MILCOM 2016 - 2016 IEEE Military Communications Conference 2016
DOI: 10.1109/milcom.2016.7795377
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Controlling proximity-malware infection in diverse tactical mobile networks using K-distance pruning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Su et al's research [16] demonstrated that Bluetooth is a crucial interface for worm spreading and short-range worm containment. This finding was supported by research conducted by Yan and Eidenbenz [17], Mickens and Noble [18], and Morris-King and Cam [19], which examined the kinetics of worm transmission over the Bluetooth interface. A distributed response system created by Ziba et al [20] uses worm signatures to eliminate nearby worms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…Su et al's research [16] demonstrated that Bluetooth is a crucial interface for worm spreading and short-range worm containment. This finding was supported by research conducted by Yan and Eidenbenz [17], Mickens and Noble [18], and Morris-King and Cam [19], which examined the kinetics of worm transmission over the Bluetooth interface. A distributed response system created by Ziba et al [20] uses worm signatures to eliminate nearby worms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…For the short-range worm containment, Su et al [12] showed that Bluetooth is an essential interface for worm's propagation. Yan and Eidenbenz [13], Mickens and Noble [14], and Morris-king and Cam [15] confirmed this conclusion by analyzing the propagation dynamics of the worm transferred via the Bluetooth interface. Zyba et al [4] designed a distributed coping scheme to eliminate the adjacent worm by using the worm signature.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…In this section, the SINs containment unit is turned on and off to demonstrate the performance of the security evaluator in the GINs feedback unit. e comparison methods include (1) a distributed local detection-based scheme [4] (marked as distributed), (2) a proximity signature forwarding-based scheme [4] (marked as proximity), (3) a Bluetooth-based malware coping scheme [21] (marked as hierarchical), (4) a pruning-based proximity malware coping scheme [15] (marked as K-distance), (5) a community-based proximity malware coping scheme [5] (marked as centralized), (6) a social network-based patching scheme [8] (marked as socializing), and (7) TC-based (performs well in the former test).…”
Section: E Performance Of Gins Feedback Unitmentioning
confidence: 99%