Linux Security Policy Generation via Activity Recording

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current Linux security modules (LSMs) pose high entry barriers, making it difficult for developers to maintain and develop security rules, especially in complex environments, and lack real-time interaction and fine-grained control, often requiring post-product development and reliance on deep understanding of system behavior.

Innovation Solution

A method that enables an unlocked mode to record activities, create a security threat model, perform a system test, and switch back to interactive mode, allowing for auto-generation of secure module policies and binding rules with hardware Root of Trust for secure boot, with options for adjusting granularity and real-time interaction.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional Linux security modules (SELinux, Apparmor, Smack, Tomoyo) are used, then security protection capability is provided, but entry barrier is high and developer difficulty increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity protection capabilityVSAvoiddeveloper difficulty
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary system that automatically generates security module policies by recording system activities and creating threat models. This intermediary layer bridges the gap between system administrators and complex security modules, eliminating the need for developers to directly configure complex LSM rules while maintaining strong security protection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs self-service by automatically recording its own activities, analyzing them to create threat models, and generating security policies without human intervention. The security module self-configures based on observed system behavior, dramatically reducing the skill barrier for deployment while maintaining effective security.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Reliability

If security rules are developed post-product development, then security can be implemented, but development efficiency decreases and time is lost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity implementationVSAvoiddevelopment time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables preliminary action by recording system activities during the product development phase itself, before security rules are traditionally written. The system captures security-relevant behaviors in advance, analyzes them to create threat models, and generates policies that can be applied immediately, eliminating the post-development delay.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system maintains continuous recording and analysis of system activities throughout the entire product lifecycle. Rather than performing security analysis as a discrete post-development task, the useful action of monitoring and policy generation continues uninterrupted during development, testing, and deployment phases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

3Manufacturing precision

If deep understanding of Linux system behavior and security thread model is required, then accurate security rules can be created, but ease of maintenance decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity rule accuracyVSAvoidmaintenance ease
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The system continuously records actual system behavior and uses this feedback to automatically adjust and refine security policies. The recorded activities serve as feedback that guides the threat model generation and policy creation processes, ensuring accuracy without requiring manual analysis of complex system behaviors by maintenance personnel.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of requiring direct manipulation of complex security thread models, the system creates simplified copies of security policies generated from recorded activities. These generated policies capture the essential security requirements in a maintainable format, separating the complexity of the underlying system from the simplicity of the maintenance interface.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

4Reliability

If security developer needs to understand each process deeply to prevent threats, then thorough security coverage is achieved, but productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity coverageVSAvoidrule development efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-service by automatically analyzing recorded process activities and generating comprehensive security rules without human intervention. The system reads process information, identifies security-relevant behaviors, and generates appropriate access control rules, achieving thorough security coverage while dramatically improving productivity by eliminating manual analysis requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS20220156381A1Method of Handling Security of an Operating System
Publication Date: 2022.05.19 MOXA INC
  • US20220156381A1 patent drawing
  • US20220156381A1 patent drawing
  • US20220156381A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of handling security of an operation system comprises turning on an unlocked mode of the operating system, and turning off an interactive mode of the operating system; recording a plurality of activities in the operating system in a list; creating a security threat model for the operating system according to the plurality of activities; performing a first system test on the security threat model; and turning off the unlocked mode, and turning on the interactive mode.