Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9998466B2/en
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 00:59:31+00:00

Document:
2016-07-19 Assigned to RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED reassignment RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: YACH, DAVID P., SHENFIELD, MICHAEL, LITTLE, HERBERT A., OWEN, RUSSELL N.
This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/543,324 filed on Nov. 17, 2014 by Russell N. Owen, et al. entitled, “System and Method for Secure Control of Resources of Wireless Mobile Communication Devices”, which is a continuation of U.S. Pat. No. 8,893,266 issued on Nov. 18, 2014 entitled, “System and Method for Secure Control of Resources of Wireless Mobile Communication Devices,” which is a continuation of U.S. Pat. No. 8,661,531, issued on Feb. 25, 2014 entitled, “System and Method for Secure Control of Resources of Wireless Mobile Communication Devices,” which is a continuation of U.S. Pat. No. 8,544,084, issued on Sep. 24, 2013 entitled, “System and Method for Secure Control of Resources of Wireless Mobile Communication Devices,” which is a National Stage Filing of International Application No. PCT/CA2003/001245 filed Aug. 19, 2003, by Russell N. Owen, et al. entitled, “System and Method for Secure Control of Resources of Wireless Mobile Communication Devices,” which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/404,120 filed on Aug. 19, 2002, by Russell N. Owen, et al. entitled, “System and Method for Secure Control of Resources of Wireless Mobile Communication Devices,” all of which are incorporated by reference herein as if reproduced in their entirety.
When personal computers (PCs) were first introduced, one of their greatest appeals was that the machine was controlled by its user. This was in stark contrast to the mainframe model, where multiple users shared a single machine. Resources on a mainframe computer were carefully shared between users by the operating system. On a PC having a single user at any time, this type of partitioning of resources was not necessary. As the PC began to displace the corporate mainframe computer, however, issues of control began to re-emerge. Corporate Information Technology (IT) departments, increasingly saw the desktop PC as part of the corporate infrastructure. This caused tension between an original goal of the PC revolution, that the user controls their own computer, and the new role they played in the corporation. This conflict continues today and is played out on a regular basis in companies around the world.
According to an aspect of the invention, a system for secure control of a wireless mobile communication device comprises at least one domain, each domain including an asset of the wireless mobile communication device, and a domain controller configured to receive a request to perform an operation affecting at least one of the assets, to determine whether the request originated with an entity that has a trust relationship with the domain that includes the at least one affected asset, and to permit completion of the operation where the request originated with an entity that has a trust relationship with the domain that includes the at least one affected asset.
The corporate LAN 18 is an example of a typical working environment, in which multiple computers 28 are connected in a network. It is normally located behind a security firewall 24. Within the corporate LAN 30, a message server 26, operating on a computer behind the firewall 24, acts as the primary interface for the corporation to exchange messages both within the LAN 18, and with other external messaging clients via the WAN 12. Known message servers include, for example, Microsoft™ Exchange Server and Lotus Domino™. These servers are often used in conjunction with Internet mail routers to route and deliver mail. The message server 26 may also provide additional functionality, such as dynamic database storage for data like calendars, todo lists, task lists, e-mail and documentation. Although only a message server 26 is shown in the LAN 18, those skilled in the art will appreciate that a LAN may include other types of servers supporting resources that are shared between the networked computer systems 28. The message server 26 and electronic messaging are described for illustrative purposes only. Owner control systems and methods are applicable to a wide range of electronic devices, and are in no way limited to electronic devices with messaging capabilities.
The wireless transceiver 48 enables the mobile device 30 for communications via a wireless network, as described above in conjunction with FIG. 1. The mobile device 30 is also enabled for communications with a similarly-equipped PC or other device, including another mobile device, via the interface/connector 50. In FIG. 2, the domain controller 40 is coupled to the memory 32, the wireless transceiver 48, the UI 46, and the interface/connector 50. As will be described in further detail below, access to such mobile device assets or resources is controlled by the domain controller 40. The domain controller 40 will likely be implemented most often as a software module or operating system that is executed by a mobile device processor (not shown). For example, where the mobile device 30 is a Java™ enabled device including a Java Virtual Machine (JVM) as its operating system, functionality of the domain controller 40 may be incorporated within the JVM or implemented as a software component that is executed by the JVM. Domain control at the operating system level provides more streamlined and reliable domain security than domain control at a software application level.
