MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514396107 · doi:10.1109/access.2016.2601009

Survey on Threats and Attacks on Mobile Networks

2016· article· en· W2514396107 on OpenAlexafffund
Silvere Mavoungou, Georges Kaddoum, Mostafa Taha, Georges Matar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersUniversité de Bretagne OccidentaleÉcole de technologie supérieure
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer securityDenial-of-service attackComputer networkCellular networkPublic land mobile networkMobile computingNetwork securityCore networkWireless networkNetwork Access ControlMobile telephonyTelecommunicationsWirelessMobile radioCloud computing securityThe InternetCloud computingWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 1G of mobile technology, mobile wireless communication systems have continued to evolve, bringing into the network architecture new interfaces and protocols, as well as unified services, high data capacity of data transmission, and packet-based transmission (4G). This evolution has also introduced new vulnerabilities and threats, which can be used to launch attacks on different network components, such as the access network and the core network. These drawbacks stand as a major concern for the security and the performance of mobile networks, since various types of attacks can take down the whole network and cause a denial of service, or perform malicious activities. In this survey, we review the main security issues in the access and core network (vulnerabilities and threats) and provide a classification and categorization of attacks in mobile network. In addition, we analyze major attacks on 4G mobile networks and corresponding countermeasures and current mitigation solutions, discuss limits of current solutions, and highlight open research areas.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations112
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207