VeriBin: A Malware Authorship Verification Approach for APT Tracking through Explainable and Functionality-Debiasing Adversarial Representation Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malware attacks are posing a significant threat to national security, cooperate network, and public endpoint security. Identifying the Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) groups behind the attacks and grouping their activities into attack campaigns help security investigators trace their activities thus providing better security protections against future attacks. Existing Cyber Threat Intelligent (CTI) components mainly focus on malware family identification and behavior characterization, which cannot solve the APT tracking problem: while APT tracking needs one to link malware binaries of multiple families to a single threat actor, these behavior or function-based techniques are tightened up to a specific attack technique and would fail on connecting different families. Binary Authorship Attribution (AA) solutions could discriminate against threat actors based on their stylometric traits. However, AA solutions assume that the author of a binary is within a fixed candidate author set. However, real-world malware binaries may be created by a new unknown threat actor. To address this research gap, we propose VeriBin for the Binary Authorship Verification (BAV) problem. VeriBin is a novel adversarial neural network that extracts functionality-agnostic style representations from assembly code for the AV task. The extracted style representations can be visualized and are explainable with VeriBin’s multi-head attention mechanism. We benchmark VeriBin with state-of-the-art coding style representations on a standard dataset and a recent malware-APT dataset. Given two anonymous binaries of out-of-sample authors, VeriBin can accurately determine whether they belong to the same author or not. VeriBin is resilient to compiler optimizations and robust against malware family variants.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".