MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054206898 · doi:10.1109/fpt.2007.4439273

High Performance Software-Hardware Network Intrusion Detection System

2007· article· en· W2054206898 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Packet Processing and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceSoftwareNetwork packetEmbedded systemIntrusion detection systemComputer hardwareProcess (computing)Network processorFlexibility (engineering)Quality of serviceReal-time computingOperating systemComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) and quality of service (QoS) demands have been steadily increasing over the past few years. Current solutions using software become inefficient running on high speed high volume networks and will end up dropping packets. Hardware solutions are available and result in much higher efficiency but present problems such as flexibility and cost. Our proposed system uses a modified version of Snort, a robust widely deployed open-sourced NIDS. It has been found that Snort spends at least 30%-60% of its processing time doing pattern matching. Our proposed system runs Snort in software until it gets to the pattern matching function and then offloads that processing to the field programmable gate array (FPGA). The software can then go on to other processing while it waits for the results from the FPGA. The hardware is able to process data at upto 1.7 GB/s on one Xilinx XC2VP100 FPGA. The design is scaleable and will allow for multiple FPGAs to be used in parallel to increase the processing speed even further.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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