MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

AB-TCAD: An Access Behavior-Based Two-Stage Compromised Account Detection Framework

2024· article· en· W4401612365 on OpenAlexaff
HU Kunling, Jessie Hui Wang, Han Zhang, Yiren Zhao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersTsinghua University
KeywordsComputer scienceStage (stratigraphy)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the fast-growing Internet, legitimate user accounts can be stolen by attackers, posing a serious threat to network security. Therefore, compromised account detection is an urgent problem. Most existing work is based on the behavior and content associated with posts. However, these approaches cannot detect anomalous behavior that attackers only collect information in the early stage, and often fail to consider temporal features. In this paper, we propose an access behavior-based two-stage compromised account detection framework, called AB-TCAD. In the first stage, we propose a novel feature called URL graph that depicts a user's website access pattern. To analyze abnormal changes in user access patterns, we design an AddEdge-GNN algorithm that detects similarities between URL graphs and obtains suspicious accounts. AddEdge-GNN predicts potential new user access behavior and reduces misjudgments that treat normal behavioral changes as anomalies. In the second stage, we propose an RVAE-based temporal detection. We construct temporal features of access behavior in multiple dimensions and use RVAE to detect anomalies, thereby identifying compromised accounts. We perform a real-world evaluation using data from a production network. The results show that AB-TCAD outperforms existing solutions in terms of both precision and recall metrics.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207