US20150254360A1 - System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute with audit records - Google Patents
System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute with audit records Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20150254360A1 US20150254360A1 US14/720,247 US201514720247A US2015254360A1 US 20150254360 A1 US20150254360 A1 US 20150254360A1 US 201514720247 A US201514720247 A US 201514720247A US 2015254360 A1 US2015254360 A1 US 2015254360A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- user
- computer
- data content
- content items
- access
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G06F17/30867—
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F16/00—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor
- G06F16/90—Details of database functions independent of the retrieved data types
- G06F16/95—Retrieval from the web
- G06F16/953—Querying, e.g. by the use of web search engines
- G06F16/9535—Search customisation based on user profiles and personalisation
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F16/00—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor
- G06F16/20—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor of structured data, e.g. relational data
- G06F16/28—Databases characterised by their database models, e.g. relational or object models
- G06F16/284—Relational databases
- G06F16/285—Clustering or classification
-
- G06F17/30598—
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F21/00—Security arrangements for protecting computers, components thereof, programs or data against unauthorised activity
- G06F21/60—Protecting data
- G06F21/62—Protecting access to data via a platform, e.g. using keys or access control rules
- G06F21/6218—Protecting access to data via a platform, e.g. using keys or access control rules to a system of files or objects, e.g. local or distributed file system or database
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F3/00—Input arrangements for transferring data to be processed into a form capable of being handled by the computer; Output arrangements for transferring data from processing unit to output unit, e.g. interface arrangements
- G06F3/01—Input arrangements or combined input and output arrangements for interaction between user and computer
- G06F3/048—Interaction techniques based on graphical user interfaces [GUI]
- G06F3/0481—Interaction techniques based on graphical user interfaces [GUI] based on specific properties of the displayed interaction object or a metaphor-based environment, e.g. interaction with desktop elements like windows or icons, or assisted by a cursor's changing behaviour or appearance
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04M—TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATION
- H04M11/00—Telephonic communication systems specially adapted for combination with other electrical systems
Definitions
- Various embodiments of the present invention are directed to providing a user the ability to self-declare one or more permission attributes about the user that form the basis for the filtering (e.g., the dynamic filtering) of current and/or future content.
- access to the content may thus be governed by the self-declared permission attributes (in one example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), the present invention may operate within a secure, tracked content delivery infrastructure).
- self-declared is intended to refer to an indication or selection associated with a given entity that is made by the given entity itself.
- value e.g., as used in “classification value” or “permission attribute value”
- classification value e.g., a distinct number, a range of numbers
- alphanumeric indicator e.g., a text label such as “private”, “public”, “yes”, “no”.
- Security systems typically provide a way of filtering information based on criteria that are defined by an administrator. While such a typical security system may prevent a user from gaining access to protected system content if the user is not explicitly permissioned to do so, various embodiments of the present invention provide the ability to reveal certain content only to users with certain attributes, even if, for example, the system administrator is unaware of the user's identity or affiliation and the user is unaware of the nature of the content.
- the filtering of the present invention may thus dynamically allow the same content to be accessed or not accessed by a particular user, based on self-declared permission attribute(s), in each situation.
- the ability to self-declare the permission attribute(s) may help reduce the administrative overhead associated with granting or withdrawing permissions (e.g., depending on the business process) and enhance compliance with laws and policies regulating the users.
- a security system working properly typically prevents access to information such that a user should only gain access to information that he or she should not have only in the event of mistakes by the system administrator. Unauthorized access otherwise should not occur while the system is operational.
- introducing the ability of a user to self-declare permission attribute(s) may increase the risk of abuse or violation of policies.
- Various embodiments of the present invention therefore provide the ability to track access to information.
- This audit information can be reviewed, for example, in the form of a report or sophisticated search criteria and can return a list of possible violations of regulations (e.g., a compliance officer can use the findings to investigate possible violations).
- One embodiment of the present invention relates to a computer implemented method of controlling access to at least one document, comprising: receiving for storage from a first user at least one document; receiving from the first user at least one classification associated with the stored document, wherein the classification has a value selected from at least a first classification value and a second classification value; receiving from a second user at least one permission attribute associated with the second user, wherein the permission attribute associated with the second user is self-declared and wherein the permission attribute has a value selected from at least a first permission attribute value and a second permission attribute value; and permitting the second user to access the stored document if the classification value of the stored document matches the permission attribute value declared by the second user.
- One example business reason for utilizing the present invention may stem from concerns within the syndicated loan market.
- loans are marketed to investors (including, without limitation, banks, debt funds, hedge funds).
- Many of the investors are institutional investors that invest in both the public markets (e.g., bonds, equity) and in the private loan market. Since disclosure related to certain loans often includes material non-public information (i.e., “private” information such as financial projections), these institutional investors have the potential to be conflicted with regard to insider trading regulations (e.g., regulations promulgated by the SEC).
- users within these firms may require the ability to indicate their status on a particular loan based on: a) whether they are or may trade in the stocks/bonds of that borrowing entity (e.g., on the “public” side); and/or b) have procedure to prevent trading securities of the borrower or have walls/controls that allow them to trade in securities of the borrower while also investing in the loan market (e.g., on the “private” side). Based on their position for any given borrower, they should only see appropriate disclosure materials. Even accidental exposure to “private” information for a “public” investor can be problematic (syndicating agents are typically not aware of each investor's position for any given borrower and therefore typically have no clear way to permission content to them).
- classifications may be assigned so as to not cause parties involved in pre-merger due diligence or formation of joint ventures to violate antitrust regulations.
- Users such as professional advisors, executive management or directors could be granted broader access to counterparty information than users from within operating units (e.g., sales, regional managers, etc.), so that pricing and other information can be filtered, without knowing in advance the name, affiliation or security level of all users that could be invited to access content on the system for purposes of the transaction.
- classifications may be assigned so as to preserve attorney-client privilege with respect to content. Only users that identify themselves in a manner consistent with the preservation of privilege (e.g. attorneys rendering advice or responding to requests for legal advice and persons within client organizations authorized to request and receive legal advice) would be granted access to the content associated with such classifications.
- FIG. 1A shows a web browser screenshot of the uploading and classification of a document according to an embodiment of the present invention
- FIG. 1B shows a web browser screenshot of self-declaring a permission attribute according to an embodiment of the present invention
- FIG. 1C shows a web browser screenshot of hyperlinks to certain information according to an embodiment of the present invention
- FIG. 1D shows a web browser screenshot of hyperlinks to certain information according to an embodiment of the present invention
- FIG. 1E shows a web browser screenshot related to changing a self-declared permission attribute according to an embodiment of the present invention
- FIG. 1F shows a web browser screenshot related to changing a self-declared permission attribute according to an embodiment of the present invention
- FIG. 2 shows a web browser screenshot of a report related to various self-declared permission attributes according to an embodiment of the present invention
- FIG. 3 shows a screenshot of an alert relating to certain stored information according to an embodiment of the present invention
- FIGS. 4-9 show block diagrams related to databases and database structures according to various embodiments of the present invention.
- FIG. 10 shows a block diagram of a computer infrastructure according to an embodiment of the present invention.
- FIGS. 1A-1F the classification of and controlled access to certain information according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown.
- FIG. 1A shows a web browser screenshot of the uploading and classification of a document according to an embodiment of the present invention.
- a user e.g., an administrative agent or a syndicating agent
- the choices for the classification values are “Public” and “Private”.
- the default classification value is “Private” (of course, the default classification value could be something other, such as “Public”).
- the user uploading the information is not responsible for permissions related to people who may try to access the information, only to the classification of the information.
- the uploader may change the visibility setting for the content (defined by the classification value).
- the visibility setting may be changed from “Public” to “Private” or visa versa.
- the user who may try to access the uploaded information self-declares his or her own permission attribute (having a value of either pubic or private in this example).
- the investor may be forced to make a selection before proceeding.
- the self-declaration can be made when the user enters any part of the system for accessing content relating to a subject company X and the self-declared permission attribute may remain associated with the user during this and any subsequent sessions within this portion of the system (or until such time as the user's access rights to such portion are terminated).
- the user could self-declare the permission attribute the first time he or she enters a portion of the system containing specific content (e.g., related to company X) and have the same self-declared permission attribute control access to content in other and additional portions of the system containing different content (e.g., related to company Y).
- specific content e.g., related to company X
- different content e.g., related to company Y
- FIGS. 1C and 1D information in the system may be filtered (that is, access controlled) based upon the self-declared permission attribute values of each user. That is, FIG. 1C shows a listing (e.g., in the form of hyperlinks) of information accessible by users who have self-declared the “Private” permission attribute value (this information may comprise information which had been categorized as “Private” as well as information which had been categorized as “Public”). Similarly, FIG.
- 1D shows a listing (e.g., in the form of hyperlinks) of information accessible by users who have self-declared the “Public” permission attribute value (this information may comprise information which had been categorized as “Public” (e.g., information which may be viewed by anybody generally having access to the system or a portion thereof) and may exclude information which had been categorized as “Private”).
- this information may comprise information which had been categorized as “Public” (e.g., information which may be viewed by anybody generally having access to the system or a portion thereof) and may exclude information which had been categorized as “Private”).
- FIG. 1E shows a web browser screenshot related to such changing of a self-declared permission attribute value
- FIG. 1F shows a web browser screenshot related to confirmation of the change.
- this Fig. shows a web browser screenshot of a report related to various self-declared permission attributes according to an embodiment of the present invention.
- the present invention may track access to content with associated classifications and store the access details in an audit record (a compete audit trail of what information was disclosed/accessed (e.g., relative to each given investor), when the information was disclosed/accessed and how the information was classified at the time of being disclosed/accessed may be provided).
- an audit entry may comprise the user's name and ID, date and time of the access, information related to the content and other data.
