IT Change Façade for Risk Minimization via Command Interception
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
In IT environments, system administrators often execute change actions on managed endpoint resources with errors due to incorrect commands, timing, or servers, leading to costly consequences such as downtime, data loss, and business interruptions, as existing ticket systems do not effectively prevent these errors.
Innovation Solution
A system and method that intercepts change action commands, compares them to corresponding change tickets, and computes a risk estimate in real-time, alerting administrators of potential errors and requiring approval from experts if the risk exceeds a threshold, using a façade arrangement with real-time logic analysis and authentication through a graphical user interface.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a traditional ticket system is used for change management, then the process is simple and easy to operate, but it cannot prevent errors in command execution, timing, or server selection
Solution Approach 1:
A façade system is introduced as an intermediary layer between administrators and managed endpoint resources. This façade intercepts change action commands, performs real-time logic analysis and risk computation by comparing commands against change tickets and ticket history, and only allows execution if risk is below a threshold. This mediator prevents errors without requiring complex changes to the underlying system architecture.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs preliminary verification of change commands against change tickets and ticket history before execution occurs. By analyzing commands in advance and comparing them against established patterns and historical data, the system identifies potential errors in planning, command syntax, timing, or target server selection before they can cause harm.
2Reliability
If real-time risk computation and command interception are implemented, then error prevention improves, but processing time and operational speed decrease
Solution Approach 1:
The façade system provides immediate feedback to administrators about the risk level of their change commands. By computing risk estimates in real-time and presenting them to users before execution, the system enables informed decisions while maintaining operational awareness. The feedback loop allows administrators to correct issues quickly without requiring complete system re-evaluation.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs risk computation only for changes that require verification, rather than continuously analyzing all possible operations. By selectively applying risk analysis to specific change actions and using cached ticket information, the system minimizes processing overhead while maintaining comprehensive safety coverage.
3Manufacturing precision
If change commands are strictly validated against change tickets, then command accuracy improves, but ease of operation decreases due to additional verification steps
Solution Approach 1:
The façade system automatically performs verification of change commands against change tickets and ticket history without requiring manual intervention. The risk computation is performed autonomously by the system, and administrators simply need to provide their change commands through the standard interface. This self-service approach maintains ease of operation while ensuring precision.
Solution Approach 2:
The verification function is merged with the existing change management ticketing system rather than operating as a separate process. Change tickets serve dual purposes: they document planned changes and provide verification criteria for the façade system. This integration eliminates the need for separate verification steps and maintains operational simplicity.
Data Source
AI summary
A system and method of employing a facade to intercept change action commands to be carried out on a target IT endpoint resource. The intercepted commands are compared to information on a corresponding change ticket and any differences, along with the information such as target history, are used to compute a risk assessment of the risk in allowing the intercepted change action commands to be executed. Where the risk exceeds a predetermined threshold, the intercepted change action commands may be modified or eventually aborted.