Patent Description:
The present invention relates generally to a system for and a method of determining data connections between software applications as those applications are built rather than after their complete deployment.

Software applications very rarely run in isolation. In fact, software applications, particularly applications that process data from diverse sources, may receive and send data to dozens of different locations throughout a series of connected resources. If the application code is operating as intended, this interaction doesn't generally cause problems. However, should the application fail to operate as intended or if other applications with which the application interacts fail, the result may be data corruption or erroneous results. The impact of corrupt data or erroneous results that are relied on to the detriment of an organization can be costly. Current methods of tracking interactions between applications involve adding intended data connections into program requirements documents and test plans. These amount to intentions rather than results as coding errors or unintended program operation can cause connections to break or perform in an unexpected manner. Thus, existing methods of documenting connections between applications can result in lack of visibility to actual connections, the inability to trace connection issues and the inability to validate interconnections in an application that has been introduced into production. What is needed is a system for and a method of defining application connectivity in such a way that it is self-regulating.

<CIT> describes a system and a method for efficient component-based application development.

<CIT> describes a system and a method for producing a firewall rule set.

In exemplary embodiments, connectivity between an application and other applications or data sources is encoded in the source code (source code, object code, scripts, interpreted code, and the like) such that these relationships are defined and can be used to automatically generate connectivity maps. This allows information flow to be reliably mapped without having to manually create maps that may not accurately reflect the actual operating characteristics of the application when in production use.

In some exemplary embodiments, the connectivity requirements are defined in programming documentation as is normally the case. However, these definitions are then also coded into the source code by the programmer. These coded definitions serve to allow for the automated creation of information flow maps. In exemplary embodiments, the coding is located in metadata (e.g., environmental labels) associated with an application. In some exemplary embodiments, the automated creation of flow maps results in data that can be readily compared to actual application connections in order to detect discrepancies that could indicate errors in the operation of the application or its environment. The connectivity requirements serve to indicate what sort of resources the application may consume and also what data should be expected to be published by the application when it is functioning normally.

The above and other aspects and advantages of the general inventive concepts will become more readily apparent from the following description and figures, illustrating by way of example the principles of the general inventive concepts.

These and other features of the general inventive concept will become better understood with regard to the following description and accompanying drawings in which:.

A connectivity map <NUM> is illustrated in <FIG>. As shown, an application <NUM> may be connected to a plurality of other applications or data sources <NUM>. The connectivity map serves to illustrate this connection in a graphical manner that is easily interpreted by a human being. Alternatively, a connectivity map <NUM> may be comprised of electronic data that can be consumed by system monitoring and provisioning systems to better understand the characteristics of applications running on the particular data system. In the connectivity map <NUM>, the connections <NUM> between the application <NUM> and other applications or data sources <NUM> are illustrated as arrows. Known approaches to creating such a map involve a manual review of the documented connections between an application and its data sources or recipients. As one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, such a manual process may not necessarily accurately reflect the actual connections of code as implemented. As such, each time a new application or resource is deployed, a new map must be created if an accurate understanding of the application's connections is desired.

In an exemplary embodiment, the connectivity is defined by the application developer. As illustrated in the flow diagram <NUM> of <FIG>, the application owner <NUM> enters application data into the application service registry <NUM>. This information comprises service definitions <NUM>, connectivity definitions <NUM>, common shared service definitions <NUM>, and data publication/subscription definitions <NUM>. This information is used to create application requirements <NUM> which are part of the software development timeline <NUM> illustrated in <FIG>. In combination with other information, these definitions are used to create an application databook <NUM> which is used to generate further requirements and design information for the requirements <NUM> and design <NUM> portions of the software development timeline <NUM>. A source data repository <NUM> collects data on service definitions <NUM>, connectivity definitions <NUM>, and common shared service definitions <NUM> and provides that data to a firewall rule patterns manager <NUM> and an application deployment manager <NUM>. The firewall rules pattern manager <NUM> uses the various definition files in order to establish firewall enforcement settings <NUM> for deployment at one or more firewalls using a firewall management platform <NUM>. In an exemplary embodiment, a representational state transfer application program interface (REST API) is used, then a set of firewall rules is applied. In certain exemplary embodiments, these rules consist of a <NUM>-tuple (source IP address, destination IP address, source port, destination port, and protocol). The rules can be embedded in either HTTP POST method (creating a new firewall rule), HTTP PUT method (modifying a firewall rule), or HTTP DELETE method (deleting a firewall rule) to update the database in the firewall management platform <NUM>. Subsequently, the firewall management platform <NUM> will push the updated rules to the target firewall devices. This arrangement enables the firewall rule patterns manager <NUM> to automatically configure the firewall enforcement settings <NUM> to accommodate the connections and data flows required by the application. <FIG> illustrates the steps involved in a method <NUM> of automatically deriving firewall rules from metadata. In step <NUM>, the communication endpoints are identified. In an exemplary embodiment, a communication endpoint could be an application, a virtual or physical server IP address, a container in a Cloud, or even a microservice with identification. In step <NUM>, the source-of-record database is queried to extract a list of metadata associated with each communication endpoint. Metadata extracted in this step contains two sets of information, a list of information that allows connectivity policy decision making (e.g., environmental variables such as 'Production' or 'Non-production', geo-location information such as country codes - 'US', 'Geneva', 'Russia', etc., confidentiality tagging such as "highly confidential", "confidential", etc., regulatory and compliance tagging such as SOX, etc., and list of network identifiers (e.g., IP addresses, subnet addresses, etc.). In step <NUM>, a pair-wise comparison is performed on the meta-data list that are relevant to policy decision making between two end points. This comparison is processed by a policy engine to derive a permit or a deny result. For example, Application-<NUM> and Application-<NUM> contains the following meta-data list: Application-<NUM>: {"production", "US"}, Application-<NUM>: {"non-production", "US"}. In this example, a global policy disallows communication between non-production assets and production assets. Thus, the policy engine will determine that the global policy will deny the communication between the two applications. In another example, Application <NUM> contains the following meta-data list: {"production", "US"}, while Application <NUM> contains the following meta-data list: {"production", "Geneva"}. In this example, although both applications are valid production apps, Geneva has strict data-residency rule and, as a result, the policy doesn't allow data flowing across country boundaries, thus the communication will yield Deny. In a third example, Application-<NUM>: {"non-production", "Russia", "public"} and Application-<NUM>: {"non-production", "Russia", "public"} have identical sets of meta-data and therefor the communication is "Permit.

