Hypervisor Enforcement of Cryptographic Policy via Instruction Analysis

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In distributed computing systems with virtualized environments, enforcing consistent cryptographic policies across multiple guest virtual machines is challenging due to the complexity of these systems and the lack of integration with hardware or operating systems, making it difficult to identify and remediate unauthorized cryptographic algorithms.

Innovation Solution

A hypervisor collects and analyzes computer executable instructions to identify patterns and structures indicative of cryptographic algorithms, comparing them against reference implementations to determine compliance with cryptographic policies, and takes remedial actions if policies are violated.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If cryptographic policies are enforced through hardware or operating system integration, then policy enforcement effectiveness is improved, but device complexity and ease of manufacture worsen due to lack of access to system hardware and operating system resources in virtualized environments

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecryptographic policy enforcement effectivenessVSAvoidsystem integration complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces a cryptographic policy enforcement module as an intermediary component that operates within the virtual machine but enforces policies at the cryptographic operation level. This mediator captures cryptographic function calls through hooks, validates them against policy rules, and either allows or blocks execution without requiring deep integration with hardware or operating system layers, thus maintaining enforcement effectiveness while avoiding excessive complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The enforcement mechanism is segmented into modular components: policy definition modules, policy evaluation modules, and enforcement modules that can be independently configured and deployed. This segmentation allows the system to enforce cryptographic policies without requiring monolithic integration into hardware or operating system, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining enforcement capability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Measurement precision

If comprehensive monitoring of executable instructions is performed to identify cryptographic algorithms, then measurement precision is improved, but use of energy and processing resources worsens

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecryptographic algorithm detection accuracyVSAvoidprocessing resource consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs partial monitoring by focusing only on cryptographic function calls rather than all executable instructions. Hook mechanisms are installed only at cryptographic library entry points, and policy evaluation is triggered only when cryptographic operations are detected, achieving sufficient detection accuracy while minimizing overall processing overhead

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The enforcement mechanism dynamically adjusts monitoring parameters based on risk assessment and policy criticality. For high-security contexts, more intensive instruction analysis is performed, while for lower-risk operations, lighter monitoring is applied, optimizing the balance between detection precision and resource consumption

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Adaptability or versatility

If cryptographic policy enforcement is implemented in distributed systems with varied computing environments, then adaptability is improved, but ease of operation worsens due to difficulty in identifying and remediating unauthorized algorithms

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecompatibility with varied computing environmentsVSAvoidpolicy identification and remediation ease
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The cryptographic policy enforcement module is designed as a universal component that can be deployed across diverse computing environments including different virtualization platforms, operating systems, and hardware architectures. The module provides multiple functions: policy enforcement, violation detection, logging, and remediation guidance, all through a unified interface that simplifies operation across varied environments

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements comprehensive feedback mechanisms that automatically log cryptographic operations, detect policy violations, and provide detailed information about unauthorized algorithms. This feedback is presented through centralized management interfaces that guide administrators through remediation steps, significantly improving ease of operation in distributed environments

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10817601B2Hypervisor enforcement of cryptographic policy
Publication Date: 2020.10.27 AMAZON TECH INC
  • US10817601B2 patent drawing
  • US10817601B2 patent drawing
  • US10817601B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Techniques for restricting the execution of algorithms contained in applications executing on virtual machines executing within a computer system are described herein. A first sampled set of computer executable instructions is gathered from a virtual machine by a controlling domain and compared against a reference set of computer executable instructions. If the first set is similar to the reference set, and if the execution of the algorithm corresponding to the reference set is restricted by one or more computer system polices, one or more operations limiting the execution of the restricted algorithm are performed, thus ensuring conformance with the computer system policies.