MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403693247 · doi:10.1080/19393555.2024.2419116

SPGDAD: Slow HTTP-Get denial of service attack detection using ontology

2024· article· en· W4403693247 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohamed Haddadi, Abdelhamid Khiat, Hadil Bouaoud, Hadjer Djehiche

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Security Journal A Global Perspective · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDenial-of-service attackComputer scienceOntologyComputer securityWorld Wide WebService (business)The Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, because of increasing use of Internet connection, security becomes a huge challenge for individuals as well as governments and organizations. Therefore, in the last decade, the world is moving toward green computing in the purpose either to store energy or to decrease operational costs. So, this new technology uses web servers to provide web applications to end user. Generally, these web servers become unavailable because of HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP) flood Denial of Service (DoS) attack, especially HTTP-Get DoS attack. This paper proposes a novel approach based on ontology to detect slow HTTP-Get DoS attack as an intelligent system at application layer. For testing our ontological model, Canadian Institute for Cybersecurity Intrusion Detection System (CIC-IDS2017) dataset test tool is used to test our model. Results show that our ontological model detects HTTP-Get DoS attack with detection accuracy of 100%. For more illustration, a comparison study with other classic existing approaches is done so that our ontological model performs better than HADM and NetFPGA, which have an accuracy of 92.63% and 93%, respectively.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation Security Journal A Global PerspectiveSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207