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 OpenAlexaff
Nikolaos Chrysikos, Panagiotis Karampelas, Konstantinos F. Xylogiannopoulos

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.052
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Conference on Cyber Warfare and SecuritySame topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207