- An additional audit entry may made each and every time a user accesses any content in the system (anywhere in the system or in one or more specific portions of the system). Also recorded may be any changes to a user's self-declared permission attributes(s).
- All audit records related to the content access, the content classification and/or the user's self-declared permission attribute(s) may be made available to authorized users and administrators through reports.
- the audit record may be used to provide a compliance officer of a company or regulatory entities with the ability to track compliance and detect violations of the regulations or company policies and take corrective action.
- auditing policies can be embodied as follows: 1) in a definition in a user interface and stored in database tables and interpreted (or compiled) during runtime; 2) in a definition in configuration fields that are interpreted by business logic; and/or 3) in business logic that is incorporated into an existing system.
- this Fig. shows a screenshot of an alert relating to certain stored information according to an embodiment of the present invention. More particularly, as seen in this Fig. a communication (e.g., via email or another mechanism) may be sent to one or more users indicating a change in content (e.g., the uploading of a new document to the system, the editing of an existing document, etc.).
- a communication e.g., via email or another mechanism
- a communication may be sent to one or more users indicating a change in content (e.g., the uploading of a new document to the system, the editing of an existing document, etc.).
- an alert related to content classified as “public” will go to appropriate users who have self-declared permission attributes of “public” or “private”.
- an alert related to content classified as “private” will go to appropriate users who have self-declared permission attributes of “public” or “private” (wherein “public” users are responsible for actually accessing the content or not).
- an alert related to content classified as “private” will go to appropriate users who have self-declared a permission attribute of only “private” (wherein self-declared “public” users are not notified by the alert).
- one embodiment of the present invention enables administrators and content managers to associate classifications and allowable classification values with the content of an enterprise information system.
- These classifications may already be included in the enterprise information system or may be specifically designed by its system administrator to represent classifications of the content.
- the classifications are typically not part of the content but may describe and represent the user characteristics, security clearance levels and/or metadata associated with access to the content.
- the present invention may provide a user of an enterprise information system with the ability to dynamically select an existing or create a new information filter for current and/or future content managed by the enterprise information system.
- a user may be required to select an existing or create a new permission attribute when he or she accesses the system the first time or after new classifications/permission attributes have been added. This may be done as soon as the user passes appropriate user credentials to the enterprise information system but before the user gains access to the functions of the enterprise information system (see, e.g., FIG. 1B ). After the user creates or selects one or more permission attributes (that is, having desired values associated therewith), the system starts to release and suppress content accordingly.
- the fact that the user self-declares his or her permission attributes may comprise a differentiation from security systems in which an administrator selects a security level by user or by group and does not allow a user or member of such group to declare the presence of attributes associated with different security levels.
- permission attribute(s) may be selected that are known to the user, notwithstanding that the user may not know or anticipate the nature, purpose or substance of the content on which such permission attributes(s) will act as a filter.
- filtering may act on any single attribute or combination of multiple attributes, such that a plurality of users with the same permission attribute(s) may not have access to the same content, to the extent access is filtered by other attribute(s) or combinations of attribute(s).
- the present invention may classify information not only based upon content but upon a location of a document within the system, a publication source, a comment, a reply, and/or association with other users (among other possibilities).
- two (or more) aliases or user names per user could be defined.
- One alias could apply automatically one or more attributes for purposes of filtering access to content; the other aliases could apply to other attribute(s) for filtering access to content.
- system or system administrator can turn on or off each user's ability to self-declare permission attribute(s).
- a limited or essentially unlimited number of classifications/classification values may be defined and linked to content, independent of modifications to the core system for storing and/or distributing content.
- the extensions can be made while the system is operating or before the system is restarted (of course, any desired number of self-declared permission attributes/permission attribute values may also be utilized).
- the system may add additional columns to the content tables in the database to be used only when an additional classification information is added.
- the business logic could manage the classifications and could expand the queries as new classifications are added. Under this approach the query overhead may be minimized and the overall system performance may not be significantly impacted.
- the classifications could be placed in separate database tables and linked with a 1-n relationship to the content tables. Filtering could be accomplished using either an additional query per access to content or a table joined between the table that contains the content and the table that contains the classifications and their allowable values.
- the allowable values per classification may be defined in multiple ways including, but not limited to, the following approaches:
- the business logic and user interface may be constructed so that the classifications are considered when content is retrieved and/or updated.
- the system programmer, system administrator, and/or user could create filters depending on the required flexibility in multiple ways including, but not limited to, the following approaches:
- FIGS. 4-9 block diagrams related to databases and database structures according to various embodiments of the present invention are shown.
- all Content has associated therewith a flag that indicates if Content is public or private information. Publication and Comment are subtypes of Content and therefore inherit that flag.
- a participant is realized in the database and in the Java implementation as a relationship between the workspace and the user tables (objects in java). Therefore, the participant references the user in a particular workspace.
- the workspace contains an attribute “publicPrivateEnabled” that indicates if the public-private feature is enabled for the specific workspace.
- the participant has an attribute called “publicPrivateSelected” that indicates if the particular user has self-declared the value “public” or “private” for the associated workspace.
- the Null Filter does not perform any filtering.
- the idea here is the filter is created to filter all returned Content items based on the publicPrivate flag. So, if the user only wants to see public information, the filter will filter out each returned content item that has a private flag. If the user wants to view private and public information, the filter allows all content to pass (Null filter).
- the filter is created as a filter criteria for the query that is issued to the database or search engine. This implies that that the filter criteria is incorporated in the defined content query (e.g. in a simple SQL query the filter criteria would be included in the WHERE clause).
- this example is a generalized version of the public/private feature.
- Content or subtypes of Content have specific classification attributes that can be used for filtering.
- the Workspace maintains in associated tables (ActiveClassification) the classifications that are enabled in a particular workspace.
- the active classifications can be retrieved calling the method getActiveClassification( ).
- the participant refers to a list of selected Filters in the SelectedFilter table.
- the filters can be accessed through the method getSelectedFilters( ).
- this example is similar to the private/public case. However, here the selected filters that are active in the workspace are selected by the participant in a given workspace. The assumption is that the filter is stored and retrieved by the system (this can be done by a multitude of approaches such as object serialization or Object-relationship mapping).
- this example is essentially the same as before (e.g., FIG. 8 ) but in this scenario the search filters are embedded in the content query.
- Website Server 100 (which may have associated therewith one or more Databases 102 ) operatively communicates (e.g., via the Internet) with User 1 Computer 104 , User 2 Computer 106 and User 3 Computer 108 .
- each of User 1 Computer 104 , User 2 Computer 106 and User 3 Computer 108 may have associated therewith appropriate software (e.g., a web browser).
- each of User 1 , User 2 and User 3 may be any entity described herein (e.g., a person uploading a document, a person viewing a document, a person editing a document, a person downloading a document).
- a permission attribute may refer to a user's public/private status relative to certain information.
- Associated permission attribute values may be, for example, “private” and “public”.
- associated permission attribute values may be “yes” and “no” (indicating a private status or a public status).
- associated permission attribute values may be “1” and “0” (indicating a private status or a public status).
- a permission attribute may refer to a user's country of residence.
- Associated permission attribute values may be, for example, “USA” and “Other”.
- associated permission attribute values may be “yes” and “no” (indicating a USA residence status or another residence status).
- associated permission attribute values may be “1” and “0” (indicating a USA residence status or another residence status).
- a permission attribute may refer to a user's security level.
- Associated permission attribute values may be, for example, “High” and “Low”.
- associated permission attribute values may be “yes” and “no” (indicating a high security level or a low security level).
- associated permission attribute values may be “1” and “0” (indicating a high security level or a low security level).
- associated permission attribute values may be in a numeric range (indicating a security level within a range).
- a permission attribute may refer to a user's age.
- Associated permission attribute values may be, for example, “at least 18 years old” and “below 18 years old”. In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “yes” and “no” (indicating at least 18 years old or below 18 years old). In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “1” and “0 (indicating at least 18 years old or below 18 years old). In another example, associated permission attribute values may be a user's age.
- any number of permission attributes may be combined in controlling access to information.
- a first user who is a “private” user and is a “USA resident” may be granted access to a first set of information
- a second user who is a “public” user and is a “USA resident” may be granted access to a second set of information
- a third user who is a “private” user and is “not a USA resident” may be granted access to a third set of information
- a fourth user who is a “public” user and is “not a USA resident” may be granted access to a fourth set of information (in this example, the first through fourth sets of information may be distinct from one another or there may be overlap (partial or total) between information in one or more of the sets of information).
- an implementation of the present invention may separate the filter logic from the logic related to the security system (of course, the security system may be extended to enforce also the filter criteria).
- the content filter may be designed and implemented to facilitate compliance with federal and/or state regulations and/or with corporate policies regarding access to information (e.g., access to “private” information).
- certain users e.g., syndicating agent, administrative agent, sales desk
- an issuer may be responsible for this (e.g., by classifying uploaded documents appropriately).
- certain users e.g., syndicating agent, administrative agent, sales desk
- certain users do not need to be responsible for knowing and identifying a given investor's “status” (e.g., private or public) relative to a given issuer. Rather, each investor may be responsible for this (e.g., by self-declaring one or more permission attributes).
- certain users e.g., loan investors
- the present invention may be used to apply other classifications and filters that are built in essentially the same way as the “visibility” classification, e.g., by adding additional columns to content tables and extending business logic and database queries to reflect their meaning to the business process (under this implementation strategy the system performance may be optimized since the system can perform very efficient filtering at the database layer).
- the self-declared permission attributes of the present invention may be applied to all content managed by an enterprise information system or to a subset of the content managed by an enterprise information system. (e.g., on a client by client basis or on a deal by deal basis).