Once the policy engine produces either 'Permit' or 'Deny' for any given communication pair, network info (e.g., IP addresses) associated with each communication end point is used in step <NUM> to construct <NUM>-tuple firewall rules. In an exemplary embodiment, these firewall rules are sent via API calls to a firewall management platform for downstream processing.

In addition to the firewall rules pattern manager <NUM>, in an exemplary embodiment, an application deployment manager (ADM) <NUM> receives connectivity and service definition data from the source data repository <NUM>. This data is used to generate application policy data that is used to introduce the application into a production environment. As is illustrated by the software development timeline <NUM>, the ADM <NUM> also receives data from various stages of software deployments, ranging, for example, from pre-production <NUM>, user acceptance testing, and production deployment. This data is provided to a connectivity attestation function <NUM> of the ADM <NUM>. This function is used to conduct a risk evaluation and acceptance test <NUM> and provide this data to the ADM application profile policy enforcement portion <NUM> of the ADM policy engine <NUM>. This process allows the ADM <NUM> to evaluate the connections that are present in the software as it progresses along the software development timeline <NUM>. Thus, in addition to defining connectivity, information from the application owner <NUM> stored in the source data repository <NUM> can also be used to automatically verify connectivity characteristics of the software during development and also to establish firewall rules and deployment policy.

As was described in <FIG>, the application owner <NUM> enters application data into the application service registry. This information is also incorporated into the source code of an application as metadata, some examples of which are shown in <FIG>. As illustrated, a portion of code 402A, 402B, and 402C defines the allowed connections of the complete code. For example, in <FIG>, the code portion <NUM> functions to allow only communication with applications in the production region of the operating environment. In <FIG>, the code portion 402A prevents the production code from communicating with desktop applications in the LAB environment. In addition, this example comprises a port restriction definition at 402B. In <FIG>, the code portion 402C permits the data source defined in <NUM> to communicate with the production applications located in Luxembourg. As can be observed by these examples, codes that define connectivity can be very specific in their limitations. This allows the application developer to exercise a great deal of control over the operation of a piece of application code.

The connectivity of the application is thus defined in the source code. In some exemplary embodiments, the only connections that can occur are those defined and permitted by the code. For example, in an exemplary embodiment, only the data sources and data consumers that satisfy a certain set of predefined conditions will be allowed to connect to the application. This was illustrated in <FIG> which limited the connections to certain applications, certain software operation regions, system types, and geographic regions. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art will understand that various combinations of such limitations can result in very specific constraints on the connectivity of a piece of software application code. Additionally, because the constraints are coded into the application, changes to the connections of the application require that the code be modified and published as a new or revised version of an application. As a result, such changes are readily tracked by version control systems, providing a means to track connectivity changes.

