KeySplitWatermark: Zero Watermarking Algorithm for Software Protection Against Cyber-Attacks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyber-attacks are evolving at a disturbing rate. Data breaches, ransomware attacks, crypto-jacking, malware and phishing attacks are now rampant. In this era of cyber warfare, the software industry is also growing with an increasing number of software being used in all domains of life. This evolution has added to the problems of software vendors and users where they have to prevent a wide range of attacks. Existing watermark detection solutions have a low detection rate in the software. In order to address this issue, this paper proposes a novel blind Zero code based Watermark detection approach named KeySplitWatermark, for the protection of software against cyber-attacks. The algorithm adds watermark logically into the code utilizing the inherent properties of code and gives a robust solution. The embedding algorithm uses keywords to make segments of the code to produce a key-dependent on the watermark. The extraction algorithms use this key to remove watermark and detect tampering. When tampering increases to a certain user-defined threshold, the original software code is restored making it resilient against attacks. KeySplitWatermark is evaluated on tampering attacks on three unique samples with two distinct watermarks. The outcomes show that the proposed approach reports promising results against cyber-attacks that are powerful and viable. We compared the performance of our proposal with state-of-the-art works using two different software codes. Our results depict that KeySplitWatermark correctly detects watermarks, resulting in up to 15.95 and 17.43 percent reduction in execution time on given code samples with no increase in program size and independent of watermark size.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".