MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1943673337 · doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.25

Mining known attack patterns from security-related events

2015· article· en· W1943673337 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ Computer Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpam and Phishing Detection
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer securityMalwareAsset (computer security)Order (exchange)HackerComputer scienceDenial-of-service attackAttack patternsSecurity serviceQuality (philosophy)Information securityBusinessThe InternetWorld Wide WebIntrusion detection system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managed Security Services (MSS) have become an essential asset for companies to have in order to protect their infrastructure from hacking attempts such as unauthorized behaviour, denial of service (DoS), malware propagation, and anomalies. A proliferation of attacks has determined the need for installing more network probes and collecting more security-related events in order to assure the best coverage, necessary for generating incident responses. The increase in volume of data to analyse has created a demand for specific tools that automatically correlate events and gather them in pre-defined scenarios of attacks. Motivated by Above Security, a specialized company in the sector, and by National Research Council Canada (NRC), we propose a new data mining system that employs text mining techniques to dynamically relate security-related events in order to reduce analysis time, increase the quality of the reports, and automatically build correlated scenarios.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.235 · 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