PhantomFS: File-Based Deception Technology for Thwarting Malicious Users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
File-based deception technologies can be used as an additional security barrier when adversaries have successfully gained access to a host evading intrusion detection systems. Adversaries are detected if they access fake files. Though previous works have mainly focused on using user data files as decoys, this concept can be applied to system files. If so, it is expected to be effective in detecting malicious users because it is very difficult to commit an attack without accessing a single system file. However, it may suffer from excessive false alarms by legitimate system services such as file indexing and searching. Legitimate users may also access fake files by mistake. This paper addresses this issue by introducing a hidden interface. Legitimate users and applications access files through the hidden interface which does not show fake files. The hidden interface can also be utilized to hide sensitive files by hiding them from the regular interface. By experiments, we demonstrate the proposed technique incurs negligible performance overhead, and it is an effective countermeasure to various attack scenarios and practical in that it does not generate false alarms for legitimate applications and users.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".