ZIDS: A Privacy-Preserving Intrusion Detection System Using Secure Two-Party Computation Protocols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce ZIDS, a client-server solution for private detection of intrusions that is suitable for private detection of zero-day attacks in input data. The system includes an intrusion detection system (IDS) server that has a set of sensitive signatures for zero-day attacks and IDS clients that possess some sensitive data (e.g. files, logs). Using ZIDS, each IDS client learns whether its input data matche any of the zero-day signatures, but neither party learns about any additional information. In other words, the IDS client learns nothing about the zero-day signatures and the IDS server learns nothing about the input data and the analysis results. To solve this problem, we reduce privacy-preserving intrusion detection to an instance of secure two-party oblivious deterministic finite automata (ODFA) evaluation. Then, motivated by the fact that the DFAs associated with attack signature are often sparse, we propose a new and efficient ODFA protocol that takes advantage of this sparsity. Our new construction is considerably more efficient than the existing solutions and, at the same time, does not leak any sensitive information about the nature of the sparsity in the private DFA. We provide a full implementation of our privacy-preserving system that includes optimizations that lead to better memory usage and evaluate its performance on rule sets from the Snort IDS.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".