Proceedings of the 1st ACM Workshop on Workshop on AISec 2008
DOI: 10.1145/1456377.1456395
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automatic feature selection for anomaly detection

Abstract: A frequent problem in anomaly detection is to decide among different feature sets to be used. For example, various features are known in network intrusion detection based on packet headers, content byte streams or application level protocol parsing. A method for automatic feature selection in anomaly detection is proposed which determines optimal mixture coefficients for various sets of features. The method generalizes the support vector data description (SVDD) and can be expressed as a semi-infinite linear pr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
30
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Authors have used DM techniques in previous works, but usually aiming for a specific general objective, for instance the detection of threats such as botnet (70), or the recognition of anomalies (71). However, these works do not contemplate any process to improve the system as the refinement phase in MUSES.…”
Section: Muses Advantages Over Other Solutions Beyond the State Of Tmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Authors have used DM techniques in previous works, but usually aiming for a specific general objective, for instance the detection of threats such as botnet (70), or the recognition of anomalies (71). However, these works do not contemplate any process to improve the system as the refinement phase in MUSES.…”
Section: Muses Advantages Over Other Solutions Beyond the State Of Tmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This nature of attribute makes it a critical research problem. Furthermore, a reduced set of attributes can improve the detection speed as well as the detection accuracy remarkably (Chebrolu et al, 2005;Kloft et al, 2008). But, this problem remains open in the anomaly detection of WSNs, despite little progress has been sporadically made (Silva et al, 2005;Ho et al, 2009).…”
Section: Attribute Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, packet arrival interval (Onat and Miri, 2005a) is just a derived attribute calculated by the difference between packet arrival times, where the packet arrival time is an atomic attribute. Third, explore the interrelationship with a variety of advanced techniques, such as support vector data description (SVDD) (Kloft et al, 2008), Bayesian networks (BN), classification and regression trees (CART) (Chebrolu et al, 2005), and fuzzy and rough sets (Jensen and Shen, 2009). …”
Section: Attribute Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They used the BA for subset generating and the SVM for the classification process in anomaly detection. Kloft et al [8] proposed a generalization of the support vector data description (SVDD) that can select the best feature combination. SVDD is described as a semiinfinite linear program that can be solved with standard techniques.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%