- access to specific content may be filtered by hiding certain content (e.g., providing a given user a list of hyperlinks to content which may be accessed by that user, based upon the content classification and the user's self-declared permission attribute(s), and not including in the list of hyperlinks any excluded content) or by prohibiting access to certain content (e.g., providing a given user a list of hyperlinks to content which may or may not be accessed by that user, based upon the content classification and the user's self-declared permission attribute(s), and prohibiting assess to excluded content if the user clicks an excluded hyperlink).
- the various steps may be performed in any desired order, one or more steps may be deleted and/or one or more steps may be added.
Abstract
Description
- This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/667,888, filed Apr. 1, 2005, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
- Various embodiments of the present invention are directed to providing a user the ability to self-declare one or more permission attributes about the user that form the basis for the filtering (e.g., the dynamic filtering) of current and/or future content. In this manner, access to the content may thus be governed by the self-declared permission attributes (in one example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), the present invention may operate within a secure, tracked content delivery infrastructure).
- For the purposes of describing and claiming the present invention the term “self-declared” is intended to refer to an indication or selection associated with a given entity that is made by the given entity itself.
- Further, for the purposes of describing and claiming the present invention the term “value” (e.g., as used in “classification value” or “permission attribute value”) is intended to refer to a numeric indicator (e.g., a distinct number, a range of numbers) or an alphanumeric indicator (e.g., a text label such as “private”, “public”, “yes”, “no”).
- Security systems typically provide a way of filtering information based on criteria that are defined by an administrator. While such a typical security system may prevent a user from gaining access to protected system content if the user is not explicitly permissioned to do so, various embodiments of the present invention provide the ability to reveal certain content only to users with certain attributes, even if, for example, the system administrator is unaware of the user's identity or affiliation and the user is unaware of the nature of the content.
- The filtering of the present invention may thus dynamically allow the same content to be accessed or not accessed by a particular user, based on self-declared permission attribute(s), in each situation. For example, the ability to self-declare the permission attribute(s) may help reduce the administrative overhead associated with granting or withdrawing permissions (e.g., depending on the business process) and enhance compliance with laws and policies regulating the users.
- Of note, a security system working properly typically prevents access to information such that a user should only gain access to information that he or she should not have only in the event of mistakes by the system administrator. Unauthorized access otherwise should not occur while the system is operational.
- In this regard, introducing the ability of a user to self-declare permission attribute(s) may increase the risk of abuse or violation of policies. Various embodiments of the present invention therefore provide the ability to track access to information. This audit information can be reviewed, for example, in the form of a report or sophisticated search criteria and can return a list of possible violations of regulations (e.g., a compliance officer can use the findings to investigate possible violations).
- One embodiment of the present invention relates to a computer implemented method of controlling access to at least one document, comprising: receiving for storage from a first user at least one document; receiving from the first user at least one classification associated with the stored document, wherein the classification has a value selected from at least a first classification value and a second classification value; receiving from a second user at least one permission attribute associated with the second user, wherein the permission attribute associated with the second user is self-declared and wherein the permission attribute has a value selected from at least a first permission attribute value and a second permission attribute value; and permitting the second user to access the stored document if the classification value of the stored document matches the permission attribute value declared by the second user.
- One example business reason for utilizing the present invention may stem from concerns within the syndicated loan market. In such a syndicated loan market, loans are marketed to investors (including, without limitation, banks, debt funds, hedge funds). Many of the investors are institutional investors that invest in both the public markets (e.g., bonds, equity) and in the private loan market. Since disclosure related to certain loans often includes material non-public information (i.e., “private” information such as financial projections), these institutional investors have the potential to be conflicted with regard to insider trading regulations (e.g., regulations promulgated by the SEC). As such, users within these firms may require the ability to indicate their status on a particular loan based on: a) whether they are or may trade in the stocks/bonds of that borrowing entity (e.g., on the “public” side); and/or b) have procedure to prevent trading securities of the borrower or have walls/controls that allow them to trade in securities of the borrower while also investing in the loan market (e.g., on the “private” side). Based on their position for any given borrower, they should only see appropriate disclosure materials. Even accidental exposure to “private” information for a “public” investor can be problematic (syndicating agents are typically not aware of each investor's position for any given borrower and therefore typically have no clear way to permission content to them).
- Similarly, in another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), classifications may be assigned so as to not cause parties involved in pre-merger due diligence or formation of joint ventures to violate antitrust regulations. Users such as professional advisors, executive management or directors could be granted broader access to counterparty information than users from within operating units (e.g., sales, regional managers, etc.), so that pricing and other information can be filtered, without knowing in advance the name, affiliation or security level of all users that could be invited to access content on the system for purposes of the transaction.
- Similarly, in yet another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), classifications may be assigned so as to preserve attorney-client privilege with respect to content. Only users that identify themselves in a manner consistent with the preservation of privilege (e.g. attorneys rendering advice or responding to requests for legal advice and persons within client organizations authorized to request and receive legal advice) would be granted access to the content associated with such classifications.
-
FIG. 1A shows a web browser screenshot of the uploading and classification of a document according to an embodiment of the present invention; -
FIG. 1B shows a web browser screenshot of self-declaring a permission attribute according to an embodiment of the present invention; -
FIG. 1C shows a web browser screenshot of hyperlinks to certain information according to an embodiment of the present invention; -
FIG. 1D shows a web browser screenshot of hyperlinks to certain information according to an embodiment of the present invention; -
FIG. 1E shows a web browser screenshot related to changing a self-declared permission attribute according to an embodiment of the present invention; -
FIG. 1F shows a web browser screenshot related to changing a self-declared permission attribute according to an embodiment of the present invention; -
FIG. 2 shows a web browser screenshot of a report related to various self-declared permission attributes according to an embodiment of the present invention; -
FIG. 3 shows a screenshot of an alert relating to certain stored information according to an embodiment of the present invention; -
FIGS. 4-9 show block diagrams related to databases and database structures according to various embodiments of the present invention; and -
FIG. 10 shows a block diagram of a computer infrastructure according to an embodiment of the present invention. - Among those benefits and improvements that have been disclosed, other objects and advantages of this invention will become apparent from the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying figures. The figures constitute a part of this specification and include illustrative embodiments of the present invention and illustrate various objects and features thereof.
- Detailed embodiments of the present invention are disclosed herein; however, it is to be understood that the disclosed embodiments are merely illustrative of the invention that may be embodied in various forms. In addition, each of the examples given in connection with the various embodiments of the invention is intended to be illustrative, and not restrictive. Further, the figures are not necessarily to scale, some features may be exaggerated to show details of particular components. Therefore, specific structural and functional details disclosed herein are not to be interpreted as limiting, but merely as a representative basis for teaching one skilled in the art to variously employ the present invention.
- Referring now to
FIGS. 1A-1F , the classification of and controlled access to certain information according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown. - More particularly,
FIG. 1A shows a web browser screenshot of the uploading and classification of a document according to an embodiment of the present invention. As seen in this Fig., a user (e.g., an administrative agent or a syndicating agent) indicates a target audience. In this example relating to potential investors, the choices for the classification values are “Public” and “Private”. Further, in this example the default classification value is “Private” (of course, the default classification value could be something other, such as “Public”). Of note, the user uploading the information is not responsible for permissions related to people who may try to access the information, only to the classification of the information. - Of course, after content is uploaded to the enterprise information system, the uploader, an administrator or a content manager may change the visibility setting for the content (defined by the classification value). Thus, in this example, the visibility setting may be changed from “Public” to “Private” or visa versa.
- Referring now to
FIG. 1B , it is seen that the user who may try to access the uploaded information (in this example an investor) self-declares his or her own permission attribute (having a value of either pubic or private in this example). As seen in this Fig, in this example the investor may be forced to make a selection before proceeding. In one specific example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), the self-declaration can be made when the user enters any part of the system for accessing content relating to a subject company X and the self-declared permission attribute may remain associated with the user during this and any subsequent sessions within this portion of the system (or until such time as the user's access rights to such portion are terminated). In another specific example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), the user could self-declare the permission attribute the first time he or she enters a portion of the system containing specific content (e.g., related to company X) and have the same self-declared permission attribute control access to content in other and additional portions of the system containing different content (e.g., related to company Y). - Further, as seen in
FIGS. 1C and 1D , information in the system may be filtered (that is, access controlled) based upon the self-declared permission attribute values of each user. That is,FIG. 1C shows a listing (e.g., in the form of hyperlinks) of information accessible by users who have self-declared the “Private” permission attribute value (this information may comprise information which had been categorized as “Private” as well as information which had been categorized as “Public”). Similarly,FIG. 1D shows a listing (e.g., in the form of hyperlinks) of information accessible by users who have self-declared the “Public” permission attribute value (this information may comprise information which had been categorized as “Public” (e.g., information which may be viewed by anybody generally having access to the system or a portion thereof) and may exclude information which had been categorized as “Private”). - Of course, users may be given the opportunity to change the self-declared permission attributes. That is, the initially self-declared permission attribute(s) could applied to all visits to the system or portions thereof until the user explicitly changes the user's attribute(s) within the user profile section of the enterprise information system or elsewhere (e.g., through a user interface). In this regard,
FIG. 1E shows a web browser screenshot related to such changing of a self-declared permission attribute value andFIG. 1F shows a web browser screenshot related to confirmation of the change. - Referring now to
FIG. 2 , this Fig. shows a web browser screenshot of a report related to various self-declared permission attributes according to an embodiment of the present invention. In this regard, the present invention may track access to content with associated classifications and store the access details in an audit record (a compete audit trail of what information was disclosed/accessed (e.g., relative to each given investor), when the information was disclosed/accessed and how the information was classified at the time of being disclosed/accessed may be provided). - More particularly, in one example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), an audit entry may comprise the user's name and ID, date and time of the access, information related to the content and other data. An additional audit entry may made each and every time a user accesses any content in the system (anywhere in the system or in one or more specific portions of the system). Also recorded may be any changes to a user's self-declared permission attributes(s).
