Threat Detection Quality Control via Iterative Scanning

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional methods for evaluating the quality of antivirus engines only assess threat detection at specific points in time, lacking real-time monitoring and dynamic analysis, which leads to inefficiencies in identifying false positives and areas for improvement, particularly due to discrepancies between internal and external scanning verdicts.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method and system for iterative dynamic assessment of threat detection quality by periodically scanning objects from various sources, comparing internal and external scan results, and adjusting detection rules to maintain consistent verdicts, thereby continuously improving threat detection accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of energy

If conventional periodic testing is used to evaluate antivirus engine quality, then resource consumption is reduced, but real-time quality monitoring capability is lost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresource consumptionVSAvoidreal-time quality monitoring capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of energyVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements periodic scanning of objects from collections at defined frequencies, combining this with real-time verification against third-party services. This periodic action allows the system to balance resource consumption with maintaining current quality assessment, scanning at optimized intervals rather than continuously while still providing timely quality monitoring.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Solution Approach 2:

The system establishes feedback loops where scan results are continuously verified against third-party scanning services, and quality metrics are dynamically adjusted based on discrepancies detected. This feedback mechanism enables real-time quality monitoring by constantly comparing internal engine performance with external benchmarks and automatically responding to quality degradation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Device complexity

If manual testing and assessment methods are used, then system complexity is reduced, but assessment objectivity and efficiency are worsened

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem complexityVSAvoidassessment efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements automated self-assessment where the antivirus engine independently scans objects, compares results with third-party services, and generates quality metrics without manual intervention. This self-service approach dramatically improves assessment efficiency while maintaining manageable system complexity through automated workflows that replace manual processes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces manual mechanical testing processes with automated electronic assessment mechanisms. Automated scanning, verification, and analysis systems substitute human operators, improving efficiency and objectivity while keeping complexity controlled through standardized automated procedures rather than complex manual protocols.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Measurement precision

If comprehensive continuous scanning is implemented, then detection quality is improved, but resource consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection qualityVSAvoidresource consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements partial continuous scanning by selectively scanning objects from collections at defined frequencies rather than continuously scanning all objects. This partial action approach maintains adequate detection quality by focusing resources on high-priority objects while reducing overall resource consumption compared to comprehensive continuous scanning of all objects.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts scanning parameters including frequency, depth, and scope based on quality metrics and resource availability. When detection quality is sufficient, scanning intensity is reduced to conserve resources; when quality degradation is detected, scanning parameters are increased to restore quality, optimizing the balance between detection quality and resource consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP4113339B1Malware detection quality control
Publication Date: 2024.10.30 ACRONIS INT
  • EP4113339B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4113339B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4113339B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method of continuous development of an internal threat scan engine based on an iterative quality assessment includes iteratively performing a dynamic assessment of a quality of a threat detection with a frequency defined for each of objects in an object collection, wherein a result of the dynamic assessment includes internal and external scan results of the objects and a consistency verdict of the internal and external scan results of the objects, changing a frequency of scanning iteration of the objects based on the consistency verdict of the external and internal scan results of the objects, classifying the objects based on the result of the dynamic assessment, and creating a development task including the internal and external scan results of the objects, meta-data of the objects, and automated test results to provide details for developing a software to fix inconsistency of the internal and external scan results.