MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Host in Danger? Detecting Network Intrusions from Authentication Logs

2019· article· en· W3010456454 on OpenAlexaff
Haibo Bian, Tim Bai, Mohammad A. Salahuddin, Noura Limam, Abbas Abou Daya, Raouf Boutaba

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)Host (biology)Network securityFeature engineeringMachine learningAuthentication (law)Data miningFeature extractionComputer securityArtificial intelligenceComputer networkDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, network infiltrations due to advanced persistent threats (APTs) have grown significantly, resulting in considerable losses to businesses and organizations. APTs are stealthy attacks with the primary objective of gaining unauthorized access to network assets. They often remain dormant for an extended period of time, which makes their detection challenging. In this paper, we leverage machine learning (ML) to detect hosts in a network that are targeted by an APT attack. We evaluate a number of ML classifiers to detect susceptible hosts in the Los Alamos National Lab dataset. We explore (i) graph-based features extracted from multiple data sources i.e., network flows and host authentication logs, (ii) feature engineering to reduce dimensionality, and (iii) balancing the training dataset using numerous over- and under-sampling techniques. Finally, we compare our model to the state-of-the-art approaches that leverage the same dataset, and show that our model outperforms them with respect to prediction performance and overhead.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207