- All audit records related to the content access, the content classification and/or the user's self-declared permission attribute(s) may be made available to authorized users and administrators through reports. The audit record may be used to provide a compliance officer of a company or regulatory entities with the ability to track compliance and detect violations of the regulations or company policies and take corrective action.
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), auditing policies can be embodied as follows: 1) in a definition in a user interface and stored in database tables and interpreted (or compiled) during runtime; 2) in a definition in configuration fields that are interpreted by business logic; and/or 3) in business logic that is incorporated into an existing system.
- Referring now to
FIG. 3 , this Fig. shows a screenshot of an alert relating to certain stored information according to an embodiment of the present invention. More particularly, as seen in this Fig. a communication (e.g., via email or another mechanism) may be sent to one or more users indicating a change in content (e.g., the uploading of a new document to the system, the editing of an existing document, etc.). - In one example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), an alert related to content classified as “public” will go to appropriate users who have self-declared permission attributes of “public” or “private”.
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), an alert related to content classified as “private” will go to appropriate users who have self-declared permission attributes of “public” or “private” (wherein “public” users are responsible for actually accessing the content or not).
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), an alert related to content classified as “private” will go to appropriate users who have self-declared a permission attribute of only “private” (wherein self-declared “public” users are not notified by the alert).
- As described above, one embodiment of the present invention enables administrators and content managers to associate classifications and allowable classification values with the content of an enterprise information system. These classifications may already be included in the enterprise information system or may be specifically designed by its system administrator to represent classifications of the content. The classifications are typically not part of the content but may describe and represent the user characteristics, security clearance levels and/or metadata associated with access to the content.
- In one example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), the present invention may provide a user of an enterprise information system with the ability to dynamically select an existing or create a new information filter for current and/or future content managed by the enterprise information system.
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), a user may be required to select an existing or create a new permission attribute when he or she accesses the system the first time or after new classifications/permission attributes have been added. This may be done as soon as the user passes appropriate user credentials to the enterprise information system but before the user gains access to the functions of the enterprise information system (see, e.g.,
FIG. 1B ). After the user creates or selects one or more permission attributes (that is, having desired values associated therewith), the system starts to release and suppress content accordingly. Of course, the fact that the user self-declares his or her permission attributes may comprise a differentiation from security systems in which an administrator selects a security level by user or by group and does not allow a user or member of such group to declare the presence of attributes associated with different security levels. - In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), permission attribute(s) may be selected that are known to the user, notwithstanding that the user may not know or anticipate the nature, purpose or substance of the content on which such permission attributes(s) will act as a filter.
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), filtering may act on any single attribute or combination of multiple attributes, such that a plurality of users with the same permission attribute(s) may not have access to the same content, to the extent access is filtered by other attribute(s) or combinations of attribute(s).
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), the present invention may classify information not only based upon content but upon a location of a document within the system, a publication source, a comment, a reply, and/or association with other users (among other possibilities).
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), the visibility of certain information (e.g., represented by hyperlinks to stored information) may be implemented through various columns in database tables.
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), two (or more) aliases or user names per user could be defined. One alias could apply automatically one or more attributes for purposes of filtering access to content; the other aliases could apply to other attribute(s) for filtering access to content.
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), the system or system administrator can turn on or off each user's ability to self-declare permission attribute(s).
- In another example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), a limited or essentially unlimited number of classifications/classification values may be defined and linked to content, independent of modifications to the core system for storing and/or distributing content. Depending on the implementation strategy, the extensions can be made while the system is operating or before the system is restarted (of course, any desired number of self-declared permission attributes/permission attribute values may also be utilized).
- For a limited number of classifications (e.g. 1 to 10), the system may add additional columns to the content tables in the database to be used only when an additional classification information is added. The business logic could manage the classifications and could expand the queries as new classifications are added. Under this approach the query overhead may be minimized and the overall system performance may not be significantly impacted.
- For an essentially unlimited number of classifications to be supported, the classifications could be placed in separate database tables and linked with a 1-n relationship to the content tables. Filtering could be accomplished using either an additional query per access to content or a table joined between the table that contains the content and the table that contains the classifications and their allowable values.
- The allowable values per classification may be defined in multiple ways including, but not limited to, the following approaches:
-
- 1. A user interface that allows a user to define the allowable values per classification and stores them as metadata in an allowable value table.
- 2. A configuration file that is loaded at system start or when a change is registered by the server.
- 3. Business logic that can be plugged into the existing system after the release date.
- The business logic and user interface may be constructed so that the classifications are considered when content is retrieved and/or updated.
- The system programmer, system administrator, and/or user could create filters depending on the required flexibility in multiple ways including, but not limited to, the following approaches:
-
- 1. A user interface allows system administrators and/or users to define filters based on the logical combination of classifications and allowable values. The expressions may be stored in database tables. The data may be interpreted (or compiled and executed) during runtime.
- a. In one example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), expressions such as “
attribute —1 IN {val1, val2} AND NOT attribute—2 IN {val3}” could be defined by the user and/or system administrator to define a filter that filters out all content that has the values “val1” and “val2” in its classification “attribute 1” and does not have the value “val3” in the classification “attribute 2”.
- a. In one example (which example is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive), expressions such as “
- 2. The filters could be defined by system programmers and/or system administrators in a configuration file and interpreted after the expression is loaded into the system. The expression can be the same or similar to the expression in the bullet (a) above.
- 3. The system programmer could develop filters as business logic that are incorporated into the existing system. The plug-in may be loaded when the system is registering the new plug-ins and makes the filters available to the user when the functionality is desired to be used.
- 1. A user interface allows system administrators and/or users to define filters based on the logical combination of classifications and allowable values. The expressions may be stored in database tables. The data may be interpreted (or compiled and executed) during runtime.
- Referring now to
FIGS. 4-9 block diagrams related to databases and database structures according to various embodiments of the present invention are shown. - More particularly, as seen in the example of
FIG. 4 , all Content has associated therewith a flag that indicates if Content is public or private information. Publication and Comment are subtypes of Content and therefore inherit that flag. Further, a participant is realized in the database and in the Java implementation as a relationship between the workspace and the user tables (objects in java). Therefore, the participant references the user in a particular workspace. Moreover, the workspace contains an attribute “publicPrivateEnabled” that indicates if the public-private feature is enabled for the specific workspace. Further, the participant has an attribute called “publicPrivateSelected” that indicates if the particular user has self-declared the value “public” or “private” for the associated workspace. - Referring now to
FIG. 5 , in this example the Null Filter does not perform any filtering. The idea here is the filter is created to filter all returned Content items based on the publicPrivate flag. So, if the user only wants to see public information, the filter will filter out each returned content item that has a private flag. If the user wants to view private and public information, the filter allows all content to pass (Null filter). - Referring now to the example of
FIG. 6 , essentially same mechanisms may exist here as before (e.g.,FIG. 5 ). However, in this example the filter is created as a filter criteria for the query that is issued to the database or search engine. This implies that that the filter criteria is incorporated in the defined content query (e.g. in a simple SQL query the filter criteria would be included in the WHERE clause). - Referring now to
FIG. 7 , this example is a generalized version of the public/private feature. Content or subtypes of Content have specific classification attributes that can be used for filtering. The Workspace maintains in associated tables (ActiveClassification) the classifications that are enabled in a particular workspace. The active classifications can be retrieved calling the method getActiveClassification( ). The participant refers to a list of selected Filters in the SelectedFilter table. The filters can be accessed through the method getSelectedFilters( ). - Referring now to
FIG. 8 , this example is similar to the private/public case. However, here the selected filters that are active in the workspace are selected by the participant in a given workspace. The assumption is that the filter is stored and retrieved by the system (this can be done by a multitude of approaches such as object serialization or Object-relationship mapping). - Referring now to
FIG. 9 , this example is essentially the same as before (e.g.,FIG. 8 ) but in this scenario the search filters are embedded in the content query. - Referring now to
FIG. 10 , a block diagram of a computer infrastructure according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown. More particularly, as seen in thisFIG. 10 , Website Server 100 (which may have associated therewith one or more Databases 102) operatively communicates (e.g., via the Internet) withUser 1Computer 104,User 2Computer 106 andUser 3Computer 108. Of note, each ofUser 1Computer 104,User 2Computer 106 andUser 3Computer 108 may have associated therewith appropriate software (e.g., a web browser). Of further note, each ofUser 1,User 2 andUser 3 may be any entity described herein (e.g., a person uploading a document, a person viewing a document, a person editing a document, a person downloading a document). - Finally, reference will now be made to a number of examples directed to permission attributes and permission attribute values (of course, these examples are intended to be illustrative, and not restrictive).
- More particularly, in one example (as discussed above) a permission attribute may refer to a user's public/private status relative to certain information. Associated permission attribute values may be, for example, “private” and “public”. In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “yes” and “no” (indicating a private status or a public status). In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “1” and “0” (indicating a private status or a public status).
- In another example, a permission attribute may refer to a user's country of residence. Associated permission attribute values may be, for example, “USA” and “Other”. In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “yes” and “no” (indicating a USA residence status or another residence status). In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “1” and “0” (indicating a USA residence status or another residence status).
- In another example, a permission attribute may refer to a user's security level. Associated permission attribute values may be, for example, “High” and “Low”. In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “yes” and “no” (indicating a high security level or a low security level). In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “1” and “0” (indicating a high security level or a low security level). In another example, associated permission attribute values may be in a numeric range (indicating a security level within a range).
