2020
DOI: 10.3837/tiis.2020.12.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Semi-supervised based Unknown Attack Detection in EDR Environment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The advantages, disadvantages, and challenges of the WAF approaches are presented in Table 1. Failing in detecting newly emerging attacks; Bypassing using encoding techniques [13] Updating the signature database Anomalybased WAFs [9][10][11][12][13] Effective in detecting known and newly emerging attacks High FP rate; high variance (overfitting) and high bias (underfitting) [16] Feature extraction and selection; Generalization for real-world Policybased WAFs [14] Elimination of the disadvantages of signature and anomalybased systems Vulnerabilities due to incorrect sequencing of policies [14] Requirement for domain experts, Difficulties in the operation of policies at large-scale systems Hybrid WAF systems [15] Combining the power of signature-based and anomaly-based systems The disadvantages of signature-based and anomaly-based systems Requirement for domain experts to the management of security rules [15] Two different web security studies have been carried out by Nguyen et al [9,10], one of which is based on feature selection, and the other is based on an ensemble model, using different traditional machine learning algorithms. The authors [10] developed WAF models based on generic feature selection (GeFS) and different machine learning.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The advantages, disadvantages, and challenges of the WAF approaches are presented in Table 1. Failing in detecting newly emerging attacks; Bypassing using encoding techniques [13] Updating the signature database Anomalybased WAFs [9][10][11][12][13] Effective in detecting known and newly emerging attacks High FP rate; high variance (overfitting) and high bias (underfitting) [16] Feature extraction and selection; Generalization for real-world Policybased WAFs [14] Elimination of the disadvantages of signature and anomalybased systems Vulnerabilities due to incorrect sequencing of policies [14] Requirement for domain experts, Difficulties in the operation of policies at large-scale systems Hybrid WAF systems [15] Combining the power of signature-based and anomaly-based systems The disadvantages of signature-based and anomaly-based systems Requirement for domain experts to the management of security rules [15] Two different web security studies have been carried out by Nguyen et al [9,10], one of which is based on feature selection, and the other is based on an ensemble model, using different traditional machine learning algorithms. The authors [10] developed WAF models based on generic feature selection (GeFS) and different machine learning.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the first layer of image processing, the convolutional layer aims to learn the feature representation of the input image. The convolutional layer consists of multiple filters that map different features [16,17]. In a convolutional neural network, an element in the output of a certain layer is determined when the region size of the corresponding input layer is called the receptive field.…”
Section: Convolutional Layermentioning
confidence: 99%