A Family of Droids-Android Malware Detection via Behavioral Modeling: Static vs Dynamic Analysis

Lucky Onwuzurike, Mário Almeida, Enrico Mariconti, Jeremy Blackburn, G. Stringhini, Emiliano De Cristofaro
{"title":"A Family of Droids-Android Malware Detection via Behavioral Modeling: Static vs Dynamic Analysis","authors":"Lucky Onwuzurike, Mário Almeida, Enrico Mariconti, Jeremy Blackburn, G. Stringhini, Emiliano De Cristofaro","doi":"10.1109/PST.2018.8514191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Following the increasing popularity of the mobile ecosystem, cybercriminals have increasingly targeted mobile ecosystems, designing and distributing malicious apps that steal information or cause harm to the device's owner. Aiming to counter them, detection techniques based on either static or dynamic analysis that model Android malware, have been proposed. While the pros and cons of these analysis techniques are known, they are usually compared in the context of their limitations e.g., static analysis is not able to capture runtime behaviors, full code coverage is usually not achieved during dynamic analysis, etc. Whereas, in this paper, we analyze the performance of static and dynamic analysis methods in the detection of Android malware and attempt to compare them in terms of their detection performance, using the same modeling approach.To this end, we build on MAMADROID, a state-of-the-art detection system that relies on static analysis to create a behavioral model from the sequences of abstracted API calls. Then, aiming to apply the same technique in a dynamic analysis setting, we modify CHIMP, a platform recently proposed to crowdsource human inputs for app testing, in order to extract API calls' sequences from the traces produced while executing the app on a CHIMP virtual device. We call this system AUNTIEDROID and instantiate it by using both automated (Monkey) and usergenerated inputs. We find that combining both static and dynamic analysis yields the best performance, with $F -$measure reaching 0.92. We also show that static analysis is at least as effective as dynamic analysis, depending on how apps are stimulated during execution, and investigate the reasons for inconsistent misclassifications across methods.","PeriodicalId":265506,"journal":{"name":"2018 16th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST)","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"40","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 16th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/PST.2018.8514191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 40

Abstract

Following the increasing popularity of the mobile ecosystem, cybercriminals have increasingly targeted mobile ecosystems, designing and distributing malicious apps that steal information or cause harm to the device's owner. Aiming to counter them, detection techniques based on either static or dynamic analysis that model Android malware, have been proposed. While the pros and cons of these analysis techniques are known, they are usually compared in the context of their limitations e.g., static analysis is not able to capture runtime behaviors, full code coverage is usually not achieved during dynamic analysis, etc. Whereas, in this paper, we analyze the performance of static and dynamic analysis methods in the detection of Android malware and attempt to compare them in terms of their detection performance, using the same modeling approach.To this end, we build on MAMADROID, a state-of-the-art detection system that relies on static analysis to create a behavioral model from the sequences of abstracted API calls. Then, aiming to apply the same technique in a dynamic analysis setting, we modify CHIMP, a platform recently proposed to crowdsource human inputs for app testing, in order to extract API calls' sequences from the traces produced while executing the app on a CHIMP virtual device. We call this system AUNTIEDROID and instantiate it by using both automated (Monkey) and usergenerated inputs. We find that combining both static and dynamic analysis yields the best performance, with $F -$measure reaching 0.92. We also show that static analysis is at least as effective as dynamic analysis, depending on how apps are stimulated during execution, and investigate the reasons for inconsistent misclassifications across methods.
通过行为建模检测android恶意软件:静态vs动态分析
随着移动生态系统的日益普及,网络犯罪分子越来越多地瞄准移动生态系统,设计和分发恶意应用程序,窃取信息或对设备所有者造成伤害。为了解决这些问题,已经提出了基于静态或动态分析的检测技术来模拟Android恶意软件。虽然这些分析技术的优缺点是已知的,但它们通常在其局限性的上下文中进行比较,例如,静态分析无法捕获运行时行为,动态分析期间通常无法实现完整的代码覆盖,等等。然而,在本文中,我们分析了静态分析方法和动态分析方法在检测Android恶意软件中的性能,并试图在检测性能方面进行比较,使用相同的建模方法。为此,我们构建了MAMADROID,这是一个最先进的检测系统,它依赖于静态分析,从抽象API调用的序列中创建行为模型。然后,为了在动态分析设置中应用相同的技术,我们修改了CHIMP,一个最近提出的用于应用程序测试的众包人工输入的平台,以便从在CHIMP虚拟设备上执行应用程序时产生的痕迹中提取API调用序列。我们称这个系统为AUNTIEDROID,并通过使用自动(Monkey)和用户生成的输入来实例化它。我们发现,将静态和动态分析相结合可以获得最佳性能,其中$F -$度量达到0.92。我们还表明,静态分析至少与动态分析一样有效,这取决于应用程序在执行过程中的刺激方式,并调查了不同方法之间不一致的错误分类的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信