Benchmarking datasets for Anomaly-based Network Intrusion Detection: KDD CUP 99 alternatives

Abhishek Divekar, Meet Parekh, Vaibhav Savla, Rudra Mishra, M. Shirole
{"title":"Benchmarking datasets for Anomaly-based Network Intrusion Detection: KDD CUP 99 alternatives","authors":"Abhishek Divekar, Meet Parekh, Vaibhav Savla, Rudra Mishra, M. Shirole","doi":"10.1109/CCCS.2018.8586840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Machine Learning has been steadily gaining traction for its use in Anomaly-based Network Intrusion Detection Systems (A-NIDS). Research into this domain is frequently performed using the KDD CUP 99 dataset as a benchmark. Several studies question its usability while constructing a contemporary NIDS, due to the skewed response distribution, non-stationarity, and failure to incorporate modern attacks. In this paper, we compare the performance for KDD-99 alternatives when trained using classification models commonly found in literature: Neural Network, Support Vector Machine, Decision Tree, Random Forest, Naive Bayes and K-Means. Applying the SMOTE oversampling technique and random undersampling, we create a balanced version of NSL-KDD and prove that skewed target classes in KDD-99 and NSL-KDD hamper the efficacy of classifiers on minority classes (U2R and R2L), leading to possible security risks. We explore UNSW-NB15, a modern substitute to KDD-99 with greater uniformity of pattern distribution. We benchmark this dataset before and after SMOTE oversampling to observe the effect on minority performance. Our results indicate that classifiers trained on UNSW-NB15 match or better the Weighted F1-Score of those trained on NSL-KDD and KDD-99 in the binary case, thus advocating UNSW-NB15 as a modern substitute to these datasets.","PeriodicalId":6570,"journal":{"name":"2018 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Computing, Communication and Security (ICCCS)","volume":"20 1","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"100","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Computing, Communication and Security (ICCCS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CCCS.2018.8586840","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 100

Abstract

Machine Learning has been steadily gaining traction for its use in Anomaly-based Network Intrusion Detection Systems (A-NIDS). Research into this domain is frequently performed using the KDD CUP 99 dataset as a benchmark. Several studies question its usability while constructing a contemporary NIDS, due to the skewed response distribution, non-stationarity, and failure to incorporate modern attacks. In this paper, we compare the performance for KDD-99 alternatives when trained using classification models commonly found in literature: Neural Network, Support Vector Machine, Decision Tree, Random Forest, Naive Bayes and K-Means. Applying the SMOTE oversampling technique and random undersampling, we create a balanced version of NSL-KDD and prove that skewed target classes in KDD-99 and NSL-KDD hamper the efficacy of classifiers on minority classes (U2R and R2L), leading to possible security risks. We explore UNSW-NB15, a modern substitute to KDD-99 with greater uniformity of pattern distribution. We benchmark this dataset before and after SMOTE oversampling to observe the effect on minority performance. Our results indicate that classifiers trained on UNSW-NB15 match or better the Weighted F1-Score of those trained on NSL-KDD and KDD-99 in the binary case, thus advocating UNSW-NB15 as a modern substitute to these datasets.
基于异常的网络入侵检测的基准测试数据集:KDD CUP 99替代方案
机器学习在基于异常的网络入侵检测系统(A-NIDS)中的应用一直在稳步获得关注。对这个领域的研究经常使用KDD CUP 99数据集作为基准。一些研究质疑其在构建当代NIDS时的可用性,因为响应分布偏斜、非平稳性和未能纳入现代攻击。在本文中,我们比较了在使用文献中常见的分类模型(神经网络、支持向量机、决策树、随机森林、朴素贝叶斯和K-Means)训练KDD-99备选方案时的性能。利用SMOTE过采样技术和随机欠采样,我们创建了一个平衡版本的NSL-KDD,并证明了KDD-99和NSL-KDD中倾斜的目标类别阻碍了分类器对少数类别(U2R和R2L)的有效性,从而导致可能的安全风险。我们探索的UNSW-NB15是KDD-99的现代替代品,具有更均匀的格局分布。我们在SMOTE过采样之前和之后对该数据集进行基准测试,以观察对少数派性能的影响。我们的研究结果表明,在二元情况下,UNSW-NB15训练的分类器与NSL-KDD和KDD-99训练的分类器的加权F1-Score相当或更好,因此提倡UNSW-NB15作为这些数据集的现代替代品。
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