MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1419517020 · doi:10.1016/j.diin.2015.05.002

Graph-theoretic characterization of cyber-threat infrastructures

2015· article· en· W1419517020 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Investigation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer securityMalwarePageRankCyber threatsCentralityKey (lock)Critical infrastructureData scienceMalware analysisWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate cyber-threats and the underlying infrastructures. More precisely, we detect and analyze cyber-threat infrastructures for the purpose of unveiling key players (owners, domains, IPs, organizations, malware families, etc.) and the relationships between these players. To this end, we propose metrics to measure the badness of different infrastructure elements using graph theoretic concepts such as centrality concepts and Google PageRank. In addition, we quantify the sharing of infrastructure elements among different malware samples and families to unveil potential groups that are behind specific attacks. Moreover, we study the evolution of cyber-threat infrastructures over time to infer patterns of cyber-criminal activities. The proposed study provides the capability to derive insights and intelligence about cyber-threat infrastructures. Using one year dataset, we generate notable results regarding emerging threats and campaigns, important players behind threats, linkages between cyber-threat infrastructure elements, patterns of cyber-crimes, etc.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it