Network Vulnerability Testing for Third-Party Device Compliance

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing systems fail to effectively detect and mitigate vulnerabilities in network and security devices, particularly those owned or operated by third parties, leading to increased exposure risks for entity networks.

Innovation Solution

A system comprising processing devices and memory devices configured to scan entity networks, identify devices, apply rules, perform tests, generate enhanced monitoring, and take actions such as isolation or communication with third parties to address vulnerabilities.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional vulnerability detection methods are used, then detection coverage is limited, but system complexity and resource consumption increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvevulnerability detection effectivenessVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments vulnerability detection into multiple specialized components: network scanning module for device discovery, vulnerability testing module for rule-based detection, and compliance verification module for rule validation. Each module handles specific aspects of vulnerability detection independently, improving overall detection effectiveness while managing system complexity through modular design

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary vulnerability management system that coordinates between third-party devices, entity network, and security protocols. This intermediary layer manages the complexity of third-party device integration while maintaining security standards, acting as a mediator that simplifies the overall system architecture

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If continuous monitoring is implemented for all devices, then security coverage improves, but resource consumption and system complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesecurity coverageVSAvoidresource consumption

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different monitoring intensities to different devices based on their risk profiles and compliance statuses. High-priority devices with known vulnerabilities receive continuous enhanced monitoring, while compliant low-risk devices receive standard monitoring, optimizing resource consumption while maintaining adequate security coverage

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements partial continuous monitoring by applying enhanced monitoring only to specific devices that fail compliance checks or are identified as high-risk, rather than monitoring all devices continuously. This selective approach reduces resource consumption while maintaining security effectiveness

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Adaptability or versatility

If third-party devices are integrated into the network, then device functionality increases, but vulnerability exposure and security risks increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedevice integration capabilityVSAvoidvulnerability exposure

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary vulnerability assessments and compliance verification before integrating third-party devices into the network. Devices must pass security rules and vulnerability checks prior to full network access, preventing vulnerable devices from being integrated in the first place

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements continuous feedback mechanisms where the vulnerability testing module regularly reassesses integrated third-party devices. When vulnerabilities are detected, the system provides feedback by isolating the device or triggering remediation actions, creating a closed-loop security system that adapts to changing threat landscapes

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

4Reliability

If vulnerability remediation actions are taken immediately, then security posture improves, but network availability and device functionality may be affected

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesecurity postureVSAvoidnetwork availability

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts remediation actions based on device criticality and vulnerability severity. Critical devices with non-critical vulnerabilities may receive monitoring rather than immediate isolation, while non-critical devices with severe vulnerabilities receive immediate remediation. This dynamic approach balances security posture improvement with network availability

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentUS12591690B2System and method for testing network and security devices to detect and mitigate vulnerabilities

Publication Date: 2026.03.31 BANK OF AMERICA CORP

AI summary

Embodiments of the present invention provide a system for testing network and security devices to detect and mitigate vulnerabilities. The system is configured for scanning an entity network to identify one or more entity devices associated with an entity, wherein the one or more entity devices comprise at least one of security devices and network devices, identifying one or more rules for the one or more entity devices based on accessing data from one or more data repositories, performing one or more tests on the one or more entity devices based on the one or more rules identified for the one or more entity devices, determining that at least a first entity device of the one or more entity devices does not meet the one or more rules, and performing one or more actions to mitigate vulnerabilities associated with the first entity device not meeting the one or more rules.