Software Security Assessment Platform for Vulnerability Detection
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Companies face challenges in efficiently testing software applications for vulnerabilities due to resource constraints and the need for proprietary software protection, as existing methods are not failsafe and require significant time and expertise, often necessitating external expertise that may compromise sensitive information.
Innovation Solution
A customizable security assessment platform that determines an appropriate assurance level and test plan based on application metadata, allowing for continuous, periodic, or event-triggered assessments, correlating results to identify vulnerabilities, and using anonymizing techniques to share benchmarking data while ensuring proprietary information protection.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If comprehensive security assessment techniques are applied to software applications, then vulnerability detection capability is improved, but time consumption and resource requirements increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically adjusts assessment parameters including assurance level, test plan scope, and analysis depth based on application metadata characteristics. This allows the security assessment to adapt its resource consumption and detection thoroughness to match the specific risk profile and importance of each application, resolving the contradiction between comprehensive detection and time efficiency.
2Measurement precision
If external experts are engaged to perform security assessments, then assessment expertise is improved, but proprietary information security risks increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces an intermediary security assessment platform that acts as a trusted third-party infrastructure. This platform enables external experts to perform assessments without directly accessing proprietary application code, as the platform mediates the interaction by hosting the application in a controlled environment and exposing only necessary interfaces for security testing. This resolves the contradiction by maintaining expertise access while protecting proprietary information.
Solution Approach 2:
The system creates a copy or replica of the application environment within the security assessment platform, allowing external experts to assess vulnerabilities on this copy rather than directly on the proprietary application. The platform maintains the functional characteristics needed for assessment while isolating the original application, thus providing expertise access without exposing sensitive proprietary code.
3Speed
If frequent and continuous security assessments are performed, then vulnerability detection timeliness is improved, but system performance and resource usage worsen
Solution Approach 1:
The system implements periodic security assessments at strategically determined intervals based on application metadata, change frequency, and risk factors. Rather than continuous assessment that would constantly impact performance, the platform schedules assessments periodically while maintaining the ability to trigger immediate assessments when specific events occur, thus balancing timeliness with system performance.
Solution Approach 2:
The assessment frequency and intensity are made dynamic rather than static. The system adjusts assessment timing and depth based on real-time conditions including application changes, emerging threats, and historical vulnerability patterns. This dynamic approach allows more frequent assessment when risks are higher while reducing intensity when stable, resolving the contradiction between timely detection and performance maintenance.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
Security assessment and vulnerability testing of software applications is performed based at least in part on application metadata in order to determine an appropriate assurance level and associated test plan that includes multiple types of analysis. Steps from each test are combined into a "custom" or "application-specific" workflow, and the results of each test may then be correlated with other results to identify potential vulnerabilities and/or faults.