Mitigating Adversarial Reconnaissance in IoT Anomaly Detection Systems: A Moving Target Defense Approach based on Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The machine learning (ML) community has extensively studied adversarial threats on learning-based systems, emphasizing the need to address the potential compromise of anomaly-based intrusion detection systems (IDS) through adversarial attacks. On the other hand, investigating the use of moving target defense (MTD) mechanisms in Internet of Things (IoT) networks is ongoing research, with unfathomable potential to equip IoT devices and networks with the ability to fend off cyber attacks despite their computational deficiencies. In this paper, we propose a game-theoretic model of MTD to render the configuration and deployment of anomaly-based IDS more dynamic through diversification of feature training in order to minimize successful reconnaissance on ML-based IDS. We then solve the MTD problem using a reinforcement learning method to generate the optimal shifting policy within the network without a prior network transition model. The state-of-the-art ToN-IoT dataset is investigated for feasibility to implement the feature-based MTD approach. The overall performance of the proposed MTD-based IDS is compared to a conventional IDS by analyzing the accuracy curve for varying attacker success rates. Our approach has proven effective in increasing the resilience of the IDS against adversarial learning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".