- In another example, a permission attribute may refer to a user's age. Associated permission attribute values may be, for example, “at least 18 years old” and “below 18 years old”. In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “yes” and “no” (indicating at least 18 years old or below 18 years old). In another example, associated permission attribute values may be “1” and “0 (indicating at least 18 years old or below 18 years old). In another example, associated permission attribute values may be a user's age.
- Of course, any number of permission attributes may be combined in controlling access to information. For example (which example is intended to be illustrative, and not restrictive), a first user who is a “private” user and is a “USA resident” may be granted access to a first set of information; a second user who is a “public” user and is a “USA resident” may be granted access to a second set of information; a third user who is a “private” user and is “not a USA resident” may be granted access to a third set of information; and a fourth user who is a “public” user and is “not a USA resident” may be granted access to a fourth set of information (in this example, the first through fourth sets of information may be distinct from one another or there may be overlap (partial or total) between information in one or more of the sets of information).
- While a number of embodiments of the present invention have been described, it is understood that these embodiments are illustrative only, and not restrictive, and that many modifications may become apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art. For example, an implementation of the present invention may separate the filter logic from the logic related to the security system (of course, the security system may be extended to enforce also the filter criteria). Further, the content filter may be designed and implemented to facilitate compliance with federal and/or state regulations and/or with corporate policies regarding access to information (e.g., access to “private” information). Further still, under various embodiments of the present invention certain users (e.g., syndicating agent, administrative agent, sales desk) do not need to be responsible for knowing and identifying what information is private. Rather, an issuer may be responsible for this (e.g., by classifying uploaded documents appropriately). Likewise, under various embodiments of the present invention certain users (e.g., syndicating agent, administrative agent, sales desk) do not need to be responsible for knowing and identifying a given investor's “status” (e.g., private or public) relative to a given issuer. Rather, each investor may be responsible for this (e.g., by self-declaring one or more permission attributes). Moreover, under various embodiments of the present invention certain users (e.g., loan investors) may be provided a mechanism for identifying “private” information in order to minimize the potential for unintentional/inappropriate exposure (the present invention may provide for this to be handled in the market by a consistent industry approach). Further still, the present invention may be used to apply other classifications and filters that are built in essentially the same way as the “visibility” classification, e.g., by adding additional columns to content tables and extending business logic and database queries to reflect their meaning to the business process (under this implementation strategy the system performance may be optimized since the system can perform very efficient filtering at the database layer). Further still, the self-declared permission attributes of the present invention may be applied to all content managed by an enterprise information system or to a subset of the content managed by an enterprise information system. (e.g., on a client by client basis or on a deal by deal basis). Further still, access to specific content may be filtered by hiding certain content (e.g., providing a given user a list of hyperlinks to content which may be accessed by that user, based upon the content classification and the user's self-declared permission attribute(s), and not including in the list of hyperlinks any excluded content) or by prohibiting access to certain content (e.g., providing a given user a list of hyperlinks to content which may or may not be accessed by that user, based upon the content classification and the user's self-declared permission attribute(s), and prohibiting assess to excluded content if the user clicks an excluded hyperlink). Further still, the various steps may be performed in any desired order, one or more steps may be deleted and/or one or more steps may be added.
Claims (22)
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US14/720,247 US20150254360A1 (en) | 2005-04-01 | 2015-05-22 | System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute with audit records |
Applications Claiming Priority (3)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US66788805P | 2005-04-01 | 2005-04-01 | |
US11/395,701 US9069436B1 (en) | 2005-04-01 | 2006-03-31 | System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute |
US14/720,247 US20150254360A1 (en) | 2005-04-01 | 2015-05-22 | System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute with audit records |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US11/395,701 Continuation US9069436B1 (en) | 2005-04-01 | 2006-03-31 | System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20150254360A1 true US20150254360A1 (en) | 2015-09-10 |
Family
ID=53441740
Family Applications (2)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US11/395,701 Active 2027-10-16 US9069436B1 (en) | 2005-04-01 | 2006-03-31 | System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute |
US14/720,247 Abandoned US20150254360A1 (en) | 2005-04-01 | 2015-05-22 | System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute with audit records |
Family Applications Before (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US11/395,701 Active 2027-10-16 US9069436B1 (en) | 2005-04-01 | 2006-03-31 | System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute |
Country Status (1)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (2) | US9069436B1 (en) |
Cited By (9)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US9253176B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-02-02 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure content sharing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9251360B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-02-02 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure mobile device content viewing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9369455B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-06-14 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing an email input facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9514327B2 (en) | 2013-11-14 | 2016-12-06 | Intralinks, Inc. | Litigation support in cloud-hosted file sharing and collaboration |
US9553860B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2017-01-24 | Intralinks, Inc. | Email effectivity facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9613190B2 (en) | 2014-04-23 | 2017-04-04 | Intralinks, Inc. | Systems and methods of secure data exchange |
US20170332306A1 (en) * | 2013-09-25 | 2017-11-16 | Gamesys Ltd. | Systems, Methods, and Apparatus for Geolocation Platform Mechanics |
US10033702B2 (en) | 2015-08-05 | 2018-07-24 | Intralinks, Inc. | Systems and methods of secure data exchange |
CN111210198A (en) * | 2019-12-30 | 2020-05-29 | 广州高企云信息科技有限公司 | Information delivery method and device and server |
Families Citing this family (17)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US9298687B2 (en) * | 2010-11-29 | 2016-03-29 | Red Hat, Inc. | Automatic spreadsheet formula output validation |
US9195759B2 (en) * | 2012-03-27 | 2015-11-24 | Varonis Systems, Ltd. | Method and apparatus for enterprise-level filtered search |
US10049131B2 (en) * | 2012-07-02 | 2018-08-14 | Salesforce.Com, Inc. | Computer implemented methods and apparatus for determining user access to custom metadata |
AU2013308905B2 (en) * | 2012-08-28 | 2018-12-13 | Visa International Service Association | Protecting assets on a device |
US10157228B2 (en) * | 2013-02-22 | 2018-12-18 | Mitel Networks Corporation | Communication system including a confidence level for a contact type and method of using same |
US9270765B2 (en) * | 2013-03-06 | 2016-02-23 | Netskope, Inc. | Security for network delivered services |
US10298617B2 (en) | 2015-07-08 | 2019-05-21 | T-Mobile Usa, Inc. | Trust policy for telecommunications device |
US9866592B2 (en) * | 2015-09-28 | 2018-01-09 | BlueTalon, Inc. | Policy enforcement system |
US10120949B2 (en) * | 2015-10-29 | 2018-11-06 | Google Llc | Indexing native application data |
US9871825B2 (en) | 2015-12-10 | 2018-01-16 | BlueTalon, Inc. | Policy enforcement for compute nodes |
US10834113B2 (en) | 2017-07-25 | 2020-11-10 | Netskope, Inc. | Compact logging of network traffic events |
CN111131362A (en) * | 2018-11-01 | 2020-05-08 | 昆盈企业股份有限公司 | Method for sharing configuration file |
US11416641B2 (en) | 2019-01-24 | 2022-08-16 | Netskope, Inc. | Incident-driven introspection for data loss prevention |
US10986150B2 (en) | 2019-03-01 | 2021-04-20 | Netskope, Inc. | Load balancing in a dynamic scalable services mesh |
US11886605B2 (en) * | 2019-09-30 | 2024-01-30 | Red Hat, Inc. | Differentiated file permissions for container users |
US11856022B2 (en) | 2020-01-27 | 2023-12-26 | Netskope, Inc. | Metadata-based detection and prevention of phishing attacks |
US11947682B2 (en) | 2022-07-07 | 2024-04-02 | Netskope, Inc. | ML-based encrypted file classification for identifying encrypted data movement |
Citations (33)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5813009A (en) * | 1995-07-28 | 1998-09-22 | Univirtual Corp. | Computer based records management system method |
US20020007330A1 (en) * | 1998-12-08 | 2002-01-17 | Srihari Kumar | Interactive transaction center interface |
US6374653B1 (en) * | 1997-12-22 | 2002-04-23 | Security People, Inc. | Mechanical/electronic lock and key therefor |
US6415321B1 (en) * | 1998-12-29 | 2002-07-02 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Domain mapping method and system |
US20020138582A1 (en) * | 2000-09-05 | 2002-09-26 | Mala Chandra | Methods and apparatus providing electronic messages that are linked and aggregated |
US6539419B2 (en) * | 1998-09-11 | 2003-03-25 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing media-independent self-help modules within a multimedia communication-center customer interface |
US20030105862A1 (en) * | 2001-11-30 | 2003-06-05 | Villavicencio Francisco J. | Impersonation in an access system |