Properties preferably have access control. Not all properties can be read or modified by all software applications or stakeholders on a mobile device. For example, the CRM software application is able to read the name of the CRM server in the value field of the server property, but cannot modify it. Additionally, the ability to modify the server URL may be reserved for the employer or corporate IT department. This is particularly important when application properties are tied to system resources. For example, if a mobile device security firewall uses an application property to allow or deny access to a corporate gateway through the corporate communication pipe, then it would be important to prevent the software application from modifying this property. In this case, the software application cannot generate a user interface to allow editing this property, since it cannot modify the property. For this reason, it is important to have a trusted application generate the user interface for editing application properties. This trusted software application or Property Editor ensures that properties are properly labelled, to prevent a user being misled into modifying a property, and that access control rules are enforced. Each property may have access control rules for each software application, as well as for each of the stakeholders on a mobile device. Since properties may be included in every domain on a mobile device, a Property Editor is preferably implemented as a super user software application and thereby granted access to the properties in multiple domains.
One purpose of domains is to define a restricted set of objects with a common trust relationship. In general, no access to domain software applications or data is granted to external entities, but all members of a domain are completely trusted. As described above, however, properties have a further level of access control. Although certain software applications may span several domains, such a software application may only access a domain if it is trusted and has been granted access to the domain by the owner of that domain.
If a code library is a member of a domain, then it may be used to grant restricted access to domain data to software applications outside the domain. This allows a domain owner to write their own access control rules and use them to grant limited access to domain data through the library. By default, domain libraries do not allow non-domain software applications to make calls to domain libraries, but the domain owner could relax this restriction on a per library basis. In this sense, a domain library that is accessible to software applications outside a domain is analogous to a domain controller in that it controls access to domain assets or resources associated with the library. Such a domain library permits implementation of a finer granularity of domain access control or more complex access rules for a particular domain, or for specific assets or resources within a domain.
The detailed design of the communication subsystem 511, such as frequency band, component selection, power level, etc., will be dependent upon the communication network 519 in which the mobile device 500 is intended to operate. For example, a mobile device 500 intended to operate in a North American market may include a communication subsystem 511 designed to operate with the Mobitex or DataTAC mobile data communication networks and also designed to operate with any of a variety of voice communication networks, such as AMPS, TDMA, CDMA, PCS, etc., whereas a mobile device 500 intended for use in Europe may be configured to operate with the GPRS data communication network and the GSM voice communication network. Other types of data and voice networks, both separate and integrated, may also be utilized with the mobile device 500.
controlling access, using a security firewall, to the corporate data based on whether the corporate data is digitally signed using a private key, wherein the corporate data that is digitally signed is verified using a corresponding public key.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the other data comprises personal data of the user of the wireless communication device, and wherein the personal data is stored in a personal domain of the wireless communication device.
3. The method of claim 2, wherein the corporate domain and the personal domain are secure domains.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining whether the software application is in the corporate domain by using a cryptographic key from a key store.
determining whether to assign the information to the corporate domain based upon a domain policy.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the domain policy specifies that the information should be associated with the corporate domain based upon any one or more of the following including any combination thereof: a source of the information, a digital signature of the information, an access list describing allowed domain information, or an input from the user of the wireless communication device.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the corporate data includes a signed software application.
control access to the corporate data, using a security firewall, based on whether the corporate data is digitally signed using a private key, wherein the corporate data that is digitally signed is verified using a corresponding public key.
9. The wireless communication device of claim 8, wherein the other data comprises personal data of the user of the wireless communication device, and wherein the personal data is stored in a personal domain of the wireless communication device.
10. The wireless communication device of claim 9, wherein the corporate domain and the personal domain are secure domains.
