Systems and methods for protecting against malware attacks using signature-less endpoint protection
US-11675904-B1 · Jun 13, 2023 · US
US12174959B2 · US · B2
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Publication number | US-12174959-B2 |
| Application number | US-202217666103-A |
| Country | US |
| Kind code | B2 |
| Filing date | Feb 7, 2022 |
| Priority date | Feb 7, 2022 |
| Publication date | Dec 24, 2024 |
| Grant date | Dec 24, 2024 |
A practical reading order for non-experts. Skip the full description unless you need deep technical detail.
What the patent document calls the invention.
A short plain-language summary of the technical disclosure.
Who owns or filed the patent and who is credited as inventor.
Filing, priority, publication, and grant dates set the timeline.
The legal scope of protection — read this for what is actually claimed.
Technology tags used to group this patent with similar filings.
Prior art links and similar publications in this corpus.
Official abstract text for this publication.
Automatic generation of a malware signature is disclosed. Code of a sample including packages and function names is parsed. Standard type packages and vendor type packages are filtered from the code of the sample to obtain main type packages. A signature using a fuzzy hash for the sample is generated based on the main type packages. A determination of whether the sample is malware is performed using the signature and a similarity score threshold.
Opening claim text (preview).
What is claimed is: 1. A system, comprising: a processor configured to: parse code of a sample including packages and function names; filter standard type packages and vendor type packages from the code of the sample to obtain main type packages; generate a signature using a fuzzy hash for the sample based on the main type packages, comprising to: obtain function names associated with the main type packages; concatenate the function names associated with the main type packages to obtain a concatenated string; and perform the fuzzy hash on the concatenated string to obtain the signature; and determine whether the sample is malware using the signature and a similarity score threshold; and a memory coupled to the processor and configured to provide the processor with instructions. 2. The system of claim 1 , wherein the parsing of the code of the sample comprises to: parse a table of the sample to extract the packages and the function names. 3. The system of claim 1 , wherein the filtering of the standard type packages and the vendor type packages from the code of the sample comprises to: classify the packages of the sample into main type, standard type, and vendor type; and filter the standard type packages and the vendor type packages from the packages to obtain the main type packages. 4. The system of claim 1 , wherein the fuzzy hash includes ssdeep. 5. The system of claim 1 , wherein the concatenating of the function names associated with the main type packages to obtain the concatenated string comprises to: sort the function names in alphabetical order; and concatenate the sorted function names to obtain the concatenated string. 6. The system of claim 1 , wherein the determining whether the sample is malware using the signature and the similarity score threshold comprises to: compare the signature with a signature associated with a known malware to obtain a similarity score. 7. The system of claim 6 , wherein the determining whether the sample is malware using the signature and the similarity score threshold further comprises to: determine whether the similarity score is equal to or exceeds the similarity score threshold; and in the event that the similarity score is equal to or exceeds the similarity score threshold, determine that the sample is malware. 8. The system of claim 6 , wherein the determining whether the sample is malware using the signature and the similarity score threshold further comprises to: determine whether the similarity score is equal to or exceeds the similarity score threshold; and in the event that the similarity score fails to equal or exceed the similarity score threshold, determine that the sample is benign. 9. A method, comprising: parsing, using a processor, code of a sample including packages and function names; filtering, using the processor, standard type packages and vendor type packages from the code of the sample to obtain main type packages; generating, using the processor, a signature using a fuzzy hash for the sample based on the main type packages, comprising: obtaining function names associated with the main type packages; concatenating the function names associated with the main type packages to obtain a concatenated string; and performing the fuzzy hash on the concatenated string to obtain the signature; and determining, using the processor, whether the sample is malware using the signature and a similarity score threshold. 10. The method of claim 9 , wherein the parsing of the code of the sample comprises: parsing a table of the sample to extract the packages and the function names. 11. The method of claim 9 , wherein the filtering of the standard type packages and the vendor type packages from the code of the sample comprises: classifying the packages of the sample into main type, standard type, and vendor type; and filtering the standard type packages and the vendor type packages from the packages to obtain the main type packages. 12. The method of claim 9 , wherein the fuzzy hash includes ssdeep. 13. The method of claim 9 , wherein the concatenating of the function names associated with the main type packages to obtain the concatenated string comprises: sorting the function names in alphabetical order; and concatenating the sorted function names to obtain the concatenated string. 14. The method of claim 9 , wherein the determining whether the sample is malware using the signature and the similarity score threshold comprises: comparing the signature with a signature associated with a known malware to obtain a similarity score. 15. The method of claim 14 , wherein the determining whether the sample is malware using the signature and the similarity score threshold further comprises: determining whether the similarity score is equal to or exceeds the similarity score threshold; and in the event that the similarity score is equal to or exceeds the similarity score threshold, determining that the sample is malware. 16. The method of claim 14 , wherein the determining whether the sample is malware using the signature and the similarity score threshold further comprises: determining whether the similarity score is equal to or exceeds the similarity score threshold; and in the event that the similarity score fails to equal or exceed the similarity score threshold, determining that the sample is benign. 17. A computer program product embodied in a non-transitory computer readable medium and comprising computer instructions for: parsing code of a sample including packages and function names; filtering standard type packages and vendor type packages from the code of the sample to obtain main type packages; generating a signature using a fuzzy hash for the sample based on the main type, comprising: obtaining function names associated with the main type packages; concatenating the function names associated with the main type packages to obtain a concatenated string; and performing the fuzzy hash on the concatenated string to obtain the signature; and determining whether the sample is malware using the signature and a similarity score threshold.
Assessing vulnerabilities and evaluating computer system security · CPC title
Test or assess software · CPC title
by virus signature recognition · CPC title
Related publications grouped by family.
Answers are generated from the same data shown on this page.