US20030105978A1 (en) * | 2001-11-13 | 2003-06-05 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Filter-based attribute value access control |
US20030217127A1 (en) * | 2002-05-15 | 2003-11-20 | Richard P. Sinn | Employing job code attributes in provisioning |
US6672506B2 (en) * | 1996-01-25 | 2004-01-06 | Symbol Technologies, Inc. | Statistical sampling security methodology for self-scanning checkout system |
US20040010791A1 (en) * | 2002-07-11 | 2004-01-15 | Vikas Jain | Supporting multiple application program interfaces |
US20040025052A1 (en) * | 2000-07-26 | 2004-02-05 | David Dickenson | Distributive access controller |
US20040034646A1 (en) * | 1998-12-30 | 2004-02-19 | Kimball Jeffrey David | Customized user interface based on user profile information |
US20040153472A1 (en) * | 2003-01-31 | 2004-08-05 | Rieffanaugh Neal King | Human resource networking system and method thereof |
US20040229199A1 (en) * | 2003-04-16 | 2004-11-18 | Measured Progress, Inc. | Computer-based standardized test administration, scoring and analysis system |
US6839850B1 (en) * | 1999-03-04 | 2005-01-04 | Prc, Inc. | Method and system for detecting intrusion into and misuse of a data processing system |
US20050018858A1 (en) * | 2002-02-08 | 2005-01-27 | John Michael Sasha | Rapid screening, threshold, and diagnostic tests for evaluation of hearing |
US20050060572A1 (en) * | 2003-09-02 | 2005-03-17 | Trulogica, Inc. | System and method for managing access entitlements in a computing network |
US20050060584A1 (en) * | 1995-02-13 | 2005-03-17 | Intertrust Technologies Corp. | Trusted infrastructure support systems, methods and techniques for secure electronic commerce, electronic transactions, commerce process control and automation, distributed computing, and rights management |
US20050102534A1 (en) * | 2003-11-12 | 2005-05-12 | Wong Joseph D. | System and method for auditing the security of an enterprise |
US20050108283A1 (en) * | 2003-11-18 | 2005-05-19 | Oracle International Corporation | Method of and system for associating an electronic signature with an electronic record |
US6904449B1 (en) * | 2000-01-14 | 2005-06-07 | Accenture Llp | System and method for an application provider framework |
US20050160065A1 (en) * | 2002-04-05 | 2005-07-21 | Lisa Seeman | System and method for enhancing resource accessibility |
US20050187972A1 (en) * | 2004-02-20 | 2005-08-25 | Kruger Michael W. | System and method for analyzing and correcting retail data |
US20060064434A1 (en) * | 2004-09-21 | 2006-03-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Case management system and method for collaborative project teaming |
US20060143447A1 (en) * | 2004-12-23 | 2006-06-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Managing elevated rights on a network |
US7085800B2 (en) * | 2000-06-01 | 2006-08-01 | Annette M. Abbott | Comprehensive system, process and article of manufacture to facilitate institutional, regulatory and individual continuing education requirements via a communications network |
US20060206622A1 (en) * | 2005-03-11 | 2006-09-14 | Ge Mortgage Holdings, Llc | Methods and apparatus for data routing and processing |
US7124101B1 (en) * | 1999-11-22 | 2006-10-17 | Accenture Llp | Asset tracking in a network-based supply chain environment |
US20070083615A1 (en) * | 2003-06-04 | 2007-04-12 | Hollebeek Robert J | Cross-enterprise wallplug for connecting internal hospital/clinic imaging systems to external storage and retrieval systems |
US7349912B2 (en) * | 2000-12-22 | 2008-03-25 | Oracle International Corporation | Runtime modification of entries in an identity system |
US7467142B2 (en) * | 2002-07-11 | 2008-12-16 | Oracle International Corporation | Rule based data management |
US20110022836A1 (en) * | 2004-01-30 | 2011-01-27 | Murphy Frederick J | Method and apparatus for securing the privacy of a computer network |
Family Cites Families (107)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
EP0736203A1 (en) * | 1993-12-23 | 1996-10-09 | Diacom Technologies, Inc. | Method and apparatus for implementing user feedback |
US5758257A (en) * | 1994-11-29 | 1998-05-26 | Herz; Frederick | System and method for scheduling broadcast of and access to video programs and other data using customer profiles |
US5630159A (en) * | 1994-12-29 | 1997-05-13 | Motorola, Inc. | Method and apparatus for personal attribute selection having delay management method and apparatus for preference establishment when preferences in a donor device are unavailable |
US6658568B1 (en) * | 1995-02-13 | 2003-12-02 | Intertrust Technologies Corporation | Trusted infrastructure support system, methods and techniques for secure electronic commerce transaction and rights management |
US5694596A (en) | 1995-05-25 | 1997-12-02 | Kangaroo, Inc. | On-line database updating network system and method |
US5903723A (en) | 1995-12-21 | 1999-05-11 | Intel Corporation | Method and apparatus for transmitting electronic mail attachments with attachment references |
US5781901A (en) | 1995-12-21 | 1998-07-14 | Intel Corporation | Transmitting electronic mail attachment over a network using a e-mail page |
US5771355A (en) | 1995-12-21 | 1998-06-23 | Intel Corporation | Transmitting electronic mail by either reference or value at file-replication points to minimize costs |
US5815665A (en) | 1996-04-03 | 1998-09-29 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for providing trusted brokering services over a distributed network |
US5898780A (en) | 1996-05-21 | 1999-04-27 | Gric Communications, Inc. | Method and apparatus for authorizing remote internet access |
SE511236C2 (en) * | 1996-11-29 | 1999-08-30 | Ericsson Telefon Ab L M | A modem with IP support |
US6029146A (en) | 1996-08-21 | 2000-02-22 | Crossmar, Inc. | Method and apparatus for trading securities electronically |
US5721827A (en) | 1996-10-02 | 1998-02-24 | James Logan | System for electrically distributing personalized information |
US5790790A (en) | 1996-10-24 | 1998-08-04 | Tumbleweed Software Corporation | Electronic document delivery system in which notification of said electronic document is sent to a recipient thereof |
US6192407B1 (en) | 1996-10-24 | 2001-02-20 | Tumbleweed Communications Corp. | Private, trackable URLs for directed document delivery |
US6385655B1 (en) | 1996-10-24 | 2002-05-07 | Tumbleweed Communications Corp. | Method and apparatus for delivering documents over an electronic network |
US6029171A (en) | 1997-02-10 | 2000-02-22 | Actioneer, Inc. | Method and apparatus for group action processing between users of a collaboration system |
US5923756A (en) | 1997-02-12 | 1999-07-13 | Gte Laboratories Incorporated | Method for providing secure remote command execution over an insecure computer network |
US5961590A (en) | 1997-04-11 | 1999-10-05 | Roampage, Inc. | System and method for synchronizing electronic mail between a client site and a central site |
GB9715256D0 (en) | 1997-07-21 | 1997-09-24 | Rank Xerox Ltd | Token-based docement transactions |
US6591291B1 (en) | 1997-08-28 | 2003-07-08 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | System and method for providing anonymous remailing and filtering of electronic mail |
US6385644B1 (en) | 1997-09-26 | 2002-05-07 | Mci Worldcom, Inc. | Multi-threaded web based user inbox for report management |
US6223177B1 (en) | 1997-10-22 | 2001-04-24 | Involv International Corporation | Network based groupware system |
US6112181A (en) * | 1997-11-06 | 2000-08-29 | Intertrust Technologies Corporation | Systems and methods for matching, selecting, narrowcasting, and/or classifying based on rights management and/or other information |
CA2309660C (en) | 1997-11-13 | 2010-02-09 | Hyperspace Communications, Inc. | File transfer system |
US6065120A (en) | 1997-12-09 | 2000-05-16 | Phone.Com, Inc. | Method and system for self-provisioning a rendezvous to ensure secure access to information in a database from multiple devices |
US6148342A (en) | 1998-01-27 | 2000-11-14 | Ho; Andrew P. | Secure database management system for confidential records using separately encrypted identifier and access request |
US6092114A (en) | 1998-04-17 | 2000-07-18 | Siemens Information And Communication Networks, Inc. | Method and system for determining the location for performing file-format conversions of electronics message attachments |
US6253326B1 (en) | 1998-05-29 | 2001-06-26 | Palm, Inc. | Method and system for secure communications |
GB2342197A (en) | 1998-09-30 | 2000-04-05 | Xerox Corp | Alerting users of mobile computing devices to document changes |
GB2342195A (en) | 1998-09-30 | 2000-04-05 | Xerox Corp | Secure token-based document server |
US6453348B1 (en) | 1998-11-06 | 2002-09-17 | Ameritech Corporation | Extranet architecture |
US6903755B1 (en) * | 1998-12-31 | 2005-06-07 | John T. Pugaczewski | Network management system and graphical user interface |
US6266692B1 (en) | 1999-01-04 | 2001-07-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for blocking all unwanted e-mail (SPAM) using a header-based password |
US6370575B1 (en) | 1999-01-08 | 2002-04-09 | Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | Web-based status/issue tracking system based on parameterized definition |
US6898636B1 (en) | 1999-02-04 | 2005-05-24 | Intralinks, Inc. | Methods and systems for interchanging documents between a sender computer, a server and a receiver computer |
US7130831B2 (en) | 1999-02-08 | 2006-10-31 | Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. | Limited-use browser and security system |
US7233992B1 (en) | 1999-04-26 | 2007-06-19 | Comerica Bank-California | Computerized method and system for managing the exchange and distribution of confidential documents |
US6718367B1 (en) | 1999-06-01 | 2004-04-06 | General Interactive, Inc. | Filter for modeling system and method for handling and routing of text-based asynchronous communications |
US6493760B1 (en) | 1999-06-28 | 2002-12-10 | Xerox Corporation | Standalone device for identifying available document services in a token-enabled operating environment |
US6581039B2 (en) | 1999-11-23 | 2003-06-17 | Accenture Llp | Report searching in a merger and acquisition environment |
JP4516649B2 (en) | 1999-12-27 | 2010-08-04 | インターナショナル・ビジネス・マシーンズ・コーポレーション | Workflow control method, system, storage medium, and server apparatus |
US7140035B1 (en) * | 2000-02-01 | 2006-11-21 | Teleran Technologies, Inc. | Rule based security policy enforcement |
US6678698B2 (en) | 2000-02-15 | 2004-01-13 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for communicating and managing information used in task-oriented projects |
CA2305249A1 (en) * | 2000-04-14 | 2001-10-14 | Branko Sarcanin | Virtual safe |
US20020162005A1 (en) * | 2000-04-24 | 2002-10-31 | Masaomi Ueda | Access right setting device and manager terminal |
US6816906B1 (en) * | 2000-05-08 | 2004-11-09 | International Business Machines Corporation | Mechanism for building access control structures for authoring systems |
