Simulating realistic network worm traffic for worm warning system design and testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reproducing the effects of large-scale worm attacks in a laboratory setup in a realistic and reproducible manner is an important issue for the development of worm detection and defense systems. In this paper, we describe a worm simulation model we are developing to accurately model the large-scale spread dynamics of a worm and many aspects of its detailed effects on the network. We can model slow or fast worms with realistic scan rates on realistic IP address spaces and selectively model local detailed network behavior. We show how it can be used to generate realistic input traffic for a working prototype worm detection and tracking system, the Dartmouth ICMP BCC: System/Tracking and Fusion Engine (DIB:S/TRAFEN), allowing performance evaluation of the system under realistic conditions. Thus, we can answer important design questions relating to necessary detector coverage and noise filtering without deploying and operating a full system. Our experiments indicate that the tracking algorithms currently implemented in the DIB:S/TRAFEN system could detect attacks such as Code Red v2 and Sapphire/Slammer very early, even when monitoring a quite limited portion of the address space, but more sophisticated algorithms are being constructed to reduce the risk of false positives in the presence of significant "background noise" scanning.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".