Annotated Control Flow Graph for Metamorphic Malware Detection
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metamorphism is a technique that mutates the binary code using different obfuscations and never keeps the same sequence of opcodes in the memory. This stealth technique provides the capability to a malware for evading detection by simple signature-based (such as instruction sequences, byte sequences and string signatures) anti-malware programs. In this paper, we present a new scheme named Annotated Control Flow Graph (ACFG) to efficiently detect such kinds of malware. ACFG is built by annotating CFG of a binary program and is used for graph and pattern matching to analyse and detect metamorphic malware. We also optimize the runtime of malware detection through parallelization and ACFG reduction, maintaining the same accuracy (without ACFG reduction) for malware detection. ACFG proposed in this paper: (i) captures the control flow semantics of a program; (ii) provides a faster matching of ACFGs and can handle malware with smaller CFGs, compared with other such techniques, without compromising the accuracy; (iii) contains more information and hence provides more accuracy than a CFG. Experimental evaluation of the proposed scheme using an existing dataset yields malware detection rate of 98.9% and false positive rate of 4.5%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it