The concept of controlled connectivity is illustrated in the simplified application communication connection example <NUM> of <FIG>, wherein a first application <NUM> is in communication with a second application <NUM>. As is illustrated, the first application <NUM> has a data component <NUM>, a logic component <NUM>, and a presentation component <NUM>. The second application <NUM> also has a data component <NUM>, a logic component <NUM>, and a presentation component <NUM>. While the term "presentation" is used, these components should be thought of as data interfaces for the output of the logic components <NUM> and <NUM>. As is illustrated by the interconnection <NUM>, these two applications are associated with each other through an application program interface (API) proxy <NUM>. As is illustrated at <NUM>, a connection exists in this exemplary embodiment between the business logic of the first application <NUM> and the presentation component <NUM> of the second application <NUM>. In an exemplary embodiment, this connection is encoded in the metadata of at least the first application <NUM>. For example, the encoding may regulate the type of data that is retrieved by the logic components <NUM> and may restrict that data to such data as is provided by the presentation component <NUM> of the second application <NUM>. In addition to this external connection <NUM>, internal connections exist within the first application <NUM> (it should be noted that internal connections generally exist in most applications). As illustrated, a connection <NUM> exists between the logic component <NUM> and the data component <NUM>. In an exemplary embodiment, this connection <NUM> may be regulated by a definition found in metadata associated with the first application <NUM>. As such, only certain data types may be allowed to flow into the logic component <NUM> and, perhaps even more importantly, only certain data may be permitted to flow from the logic component <NUM> to the data component <NUM>. This restriction may be used to prevent unintended data from entering the data component <NUM> in an attempt to avoid corruption of data stored in the data component <NUM>. In a similar manner, in certain exemplary embodiments, the connection between the logic component <NUM> and the presentation component <NUM> can be controlled by limitations stored in metadata.

Metadata <NUM>, for an exemplary web interface component, is illustrated in <FIG>. As shown, the metadata <NUM> comprises a definition of the web interface component name <NUM>, a component interface name <NUM>, and conditions <NUM> that are required in order to allow communications by the application. Thus, as illustrated, the application with which this metadata is associated can communicate only with applications in certain environments <NUM>, certain tiers <NUM>, certain communications ports <NUM>, and certain locations <NUM> (in the illustrated exemplary embodiment, excluding the location "Luxembourg").

<FIG> illustrates another exemplary embodiment in which metadata <NUM> is provided to define the interface characteristics of an application program. As is shown, an interface <NUM> is identified which comprises a first set of conditions <NUM> which are used to define an allowed state with regard to data flowing to and from the application. In the illustrated exemplary embodiment, two interfaces are identified. The first is defined as a public interface <NUM>, but the second set of conditions <NUM> is associated with a private interface <NUM>. In this manner, the application owner (e.g., the application owner <NUM>) can establish various interfaces with different conditions and thus regulate the information provided to (or accessed by) various applications according to their characteristics and needs.

<FIG> illustrates another exemplary embodiment of metadata <NUM> that is associated with a database of information. As illustrated, the metadata <NUM> defines the limitations on the access to and the use of the database according to a list of specific applications <NUM>, the environment in which the application is operating <NUM>, the tier <NUM> of the application which is doing the accessing, the function of the application <NUM>, and the port <NUM> through which the application is attempting to interface the data.

<FIG> illustrated a data flow from an application owner <NUM> through various functions to arrive at configuration and control information used for firewall enforcement settings <NUM> and also to manage an application interface manager <NUM> that manages the interface connections between an application and various external systems and data sources <NUM>. In certain exemplary embodiments, these functions can be performed by computerized devices such as computer servers. In some exemplary embodiments, computer servers are comprised of processors, memory and software instructions that configure the processors to perform certain desired functions. An exemplary embodiment of the main functions illustrated in <FIG> is shown in <FIG> as a connection diagram <NUM> of computer servers. As shown, the application service registry (e.g., the application service registry <NUM>) is formed from a computer server <NUM>. The application service registry is in communication with a source data repository (e.g., the source data repository <NUM>), which is also formed from a computer server <NUM>. The application service registry communicates with a firewall rules pattern manager (e.g., the firewall rules pattern manager <NUM>) whose functions are performed by a computer server <NUM>. The server <NUM> communicates with one or more firewalls <NUM> which themselves can be formed from one or more servers. The source data repository communicates connection and data flow information to an ADM (e.g., the ADM <NUM>) which is formed from a computer server <NUM>. This computer server <NUM> then provides application interface data to an application interface manager (e.g., the application interface manager <NUM>) which can be formed from one or more servers <NUM>. In the illustrated exemplary embodiment, each function is performed in a separate computer server, however, it will be understood that these servers can be combined into a lesser number of computers or certain functions can be divided between more than one such server. Such functions can be consolidated or can be distributed across an organization as is appropriate. As noted, each server executes software instructions that cause the processor of the server to perform the steps necessary to perform the operations of each function from <FIG>.

Claim 1:
A computer implemented method of controlling data connections of an application program (<NUM>), the method comprising:
establishing a service definition (<NUM>);
establishing definitions of allowed connections (<NUM>);
storing the service definition (<NUM>) and definitions of allowed connections (<NUM>) in an application service registry;
embedding the definitions of allowed connections (<NUM>) as metadata (<NUM>) in a source code document;
automatically deriving firewall rules from the metadata (<NUM>);
automatically deriving an allowed application data listing from the metadata (<NUM>); and
configuring an application interface manager (<NUM>) using the allowed application data listing,
wherein the application interface manager (<NUM>) is configured to manage interface connections between the application program (<NUM>) and various external systems and data sources (<NUM>) based on the allowed application data listing.