Using VMM-based sensors to monitor honeypots
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
Virtual Machine Monitors (VMMs) are a common tool for implementing honeypots. In this paper we examine the implementation of a VMM-based intrusion detection and monitoring system for collecting information about attacks on honeypots. We document and evaluate three designs we have implemented on two open-source virtualization platforms: User-Mode Linux and Xen. Our results show that our designs give the monitor good visibility into the system and thus, a small number of monitoring sensors can detect a large number of intrusions. In a three month period, we were able to detect five different attacks, as well as collect and try 46 more exploits on our honeypots. All attacks were detected with only two monitoring sensors. We found that the performance overhead for monitoring such intrusions is independent of which events are being monitored, but depends entirely on the number of monitoring events and the underlying monitoring implementation. The performance overhead can be significantly improved by implementing the monitor directly in the privileged code of the VMM, though at the cost of increasing the size of the trusted computing base of the system.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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