MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381193127 · doi:10.34190/eccws.22.1.1212

Permission-Based Classification of Android Malware Applications Using Random Forest

2023· article· en· W4381193127 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

VenueEuropean Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMalwareExploitAndroid (operating system)Lexical analysisRandom forestClassifier (UML)PermissionData miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer securityOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Android is arguably the most widely used mobile operating system in the world. Due to its widespread use, it has attracted a lot of attention of cybercriminals who attempt to exploit its architecture and outsmart innocent users to install malware applications. The number of such applications is growing every day either by alternating a basic exploitation mechanism or by creating novel mechanisms to exfiltrate users’ data. As a result, there is an increasing need for detection mechanisms that can classify these applications to families based on their characteristics. A significant amount of research has already been devoted to analysing and mitigating this growing problem; however, this situation demands more efficient methods with higher precision. The paper proposes such a framework for analysing and classifying a malicious application to certain families relying on the permissions used. The proposed method involves the pre-processing of the applications to extract their permissions, the tokenization of permissions, the data cleansing and finally the application of the Random Forest Classifier to classify the applications in families. The proposed method is trained and tested with a dataset of 11,159 malicious applications categorized in 33 unique families. The precision, recall and f1-score achieved is 98%. The results of the proposed methodology are promising, since it even works in an unbalanced dataset and in many cases outperform other state-of-the-art approaches.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.246 · 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