US7669051B2 (en) * | 2000-11-13 | 2010-02-23 | DigitalDoors, Inc. | Data security system and method with multiple independent levels of security |
JP2003044297A (en) * | 2000-11-20 | 2003-02-14 | Humming Heads Inc | Information processing method and device controlling computer resource, information processing system, control method therefor, storage medium and program |
CA2326368A1 (en) * | 2000-11-20 | 2002-05-20 | Adexact Corporation | Method and system for targeted content delivery, presentation, management, and reporting |
US7168094B1 (en) | 2000-12-29 | 2007-01-23 | Intralinks, Inc. | Method and system for managing access to information and the transfer thereof |
US20020095499A1 (en) * | 2001-01-16 | 2002-07-18 | General Electric Company With Cover Sheet | Delegated administration of information in a database directory using attribute permissions |
WO2002057889A2 (en) * | 2001-01-19 | 2002-07-25 | Globalserve Computer Services, Ltd. | Electronic procurement ('e-procurement') |
US7949605B2 (en) | 2001-02-23 | 2011-05-24 | Mark Itwaru | Secure electronic commerce |
US7185364B2 (en) * | 2001-03-21 | 2007-02-27 | Oracle International Corporation | Access system interface |
US20020123924A1 (en) | 2001-03-05 | 2002-09-05 | Cruz Benjamin G. | Method of gathering local demand data for entertainment performances |
US7302634B2 (en) * | 2001-03-14 | 2007-11-27 | Microsoft Corporation | Schema-based services for identity-based data access |
US7047406B2 (en) * | 2001-03-21 | 2006-05-16 | Qurlo Holdings, Inc. | Method and system for providing a secure peer-to-peer file delivery network |
US7580988B2 (en) * | 2001-04-05 | 2009-08-25 | Intertrust Technologies Corporation | System and methods for managing the distribution of electronic content |
JP4327377B2 (en) | 2001-04-23 | 2009-09-09 | 富士フイルム株式会社 | Image management server, server control method, terminal device, terminal control method, and client server system |
US20030172296A1 (en) | 2002-03-05 | 2003-09-11 | Gunter Carl A. | Method and system for maintaining secure access to web server services using permissions delegated via electronic messaging systems |
US20030046313A1 (en) * | 2001-08-31 | 2003-03-06 | Arkivio, Inc. | Techniques for restoring data based on contents and attributes of the data |
US20030097410A1 (en) | 2001-10-04 | 2003-05-22 | Atkins R. Travis | Methodology for enabling multi-party collaboration across a data network |
US7725490B2 (en) | 2001-11-16 | 2010-05-25 | Crucian Global Services, Inc. | Collaborative file access management system |
JP2003223590A (en) * | 2001-11-21 | 2003-08-08 | Matsushita Electric Ind Co Ltd | System and device for using attribute information |
US20040006594A1 (en) * | 2001-11-27 | 2004-01-08 | Ftf Technologies Inc. | Data access control techniques using roles and permissions |
US7783765B2 (en) * | 2001-12-12 | 2010-08-24 | Hildebrand Hal S | System and method for providing distributed access control to secured documents |
US20030225763A1 (en) * | 2002-04-15 | 2003-12-04 | Microsoft Corporation | Self-improving system and method for classifying pages on the world wide web |
AU2003239385A1 (en) * | 2002-05-10 | 2003-11-11 | Richard R. Reisman | Method and apparatus for browsing using multiple coordinated device |
US7146367B2 (en) * | 2002-05-14 | 2006-12-05 | Advectis, Inc. | Document management system and method |
US20030226105A1 (en) | 2002-05-29 | 2003-12-04 | Mattias Waldau | Method in connection with a spreadsheet program |
US7574488B2 (en) * | 2002-05-31 | 2009-08-11 | Hitachi, Ltd. | Method and apparatus for peer-to-peer file sharing |
US20040054790A1 (en) * | 2002-09-12 | 2004-03-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Management of security objects controlling access to resources |
GB2397904B (en) * | 2003-01-29 | 2005-08-24 | Hewlett Packard Co | Control of access to data content for read and/or write operations |
US7359905B2 (en) * | 2003-06-24 | 2008-04-15 | Microsoft Corporation | Resource classification and prioritization system |
US7769626B2 (en) * | 2003-08-25 | 2010-08-03 | Tom Reynolds | Determining strategies for increasing loyalty of a population to an entity |
US20050060643A1 (en) * | 2003-08-25 | 2005-03-17 | Miavia, Inc. | Document similarity detection and classification system |
US7650644B2 (en) * | 2003-11-25 | 2010-01-19 | Sap Aktiengesellschaft | Object-based access control |
US7885901B2 (en) | 2004-01-29 | 2011-02-08 | Yahoo! Inc. | Method and system for seeding online social network contacts |
EP1719065A2 (en) * | 2004-02-26 | 2006-11-08 | Siemens Medical Solutions Health Services Corporation | A system and method for processing audit records |
US20050231738A1 (en) * | 2004-03-10 | 2005-10-20 | Elynx, Ltd. | Electronic document management system |
US7254588B2 (en) * | 2004-04-26 | 2007-08-07 | Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. | Document management and access control by document's attributes for document query system |
US20080201299A1 (en) * | 2004-06-30 | 2008-08-21 | Nokia Corporation | Method and System for Managing Metadata |
US8190907B2 (en) | 2004-08-11 | 2012-05-29 | Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. | Process and apparatus for automatically identifying user of consumer electronics |
US20060047752A1 (en) * | 2004-08-27 | 2006-03-02 | Reconda International Corp. | A System and Method to Capture, Filter, and Statistically Analyze Electronic Messages |
US7814308B2 (en) * | 2004-08-27 | 2010-10-12 | Microsoft Corporation | Debugging applications under different permissions |
US7422115B2 (en) | 2004-09-07 | 2008-09-09 | Iconix, Inc. | Techniques for to defeat phishing |
US20060136417A1 (en) * | 2004-12-17 | 2006-06-22 | General Electric Company | Method and system for search, analysis and display of structured data |
US20070185875A1 (en) * | 2006-02-09 | 2007-08-09 | International Business Machines Corporation | Extensible role based authorization for manageable resources |
US7991838B2 (en) | 2006-03-31 | 2011-08-02 | Business Objects Software Ltd. | Apparatus and method for report sharing within an instant messaging framework |
US8296834B2 (en) | 2007-08-02 | 2012-10-23 | Deluxe Corporation | Secure single-sign-on portal system |
US8549550B2 (en) | 2008-09-17 | 2013-10-01 | Tubemogul, Inc. | Method and apparatus for passively monitoring online video viewing and viewer behavior |
US20090204580A1 (en) | 2008-02-12 | 2009-08-13 | Joseph Socrates Seamon | Selectively obscuring the presentation of restricted data items |
US20100005520A1 (en) | 2008-06-06 | 2010-01-07 | Mekey Llc | Personal area social networking |
US20100138797A1 (en) | 2008-12-01 | 2010-06-03 | Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Ab | Portable electronic device with split vision content sharing control and method |
US8931034B2 (en) | 2010-06-25 | 2015-01-06 | Telefonaktiebolaget L M Ericsson (Publ) | System, method, and policy engine for granting temporary access to electronic content |
US9361395B2 (en) | 2011-01-13 | 2016-06-07 | Google Inc. | System and method for providing offline access in a hosted document service |
US9253176B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-02-02 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure content sharing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9148417B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2015-09-29 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing amendment voting in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9251360B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-02-02 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure mobile device content viewing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US20140304836A1 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2014-10-09 | Intralinks, Inc. | Digital rights management through virtual container partitioning |
US20140189483A1 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2014-07-03 | Intralinks, Inc. | Spreadsheet viewer facility |
US9553860B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2017-01-24 | Intralinks, Inc. | Email effectivity facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US20140245015A1 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2014-08-28 | Intralinks, Inc. | Offline file access |
AU2013299720B2 (en) | 2012-08-06 | 2019-07-18 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure content sharing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
EP2909770B1 (en) | 2012-10-19 | 2018-02-14 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
CA2901630A1 (en) | 2013-03-14 | 2014-09-25 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
-
2006
- 2006-03-31 US US11/395,701 patent/US9069436B1/en active Active
-
2015
- 2015-05-22 US US14/720,247 patent/US20150254360A1/en not_active Abandoned
Patent Citations (34)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20050060584A1 (en) * | 1995-02-13 | 2005-03-17 | Intertrust Technologies Corp. | Trusted infrastructure support systems, methods and techniques for secure electronic commerce, electronic transactions, commerce process control and automation, distributed computing, and rights management |
US5813009A (en) * | 1995-07-28 | 1998-09-22 | Univirtual Corp. | Computer based records management system method |
US6672506B2 (en) * | 1996-01-25 | 2004-01-06 | Symbol Technologies, Inc. | Statistical sampling security methodology for self-scanning checkout system |
US6374653B1 (en) * | 1997-12-22 | 2002-04-23 | Security People, Inc. | Mechanical/electronic lock and key therefor |
US6539419B2 (en) * | 1998-09-11 | 2003-03-25 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing media-independent self-help modules within a multimedia communication-center customer interface |
US20020007330A1 (en) * | 1998-12-08 | 2002-01-17 | Srihari Kumar | Interactive transaction center interface |
US6415321B1 (en) * | 1998-12-29 | 2002-07-02 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Domain mapping method and system |
US20040034646A1 (en) * | 1998-12-30 | 2004-02-19 | Kimball Jeffrey David | Customized user interface based on user profile information |
US6839850B1 (en) * | 1999-03-04 | 2005-01-04 | Prc, Inc. | Method and system for detecting intrusion into and misuse of a data processing system |
US7124101B1 (en) * | 1999-11-22 | 2006-10-17 | Accenture Llp | Asset tracking in a network-based supply chain environment |
US6904449B1 (en) * | 2000-01-14 | 2005-06-07 | Accenture Llp | System and method for an application provider framework |
US7085800B2 (en) * | 2000-06-01 | 2006-08-01 | Annette M. Abbott | Comprehensive system, process and article of manufacture to facilitate institutional, regulatory and individual continuing education requirements via a communications network |
US20040025052A1 (en) * | 2000-07-26 | 2004-02-05 | David Dickenson | Distributive access controller |
