MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942721864 · doi:10.5539/mas.v13n5p114

Using Sequential Minimal Optimization for Phishing Attack Detection

2019· article· en· W2942721864 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ali Al-Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpam and Phishing Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhishingComputer sciencePasswordConfidentialityHackerComputer securityThe InternetCredit cardExploitInformation sensitivityPersonally identifiable informationWorld Wide WebInternet privacy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of Internet technology and electronic transactions, the problem of software security has become a reality that must be confronted and is no longer an option that can be abandoned. For this reason, software must be protected in all available ways. Where attackers use many methods to enable them to penetrate systems, especially those that rely on the Internet and hackers try to identify the vulnerabilities in the programs and exploit them to enter the database and steal sensitive information. Electronic phishing is a form of illegal access to information, such as user names, passwords, credit card details, etc. Where attackers use different types of tricks to reveal confidential user information. Where attacks appear as links and phishing is done by clicking on the links contained in them. This leads to obtaining confidential information by using those false emails, redirecting the user without his knowledge to a site similar to the site he wants to access and capturing information. The main purpose of this paper is to protect users from malicious pages that are intended to steal personal information. Therefore, an electronic phishing detection algorithm called the SMO algorithm, which deals only with the properties of links, has been used. Weka was used in the classification process. The samples were the characteristics of the links and they contain a number of sites which were 8266 and the number of phishing sites 4116 and legitimate sites 4150 sites and results were found to be new for the previous algorithms where the real classification rate 99.0202% in the time of 1.68 seconds.

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 score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicSpam and Phishing DetectionFrench-language works237,207