Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to the application filed 10/20/2023.
2. Claims 1-11 have been examined and are pending in the application.
Claim Objections
3. Claims 1 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities: “(1)” at the end of the claims needs to be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
4. Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
A. The following terms lack antecedent basis:
(i) the second size (lines 3-4 of claim 4; line 4 of claim 9). Correction is required.
B. The claim language in the following claims is not clearly understood: (i) As to claim 1, it is unclear whether “a program” (line 9) refers to “a program” (line 3). Correction is required.
(ii) As to claim 2, it is unclear whether “a custom memory allocation code” (line 2) refers to “a custom memory allocation code” (line 4 of claim 1). Correction is required.
(iii) As to claim 4, it is unclear whether “a memory chunk” (lines 1-2) refers to “a memory chunk” (line 6 of claim 1). Correction is required.
(iv) As to claim 4, it is unclear whether “a garbage value” (line 3) refers to “a garbage value” (line 7 of claim 1). Correction is required.
(v) As to claim 6, it is unclear whether “a program” (line 9) refers to “a program” (line 5). Correction is required.
(vi) As to claim 7, it is unclear whether “a custom memory allocation code” (lines 2-3) refers to “a custom memory allocation code” (line 5 of claim 6). Correction is required.
(vii) As to claim 9, it is unclear whether “a memory chunk” (line 2) refers to “a memory chunk” (line 6 of claim 6). Correction is required.
(viii) As to claim 9, it is unclear whether “a garbage value” (line 3) refers to “a garbage value” (line 8 of claim 6). Correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 1-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objections and rejections set forth in this office action.
Reasons for Allowance
6. The following is the examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior arts do not teach or render obvious the invention as recited in the independent claims. More specifically, the prior arts do not teach the limitations of:
…inserting first function to increase a memory chunk and a second function to poison an increased region with a garbage value…;
runtime executing a program into which the first function and the second function are inserted, to detect an access to a poisoned region poisoned with the garbage value; and
determining that security of the custom memory allocation code is weak when the access to the poisoned region is true.
…, when taken in the context of the claim as a whole.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S Patent No. 12,189,969 discloses efficiently allocate memory space with low latency overhead by allocating blocks of non-volatile memory on a storage device according to a tree data structure comprising a plurality of counter sets, each counter set including one or a plurality of counters indicating numbers of unallocated blocks of memory space within the non-volatile memory.
U.S Patent No. 12,524,160 discloses allocating a data storage space includes detecting one allocation request of an operating system for a continuous storage space for a target program.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andy Ho whose telephone number is (571) 272-3762. A voice mail service is also available for this number. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday, 8:30 am – 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Kevin Young can be reached on (571) 270-3180.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-2100.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Or fax to:
AFTER-FINAL faxes must be signed and sent to (571) 273 - 8300.
OFFICAL faxes must be signed and sent to (571) 273 - 8300.
NON OFFICAL faxes should not be signed, please send to (571) 273 – 3762
/Andy Ho/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2194
Prosecution Insights