US20020138582A1 (en) * | 2000-09-05 | 2002-09-26 | Mala Chandra | Methods and apparatus providing electronic messages that are linked and aggregated |
US7349912B2 (en) * | 2000-12-22 | 2008-03-25 | Oracle International Corporation | Runtime modification of entries in an identity system |
US20030105978A1 (en) * | 2001-11-13 | 2003-06-05 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Filter-based attribute value access control |
US20030105862A1 (en) * | 2001-11-30 | 2003-06-05 | Villavicencio Francisco J. | Impersonation in an access system |
US7225256B2 (en) * | 2001-11-30 | 2007-05-29 | Oracle International Corporation | Impersonation in an access system |
US20050018858A1 (en) * | 2002-02-08 | 2005-01-27 | John Michael Sasha | Rapid screening, threshold, and diagnostic tests for evaluation of hearing |
US20050160065A1 (en) * | 2002-04-05 | 2005-07-21 | Lisa Seeman | System and method for enhancing resource accessibility |
US20030217127A1 (en) * | 2002-05-15 | 2003-11-20 | Richard P. Sinn | Employing job code attributes in provisioning |
US20040010791A1 (en) * | 2002-07-11 | 2004-01-15 | Vikas Jain | Supporting multiple application program interfaces |
US7467142B2 (en) * | 2002-07-11 | 2008-12-16 | Oracle International Corporation | Rule based data management |
US20040153472A1 (en) * | 2003-01-31 | 2004-08-05 | Rieffanaugh Neal King | Human resource networking system and method thereof |
US20040229199A1 (en) * | 2003-04-16 | 2004-11-18 | Measured Progress, Inc. | Computer-based standardized test administration, scoring and analysis system |
US20070083615A1 (en) * | 2003-06-04 | 2007-04-12 | Hollebeek Robert J | Cross-enterprise wallplug for connecting internal hospital/clinic imaging systems to external storage and retrieval systems |
US20050060572A1 (en) * | 2003-09-02 | 2005-03-17 | Trulogica, Inc. | System and method for managing access entitlements in a computing network |
US20050102534A1 (en) * | 2003-11-12 | 2005-05-12 | Wong Joseph D. | System and method for auditing the security of an enterprise |
US20050108283A1 (en) * | 2003-11-18 | 2005-05-19 | Oracle International Corporation | Method of and system for associating an electronic signature with an electronic record |
US20110022836A1 (en) * | 2004-01-30 | 2011-01-27 | Murphy Frederick J | Method and apparatus for securing the privacy of a computer network |
US20050187972A1 (en) * | 2004-02-20 | 2005-08-25 | Kruger Michael W. | System and method for analyzing and correcting retail data |
US20060064434A1 (en) * | 2004-09-21 | 2006-03-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Case management system and method for collaborative project teaming |
US20060143447A1 (en) * | 2004-12-23 | 2006-06-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Managing elevated rights on a network |
US20060206622A1 (en) * | 2005-03-11 | 2006-09-14 | Ge Mortgage Holdings, Llc | Methods and apparatus for data routing and processing |
Non-Patent Citations (23)
Cited By (21)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US9547770B2 (en) | 2012-03-14 | 2017-01-17 | Intralinks, Inc. | System and method for managing collaboration in a networked secure exchange environment |
US9369454B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-06-14 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing a community facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9596227B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2017-03-14 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing an email input facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US10142316B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2018-11-27 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing an email input facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9397998B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-07-19 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure content sharing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment with customer managed keys |
US9253176B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-02-02 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure content sharing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9251360B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-02-02 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure mobile device content viewing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9553860B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2017-01-24 | Intralinks, Inc. | Email effectivity facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9369455B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2016-06-14 | Intralinks, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing an email input facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US10356095B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2019-07-16 | Intralinks, Inc. | Email effectivity facilty in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US9654450B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2017-05-16 | Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing secure content sharing in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment with customer managed keys |
US9807078B2 (en) | 2012-04-27 | 2017-10-31 | Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. | Computerized method and system for managing a community facility in a networked secure collaborative exchange environment |
US10278114B2 (en) | 2013-09-25 | 2019-04-30 | Gamesys Ltd. | Systems, methods, and apparatus for geolocation platform mechanics |
US20170332306A1 (en) * | 2013-09-25 | 2017-11-16 | Gamesys Ltd. | Systems, Methods, and Apparatus for Geolocation Platform Mechanics |
US9961614B2 (en) * | 2013-09-25 | 2018-05-01 | Gamesys Ltd. | Systems, methods, and apparatus for geolocation platform mechanics |
US9514327B2 (en) | 2013-11-14 | 2016-12-06 | Intralinks, Inc. | Litigation support in cloud-hosted file sharing and collaboration |
US10346937B2 (en) | 2013-11-14 | 2019-07-09 | Intralinks, Inc. | Litigation support in cloud-hosted file sharing and collaboration |
US9762553B2 (en) | 2014-04-23 | 2017-09-12 | Intralinks, Inc. | Systems and methods of secure data exchange |
US9613190B2 (en) | 2014-04-23 | 2017-04-04 | Intralinks, Inc. | Systems and methods of secure data exchange |
US10033702B2 (en) | 2015-08-05 | 2018-07-24 | Intralinks, Inc. | Systems and methods of secure data exchange |
CN111210198A (en) * | 2019-12-30 | 2020-05-29 | 广州高企云信息科技有限公司 | Information delivery method and device and server |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
US9069436B1 (en) | 2015-06-30 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US9069436B1 (en) | System and method for information delivery based on at least one self-declared user attribute | |
US7774365B2 (en) | Organizational reference data and entitlement system | |
US11604791B2 (en) | Automatic resource ownership assignment systems and methods | |
US7673323B1 (en) | System and method for maintaining security in a distributed computer network | |
US8312516B1 (en) | Security permissions with dynamic definition | |
US5751909A (en) | Database system with methods for controlling object interaction by establishing database contracts between objects | |
Alces | Debunking the corporate fiduciary myth | |
Zekos | Ethics versus corruption in globalization | |
US7805330B2 (en) | System and method for cross-selling products and services across an enterprise | |
US20030115322A1 (en) | System and method for analyzing security policies in a distributed computer network | |
JP5524870B2 (en) | Method and system for group data management and classification | |
US8447682B2 (en) | Method of operating a venture business | |
US20120215809A1 (en) | Search mediation system | |
US9031983B2 (en) | System and method for providing a standardized data sharing platform | |
US20080163335A1 (en) | Method and arrangement for role management | |
CN102542412A (en) | Scoped resource authorization policies | |
Lautsch | The influence of regular work systems on compensation for contingent workers | |
Crook et al. | Towards an analytical role modelling framework for security requirements | |
US20070192323A1 (en) | System and method of access and control management between multiple databases | |
US8607308B1 (en) | System and methods for facilitating privacy enforcement | |
US20080027939A1 (en) | Method, system, and program product for controlling access to personal attributes across enterprise domains | |
Walczuch et al. | An analysis of the cultural motivations for transborder data flowlegislation | |
Berger | Statutory Close or Closely Held Corporation | |
Duta et al. | P4A: A new privacy model for XML | |
Mander et al. | Reserved powers in BVI and Cayman trusts: what we see now |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: INTRALINKS, INC., NEW YORK Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:FIEWEGER, ANDREW;WADLEY, MATTHEW;AZZOLINO, ANGELA;AND OTHERS;SIGNING DATES FROM 20060403 TO 20060601;REEL/FRAME:036599/0706 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA, AS COLLATERAL AGENT, NEW Y Free format text: SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:INTRALINKS, INC., AS GRANTOR;REEL/FRAME:041046/0919 Effective date: 20170119 |
|
STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: INTRALINKS, INC., MASSACHUSETTS Free format text: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY;ASSIGNOR:GOIDMAN SACHS BANK USA;REEL/FRAME:044123/0110 Effective date: 20171114 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: ROYAL BANK OF CANADA, AS COLLATERAL AGENT, CANADA Free format text: FIRST LIEN SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:INTRALINKS, INC.;REEL/FRAME:044455/0479 Effective date: 20171114 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: ROYAL BANK OF CANADA, AS COLLATERAL AGENT, CANADA Free format text: SECOND LIEN SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:INTRALINKS, INC.;REEL/FRAME:044477/0445 Effective date: 20171114 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: INTRALINKS, INC., MASSACHUSETTS Free format text: CORRECTIVE ASSIGNMENT TO CORRECT THE CONVEYING PARTY NAME PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ON REEL 044123 FRAME 0110. ASSIGNOR(S) HEREBY CONFIRMS THE RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA;REEL/FRAME:044566/0919 Effective date: 20171114 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: INTRALINKS, INC., MASSACHUSETTS Free format text: RELEASE OF 1ST LIEN SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:ROYAL BANK OF CANADA;REEL/FRAME:047587/0828 Effective date: 20181116 Owner name: INTRALINKS, INC., MASSACHUSETTS Free format text: RELEASE OF 2ND LIEN SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:ROYAL BANK OF CANADA;REEL/FRAME:047587/0836 Effective date: 20181116 |