MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2244431679 · doi:10.1109/edcc.2015.17

Flexible Intrusion Detection Systems for Memory-Constrained Embedded Systems

2015· article· en· W2244431679 on OpenAlexaff
Farid Molazem Tabrizi, Karthik Pattabiraman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIntrusion detection systemEmbedded systemDistributed computingComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embedded systems are widely used in critical situations and hence, are targets for malicious users. Researchers have demonstrated successful attacks against embedded systems used in power grids, modern cars, and medical devices. This makes building Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS)for embedded devices a necessity. However, embedded devices have constraints(such as limited memory capacity) that make building IDSes monitoring all their security properties challenging. In this paper, we formulate building IDS for embedded systems as an optimization problem. Having the set of the security properties of the system and the invariants that verify those properties, we build an IDS that maximizes the coverage for the security properties, with respect to the available memory. This allows our IDS to be applicable to a wide range of embedded devices with different memory capacities. In our formulation users may define their own coverage criteria for the security properties. We also propose two coverage criteria and build IDSes based on them. We implement our IDSes for SegMeter, an open source smart meter. Our results show that our IDSes provide a high detection rate in spite of memory constraints of the system. Further, the detection rate of our IDSes at runtime are close to their estimated coverage at design time. This validates our approach in quantifying the coverage of our IDSes and optimizing them.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207