Method and apparatus for filtering e-mail infected with a previously unidentified computer virus

• US 20030204569A1
• Filed: 04/29/2002
• Published: 10/30/2003
• Est. Priority Date: 04/29/2002
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Lucent Technologies, Inc. (Nokia Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Lucent Technologies, Inc. (Nokia Corporation)
• Inventors: P. Kochanski, Gregory, Shih, Chi-Lin, Andrews, Michael R., Lopresti, Daniel Philip
• Application Number:
  US10/135,102
• Publication Number:
  US 20030204569A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 709/206
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 51/212 using filtering or selective blocking

Abstract

E-mail which may be infected by a computer virus is advantageously filtered by incorporating a “Reverse Turing Test” to verify that the source of a potentially infected e-mail is human and not a machine, and that the message was intentionally transmitted by the apparent sender. Such a test may, for example, involve asking a question which will be easy for a human to answer correctly but quite difficult for a machine to do so. The e-mail may be deemed to be potentially infected based on an analysis of executable code which is attached to the e-mail, or merely based on the fact that executable code is attached. The e-mail may also be deemed to be potentially infected based on additional factors, such as, for example, the identity of the sender and past experiences therewith. Spam E-mail may also be advantageously filtered together with virus-containing e-mail with use of a single common filtering system.

Claims

1. An automated method for filtering electronic mail, the method comprising:

receiving an original electronic mail message from a sender;

identifying the original electronic mail message as being potentially infected with a computer virus; and

automatically sending a challenge back to the sender, wherein the challenge comprises an electronic mail message which requests a response from the sender, and wherein the challenge has been designed to be answered by a person and not by a machine.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the original electronic mail message is identified as being potentially infected with a computer virus based on the presence of executable code attached thereto.

3. The method of claim 2 wherein the original electronic mail message is identified as being potentially infected with a computer virus further based on an analysis of one or more strings of byte patterns in said executable code.

4. The method of claim 3 wherein the original electronic mail message is identified as being potentially infected with a computer virus further based on the identification of a match between said one or more strings of byte patterns in said executable code with one or more predetermined signatures of known viruses.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein said step of identifying the original electronic mail message as being potentially infected with a computer virus is based in part on results from one or more past challenges that had been sent in connection with previously received incoming electronic mail messages.

6. The method of claim 1 wherein said step of identifying the original electronic mail message as being potentially infected with a computer virus is based in part on a manual analysis of previously received incoming electronic mail messages.

7. The method of claim 1 wherein said challenge comprises an electronic mail message which requests that the sender identify text which is included in a provided image.

8. The method of claim 7 wherein said text included in said image has been degraded with visual noise.

9. The method of claim 1 wherein said challenge comprises an electronic mail message in which said request of said response from said sender is presented to the sender as text.

10. The method of claim 1 wherein said challenge comprises an electronic mail message in which said request of said response from said sender is presented to the sender as speech.

11. The method of claim 10 wherein said speech presented to the sender has been acoustically degraded.

12. The method of claim 1 wherein said challenge comprises an electronic mail message which requests that the sender identify one or more entities included in a provided image.

13. The method of claim 1 wherein said challenge comprises an electronic mail message which requests that the sender identify a characteristic of a provided piece of music presented as audio.

14. The method of claim 1 further comprising the step of filtering out said original electronic mail message when a response to said challenge is not received within a predetermined amount of time.

15. The method of claim 1 wherein said challenge has one or more correct responses associated therewith, the method further comprising the step of filtering out said original electronic mail message when a response to said challenge is received which does not include at least one of said associated correct responses.

16. An automated method for filtering electronic mail, the method comprising receiving a plurality of incoming electronic mail messages;

identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam;

identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potentially infected with a computer virus;

for each of said incoming electronic mail messages which has been identified either as being potential spam or as being potentially infected with a computer virus, automatically sending a challenge back to a corresponding sender of said incoming electronic mail message, wherein each of said challenges comprises an electronic mail message which requests a response from the corresponding sender of said incoming electronic mail message, and wherein each challenge has been designed to be answered by a person and not by a machine.

17. The method of claim 16 wherein said step of identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam comprises, for each of said plurality of incoming electronic mail messages, the steps of:

identifying a corresponding sender of said incoming electronic mail message;

determining whether said corresponding sender matches an entry comprised in a list of known senders;

if said corresponding sender does not match an entry comprised in said list of known senders, determining if said corresponding sender has a suspicious identity; and

identifying said incoming electronic message as being potential spam when said corresponding sender is determined to have a suspicious identity.

18. The method of claim 16 wherein said step of identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam comprises identifying each of said incoming electronic message as being potential spam when said incoming electronic mail message comprises spam-like content.

19. The method of claim 16 wherein said step of identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam is based at least in part on results from one or more past challenges that had been sent in connection with previously received incoming electronic mail messages.

20. The method of claim 16 wherein said step of identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam is based at least in part on a previous manual analysis of previously received incoming electronic mail messages.

21. The method of claim 16 further comprising the step of filtering out each of said incoming electronic mail messages for which a response to the challenge corresponding thereto is not received within a predetermined amount of time.

22. The method of claim 16 wherein each of said challenges has one or more correct responses associated therewith, the method further comprising the step of filtering out each of said incoming electronic mail messages for which a response to the challenge corresponding thereto is received which does not include at least one of said correct responses associated therewith.

23. An automated electronic mail filter comprising:

means for receiving a plurality of incoming electronic mail messages;

means for identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potentially infected with a computer virus;

automatic means for sending challenges back to corresponding senders of each of said incoming electronic mail messages which have been identified as being potentially infected with a computer virus, wherein each of said challenges comprises an electronic mail message which requests a response from the corresponding sender of said incoming electronic mail message, and wherein each challenge has been designed to be answered by a person and not by a machine.

24. The automated electronic mail filter of claim 23 further comprising means for filtering out each of said incoming electronic mail messages for which a response to the challenge corresponding thereto is not received within a predetermined amount of time.

25. The automated electronic mail filter of claim 23 wherein each of said challenges has one or more correct responses associated therewith, the apparatus further comprising means for filtering out each of said incoming electronic mail messages for which a response to the challenge corresponding thereto is received which does not include at least one of said correct responses associated therewith.

26. The automated electronic mail filter of claim 23 further comprising:

means for identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam; and

automatic means for sending challenges back to corresponding senders of each of said incoming electronic mail messages which have been identified as being potential spam, wherein each of said challenges comprises an electronic mail message which requests a response from the corresponding sender of said incoming electronic mail message, and wherein each challenge has been designed to be answered by a person and not by a machine.

27. The automated electronic mail filter of claim 23 wherein said means for identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam comprises:

means for identifying a corresponding sender of each of said incoming electronic mail messages;

means for determining whether each of said corresponding senders matches an entry comprised in a list of known senders;

means for determining if each of said corresponding senders has a suspicious identity when said corresponding sender does not match an entry comprised in said list of known senders; and

means for identifying one or more of said incoming electronic messages as being potential spam when the corresponding sender thereof is determined to have a suspicious identity.

28. The automated electronic mail filter of claim 23 wherein said means for identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam identifies one of said incoming electronic messages as being potential spam when said incoming electronic mail message comprises spam-like content.

29. The automated electronic mail filter of claim 23 wherein said means for identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam is based at least in part on results from one or more past challenges that had been sent in connection with previously received incoming electronic mail messages.

30. The automated electronic mail filter of claim 23 wherein said means for identifying one or more of said incoming electronic mail messages as being potential spam is based at least in part on a previous manual analysis of previously received incoming electronic mail messages.