Malware Analysis Abstraction for Operation Log Similarity

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Signature-type detection methods struggle to effectively cope with new types of malware due to their customized nature, and existing techniques fail to accurately analyze similarity in operation logs, leading to decreased accuracy in malware analysis.

Innovation Solution

A malware analysis device that generates abstraction information from operation logs, calculates similarity with known malware logs, and specifies software matching a similarity criterion, using abstraction rules to delete or modify less important information and employing methods like Manhattan distance calculation and shortest edit script analysis.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If signature-type detection is used to detect malware, then detection accuracy for known malware is improved, but the ability to detect new types of malware deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidability to detect new malware
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent transforms operation logs from unstructured data into structured data with standardized parameters and fields. This parameterization enables consistent comparison across different malware samples by normalizing diverse log formats into a common structure, allowing both signature matching and behavioral analysis to work effectively together

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments operation logs into distinct structured components including process information, file operations, network communications, and registry modifications. Each segment is assigned specific parameters that can be independently analyzed, enabling multi-dimensional comparison between malware samples

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Loss of information

If operation logs are stored as unstructured data to preserve all operation information, then information completeness is improved, but similarity analysis accuracy deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinformation completenessVSAvoidsimilarity analysis accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter transformation by converting unstructured log entries into structured records with defined parameters such as process ID, operation type, target object, and timestamp. This structured representation preserves all operational information while enabling precise similarity measurement through parameter-based comparison

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces a structured data format as an intermediary layer between the raw operation logs and the similarity analysis process. This intermediary structure maintains complete information from the original logs while providing a standardized interface for accurate similarity calculation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS11366907B2Malware analysis device, malware analysis method, and storage medium having malware analysis program contained therein
Publication Date: 2022.06.21 NEC CORP
  • US11366907B2 patent drawing
  • US11366907B2 patent drawing
  • US11366907B2 patent drawing

AI summary

In order to analyze, efficiently and with high precision, the similarity in operation between software that is being examined and a known malware, this malware analysis device 40 is equipped with: an abstraction unit 41 for generating first abstraction information 410 obtained by abstracting first operation information 440 which indicates the result of an operation of sample software; an abstraction information storage unit 45 for storing second abstraction information 450 obtained by abstracting second operation information which indicates one or more operation results obtained for each piece of software that has been compared with the sample; a calculation unit 42 for calculating the similarity between the first abstraction information 410 and the second abstraction information 450; and a specifying unit 43 for specifying the compared software for which the similarity satisfies a criteria.