Finite-State Malware Behavior Analysis for Faster Threat Detection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional malware detection systems face high computing resource consumption, low analysis speed, inflexibility in updating signatures, and lack of threat prediction capabilities, leading to inefficient and ineffective malware detection.

Innovation Solution

A system utilizing a virtual machine with a behavior analyzer implemented via high-level programming instructions, which includes a behavior detection module, event processing module, event correlator, and threat handler, to analyze system events and identify malicious activity by changing finite-state machine states based on a transition table and repository of expected states.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If conventional analyzers perform a stack of operations per user, per process, per application and match with known behavior signature, then malware detection capability is achieved, but computing resource consumption is high and analysis speed is low

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemalware detection capabilityVSAvoidanalysis speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the behavior analysis process into distinct finite states representing different stages of malware execution. By dividing the analysis into discrete states and transitions, the system processes events more efficiently without sacrificing detection accuracy, thus improving analysis speed while maintaining malware detection capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary action by pre-defining finite states and transition rules that represent expected malware behavior patterns. This allows the analyzer to quickly evaluate events against pre-established criteria rather than performing comprehensive analysis from scratch, thereby increasing analysis speed while preserving detection reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If conventional analyzers perform comprehensive stack operations for behavior analysis, then detection accuracy is maintained, but computing resource consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidcomputing resource consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system extracts and focuses only on the essential events and parameters relevant to malware detection by filtering events at each finite state transition. This selective approach removes unnecessary computational overhead while preserving detection accuracy by concentrating resources on critical analysis points.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial action by performing behavior analysis only on specific events that trigger finite state transitions, rather than analyzing all events comprehensively. This selective analysis maintains detection accuracy for malicious activities while reducing overall computing resource consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Stability of the object's composition

If behavior analyzers use fixed signatures and detection rules, then consistent detection is achieved, but flexibility to update signatures is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconsistent detectionVSAvoidflexibility to update signatures
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements dynamics by allowing the finite state machine structure to remain stable while enabling dynamic updates to transition rules and event filters. This allows consistent detection based on established states while providing flexibility to adapt to new malware variants by updating transition criteria without restructuring the entire analysis framework.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system enables parameter changes by allowing modification of event filters, transition conditions, and state definitions in response to emerging threats. This maintains consistent detection through stable finite state structure while adapting to new malware patterns by changing specific parameters such as event types monitored or transition thresholds.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Device complexity

If conventional analyzers lack threat prediction features, then system simplicity is maintained, but ability to predict and track threat risk is lost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem simplicityVSAvoidthreat prediction capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary action by establishing finite states that represent progressive levels of malicious activity and defining transition rules that predict future malicious behavior based on current event patterns. This enables threat prediction and risk tracking while maintaining relative system simplicity through the structured finite state framework.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS12530454B2Behavior analysis based on finite-state machine for malware detection
Publication Date: 2026.01.20 ACRONIS INT
  • US12530454B2 patent drawing
  • US12530454B2 patent drawing
  • US12530454B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system and method are disclosed for identifying malicious activity on a target device based on behavior analysis of the target device. The system includes a behavioral analyzer run on a virtual machine connected to the target device. The virtual machine collects system events and parameters from the target device and run a script, independent of the target device, to detect a threat. The script is a set of instructions executed to analyze behavior of an object by processing and correlating the events. The script includes a rule structure which stores signatures and expressions of the known malwares. By correlating the selected event parameters with known malware parameters, it is determined whether the event imposes a threat or not. A finite state machine is used for the state transition table.