11. The wireless communication device of claim 8, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the software application is in the corporate domain by using a cryptographic key from a key store.
determine whether to assign the information to the corporate domain based upon a domain policy.
13. The wireless communication device of claim 12, wherein the domain policy specifies that the information should be associated with the corporate domain based upon any one or more of the following including any combination thereof: a source of the information, a digital signature of the information, an access list describing allowed domain information, or an input from the user of the wireless communication device.
control access, using a security firewall, to the corporate data based on whether the corporate data is digitally signed using a private key, wherein the corporate data that is digitally signed is verified using a corresponding public key.
15. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the other data comprises personal data of the user of the wireless communication device, and wherein the personal data is stored in a personal domain of the wireless communication device.
16. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15, wherein the corporate domain and the personal domain are secure domains.
17. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the program code is further configured to determine whether the software application is in the corporate domain by using a cryptographic key from a key store.
19. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 18, wherein the domain policy specifies that the information should be associated with the corporate domain based upon any one or more of the following including any combination thereof: a source of the information, a digital signature of the information, an access list describing allowed domain information, or an input from the user of the wireless communication device.
20. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the corporate data includes a signed software application.
3GPP TS 23.057 V3.3.0; 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Terminals; Mobile Station Application Execution Environment (MExE); Functional Description; Stage 2; Release 1999; Sep. 2000; 60 pages.
Advisory Action dated Dec. 11, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 13/074,136, filed Mar. 29, 2011; 5 pages.
Advisory Action dated Feb. 18, 2009; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 3 pages.
Advisory Action dated Jan. 10, 2012; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 6 pages.
Advisory Action dated Jul. 23, 2010; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 5 pages.
Advisory Action dated Sep. 13, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 13/371,093, filed Feb. 10, 2012; 5 pages.
Canadian Notice of Allowance; Application 2,496,165; dated Aug. 23, 2011; 1 page.
Canadian Office Action; Application 2,496,165; dated Jun. 28, 2013; 2 pages.
Canadian Office Action; Application No. 2,496,165; dated Aug. 11, 2005; 4 pages.
Canadian Office Action; Application No. 2,496,165; dated Jul. 19, 2010; 2 pages.
Canadian Office Action; Application No. 2,496,165; dated Jul. 7, 2008; 3 pages.
Canadian Office Action; Application No. 2,757,815; dated Jan. 23, 2014; 3 pages.
Canadian Office Action; Application No. 2,757,815; dated Sep. 29, 2014; 3 pages.
Chinese Notice of Allowance; Application No. 03824087.4; dated Sep. 14, 2010; 6 pages.
Chinese Office Action; Application No. 03824087.4; dated Dec. 12, 2008; 24 pages.
Chinese Office Action; Application No. 03824087.4; dated Feb. 5, 2010; 5 pages.
European Examination Report; Application No. 03787555.6; dated Apr. 29, 2010; 5 pages.
European Examination Report; Application No. 03787555.6; dated Dec. 8, 2006; 3 pages.
European Intent to Grant; Application No. 03787555.6; dated Oct. 22, 2012; 7 pages.
Extended European Search Report; Application No. 11160321.3; dated Jul. 20, 2011; 5 pages.
Final Office Action dated Apr. 24, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 13/371,093, dated Feb. 10, 2012; 33 pages.
Final Office Action dated Dec. 10, 2008; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 12 pages.
Final Office Action dated May 21, 2010; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 12 pages.
Final Office Action dated May 21, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 13/074,136, filed Mar. 29, 2011; 15 pages.
Final Office Action dated Nov. 12, 2009; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 12 pages.
Final Office Action dated Oct. 20, 2011; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 14 pages.
Final Office Action dated Sep. 25, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 13/074,136, filed Mar. 29, 2011; 11 pages.
Gupta, Aditi, et al.; "Using Context-Profiling to Aid Access Control Decisions in Mobile Devices"; http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/assets/symposium/2011-posters/372-C48.pdf; CERIAS; Purdue University; 2011; 1 page.
