MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130537748 · doi:10.1109/cit.2011.103

Effective SQL Injection Attack Reconstruction Using Network Recording

2011· article· en· W2130537748 on OpenAlexaff
Allen Pomeroy, Qing Tan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Application Security Vulnerabilities
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer securitySQL injectionComputer scienceWeb applicationWeb application securityOrder (exchange)ConfidentialitySecurity awarenessWeb serviceInternet privacyWorld Wide WebInformation securityWeb developmentBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web applications offer business and convenience services that society has become dependent on, such as online banking. Success of these applications is dependent on end user trust, although these services have serious weaknesses that can be exploited by attackers. Application owners must take additional steps to ensure the security of customer data and integrity of the applications, since web applications are under siege from cyber criminals seeking to steal confidential information and disable or damage the services offered by these applications. Successful attacks have lead to some organizations experiencing financial difficulties or even being forced out of business. Organizations have insufficient tools to detect and respond to attacks on web applications, since traditional security logs have gaps that make attack reconstruction nearly impossible. This paper explores network recording challenges, benefits and possible future use. A network recording solution is proposed to detect and capture SQL injection attacks, resulting in the ability to successfully reconstruct SQL injection attacks in order to maintain application integrity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWeb Application Security VulnerabilitiesFrench-language works237,207