Identifying IoT Devices: A Machine Learning Analysis Using Traffic Flow Metadata
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deployment of IoT (Internet of Things) devices in homes, corporate networks and industrial settings continues to rise. The weak security in many such devices leaves them susceptible to targeted attacks. As a result, there is a strong requirement to easily discover and identify such devices, even when they utilize encrypted communications. In this paper, we explore a machine learning (ML) based approach for identification of IoT devices. We contribute to this area of active research by developing a testbed consisting of nine IoT devices and create a labeled dataset which is publicly available. We further investigate eight different ML algorithms with features derived from two different open source network traffic flow analysis tools - Tranalyzer2 and NFStream. Three different flow metadata based feature sets were evaluated to determine their efficacy in identifying the different IoT devices during regular operation. The results show that the Random Forest ML model achieves the highest performance using the Tranalyzer2 feature set with a 99.68% (approximately 100%) F1-Score for identifying IoT devices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it