Kelley, Diana; "Smartphone Security Beyond Lock and Wipe"; http://www.enterprisemobiletoday.com/features/security/article.php/3887006/Smartphone-Security-Beyond-Lock-and-Wipe.htm; Jun. 10, 2010; 4 pages.
Korpipaa, Panu, et al.; "Customizing User Interaction in Smart Phones"; Pervasive Computing; IEEE; Jul.-Sep. 2006; 9 pages.
Menezes, Alfred J., et al.; "Handbook of Applied Cryptography"; CRC Press; 1997; 12 pages.
Newton, Harry; "Newton's Telecom Dictionary;" CMP Books; 22nd Edition; 2006; 4 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Aug. 25, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 13/074,136, filed Mar. 29, 2011; 11 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Feb. 27, 2018; U.S. Appl. No. 15/207,125, filed Jul. 11, 2016; 42 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 8, 2014; U.S. Appl. No. 14/188,345, filed Feb. 24, 2014; 31 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Mar. 8, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 14 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Mar. 9, 2016; U.S. Appl. No. 14/543,324, filed Nov. 17, 2014; 14 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated May 29, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 18 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 10, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 13/371,093, filed Feb. 10, 2012; 12 pages.
Office Action dated Apr. 29, 2011; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 15 pages.
Office Action dated Apr. 8, 2009; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 12 pages.
Office Action dated Feb. 2, 2010; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 13 pages.
Office Action dated Jan. 14, 2013; U.S. Appl. No. 13/371,093, filed Feb. 10, 2012; 26 pages.
Office Action dated Jul. 31, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 14/543,324, filed Nov. 17, 2014; 9 pages.
Office Action dated Mar. 12, 2018; U.S. Appl. No. 14/980,644, filed Dec. 28, 2015; 37 pages.
Office Action dated May 30, 2008; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 9 pages.
Office Action dated Nov. 26, 2012; U.S. Appl. No. 13/074,136, filed Mar. 29, 2011; 24 pages.
Office Action dated Oct. 19, 2015; U.S. Appl. No. 14/543,324, filed Nov. 17, 2014; 37 pages.
Office Action dated Oct. 23, 2014; U.S. Appl. No. 13/074,136, filed Mar. 29, 2011; 17 pages.
Office Action dated Sep. 21, 2012; U.S. Appl. No. 10/524,353, filed Feb. 14, 2005; 16 pages.
Owen, Russell N., U.S. Appl. No. 15/207,125, filed Jul. 11, 2016; Title: System and Method for Secure Control of Resources of Wireless Mobile Communication Devices; 61 pages.
PCT International Preliminary Examination Report; Application No. PCT/CA03/01245; dated Nov. 29, 2004; 8 pages.
PCT International Search Report; Application No. PCT/CA03/01245; dated Dec. 23, 2003; 3 pages.
PCT Written Opinion; Application No. PCT/CA03/01245; dated Apr. 23, 2004; 2 pages.
PCT Written Opinion; Application No. PCT/CA03/01245; dated Sep. 20, 2004; 6 pages.
Seifert, Julian, et al.; "Supporting Mobile Privacy and Security Through Sensor-Based Context Detection"; Second International Workshop on Security and Privacy in Spontaneous Interaction and Mobile Phone Use; May 17, 2010; Helsinki, Finland; 2 pages.
Wikipedia; "Basic Access Authentication"; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_access_authentication; Mar. 20, 2013; 3 pages.
Wikipedia; "Cross-site Request Forgery"; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-site_request_forgery; Mar. 11, 2013; 6 pages.
Wikipedia; "Digest Access Authentication"; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digest_access_authentication; Mar. 4, 2013; 7 pages.
Yang, KA, et al.; "Eagle Vision: A Pervasive Mobile Device Protection System"; Iowa State University; Feb. 22, 2011; 10 pages.

References: Application No. 60
 Application No. 2
 Application No. 2
 Application No. 2
 Application No. 2
 Application No. 2
 Application No. 03824087
 Application No. 03824087
 Application No. 03824087
 Application No. 03787555
 Application No. 03787555
 Application No. 03787555
 Application No. 11160321