MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293088673 · doi:10.1145/3558767

DeviceWatch: A Data-Driven Network Analysis Approach to Identifying Compromised Mobile Devices with Graph-Inference

2022· article· en· W4293088673 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Privacy and Security · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMobile deviceInferenceLeverage (statistics)GraphMobile appsWorld Wide WebData miningComputer securityData scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose to identify compromised mobile devices from a network administrator’s point of view. Intuitively, inadvertent users (and thus their devices) who download apps through untrustworthy markets are often lured to install malicious apps through in-app advertisements or phishing. We thus hypothesize that devices sharing similar apps would have a similar likelihood of being compromised, resulting in an association between a compromised device and its apps. We propose to leverage such associations to identify unknown compromised devices using the guilt-by-association principle. Admittedly, such associations could be relatively weak as it is hard, if not impossible, for an app to automatically download and install other apps without explicit user initiation. We describe how we can magnify such associations by carefully choosing parameters when applying graph-based inferences. We empirically evaluate the effectiveness of our approach on real datasets provided by a major mobile service provider. Specifically, we show that our approach achieves nearly 98% AUC (area under the ROC curve) and further detects as many as 6 ~ 7 times of new compromised devices not covered by the ground truth by expanding the limited knowledge on known devices. We show that the newly detected devices indeed present undesirable behavior in terms of leaking private information and accessing risky IPs and domains. We further conduct in-depth analysis of the effectiveness of graph inferences to understand the unique structure of the associations between mobile devices and their apps, and its impact on graph inferences, based on which we propose how to choose key parameters.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.259 · 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