Identification of Android malware using refined system calls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The ever increasing number of Android malware has always been a concern for cybersecurity professionals. Even though plenty of anti‐malware solutions exist, we hypothesize that the performance of existing approaches can be improved by deriving relevant attributes through effective feature selection methods. In this paper, we propose a novel two‐step feature selection approach based on Rough Set and Statistical Test named as RSST to extract refined system calls, which can effectively discriminate malware from benign apps. By refined set of system call, we mean the existence of highly relevant calls that are uniformly distributed thought target classes. Moreover, an optimal attribute set is created, which is devoid of redundant system calls. To address the problem of higher dimensional attribute set, we derived suboptimal system call space by applying the proposed feature selection method to maximize the separability between malware and benign samples. Comprehensive experiments conducted on three datasets resulted in an accuracy of 99.9%, Area Under Curve (AUC) of 1.0, with 1% False Positive Rate (FPR). However, other feature selectors (Information Gain, CFsSubsetEval, ChiSquare, FreqSel, and Symmetric Uncertainty) used in the domain of malware analysis resulted in the accuracy of 95.5% with 8.5% FPR. Moreover, the empirical analysis of RSST derived system calls outperformed other attributes such as permissions, opcodes, API, methods, call graphs, Droidbox attributes, and network traces.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".