MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362009315 · doi:10.32604/cmc.2023.037386

DDoS Attack Detection in Cloud Computing Based on Ensemble Feature Selection and Deep Learning

2023· article· en· W4362009315 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yousef Sanjalawe, Turke Althobaiti

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDenial-of-service attackDeep learningFeature selectionCloud computingArtificial intelligenceIntrusion detection systemConvolutional neural networkMachine learningBotnetThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intrusion Detection System (IDS) in the cloud Computing (CC) environment has received paramount interest over the last few years. Among the latest approaches, Deep Learning (DL)-based IDS methods allow the discovery of attacks with the highest performance. In the CC environment, Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks are widespread. The cloud services will be rendered unavailable to legitimate end-users as a consequence of the overwhelming network traffic, resulting in financial losses. Although various researchers have proposed many detection techniques, there are possible obstacles in terms of detection performance due to the use of insignificant traffic features. Therefore, in this paper, a hybrid deep learning mode based on hybridizing Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) with Long-Short-Term Memory (LSTM) is used due to its robustness and efficiency in detecting normal and attack traffic. Besides, the ensemble feature selection, mutualization aggregation between Particle Swarm Optimizer (PSO), Grey Wolf Optimizer (PSO), Krill Hird (KH), and Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA), is used to select the most important features that would influence the detection performance in detecting DDoS attack in CC. A benchmark dataset proposed by the Canadian Institute of Cybersecurity (CIC), called CICIDS 2017 is used to evaluate the proposed IDS. The results revealed that the proposed IDS outperforms the state-of-the-art IDSs, as it achieved 97.9%, 98.3%, 97.9%, 98.1%, respectively. As a result, the proposed IDS achieves the requirements of getting high security, automatic, efficient, and self-decision detection of DDoS attacks.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print)Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207