and the another entity is non-sanctioned; and, performing a security operation in response to the analyzing the interaction and the determining whether the interaction is non-sanctioned.