基于CIDDS-002数据集的异常入侵检测系统集成方法分类器比较

Ainurrochman, A. Nugroho, Raditia Wahyuwidayat, Santi Tiodora Sianturi, Muhamad Fauzi, M. Ramadhan, B. Pratomo, A. M. Shiddiqi
{"title":"基于CIDDS-002数据集的异常入侵检测系统集成方法分类器比较","authors":"Ainurrochman, A. Nugroho, Raditia Wahyuwidayat, Santi Tiodora Sianturi, Muhamad Fauzi, M. Ramadhan, B. Pratomo, A. M. Shiddiqi","doi":"10.1109/ICTS52701.2021.9608714","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the rapid development of information technology, the network has been everywhere. This technology has brought a lot of convenience to people, but there are also some security problems. To solve these problems, many methods have been proposed, among which is intrusion detection. A lot of research has been done to find the most effective Intrusion Detection Systems. In term of detecting novel attacks, Anomaly-Based Intrusion Detection Systems has better significance than Misuse-Based Intrusion Detection Systems. The research on the datasets being used for training and testing purposes in the detection model is as important as the model. Better dataset quality can improve intrusion detection model results. This research presents the statistical analysis of labeled flow-based CIDDS-002 dataset using ensemble methods classifier. The analysis is done concerning some prominent evaluation metrics used for evaluating Intrusion Detection Systems including Detection Rate, Accuracy, and False Positive Rate. As a result, the accuracy of the Bagging (Decision Tree) is 99.71% and Bagging (Gaussian Naïve Bayes) is 67.57%.","PeriodicalId":6738,"journal":{"name":"2021 13th International Conference on Information & Communication Technology and System (ICTS)","volume":"1 1","pages":"62-67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ensemble Methods Classifier Comparison for Anomaly Based Intrusion Detection System on CIDDS-002 Dataset\",\"authors\":\"Ainurrochman, A. Nugroho, Raditia Wahyuwidayat, Santi Tiodora Sianturi, Muhamad Fauzi, M. Ramadhan, B. Pratomo, A. M. Shiddiqi\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICTS52701.2021.9608714\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With the rapid development of information technology, the network has been everywhere. This technology has brought a lot of convenience to people, but there are also some security problems. To solve these problems, many methods have been proposed, among which is intrusion detection. A lot of research has been done to find the most effective Intrusion Detection Systems. In term of detecting novel attacks, Anomaly-Based Intrusion Detection Systems has better significance than Misuse-Based Intrusion Detection Systems. The research on the datasets being used for training and testing purposes in the detection model is as important as the model. Better dataset quality can improve intrusion detection model results. This research presents the statistical analysis of labeled flow-based CIDDS-002 dataset using ensemble methods classifier. The analysis is done concerning some prominent evaluation metrics used for evaluating Intrusion Detection Systems including Detection Rate, Accuracy, and False Positive Rate. As a result, the accuracy of the Bagging (Decision Tree) is 99.71% and Bagging (Gaussian Naïve Bayes) is 67.57%.\",\"PeriodicalId\":6738,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2021 13th International Conference on Information & Communication Technology and System (ICTS)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"62-67\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2021 13th International Conference on Information & Communication Technology and System (ICTS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTS52701.2021.9608714\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2021 13th International Conference on Information & Communication Technology and System (ICTS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTS52701.2021.9608714","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

随着信息技术的飞速发展,网络已经无处不在。这项技术给人们带来了很多便利,但也存在一些安全问题。为了解决这些问题,人们提出了许多方法,入侵检测就是其中之一。为了找到最有效的入侵检测系统,人们进行了大量的研究。在检测新型攻击方面,基于异常的入侵检测系统比基于误用的入侵检测系统更有意义。对检测模型中用于训练和测试目的的数据集的研究与模型一样重要。更好的数据集质量可以改善入侵检测模型的结果。本研究利用集成方法对基于标记流的CIDDS-002数据集进行统计分析。分析了入侵检测系统的主要评价指标,包括检测率、准确率和误报率。因此,Bagging(决策树)的准确率为99.71%,Bagging(高斯Naïve贝叶斯)的准确率为67.57%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ensemble Methods Classifier Comparison for Anomaly Based Intrusion Detection System on CIDDS-002 Dataset
With the rapid development of information technology, the network has been everywhere. This technology has brought a lot of convenience to people, but there are also some security problems. To solve these problems, many methods have been proposed, among which is intrusion detection. A lot of research has been done to find the most effective Intrusion Detection Systems. In term of detecting novel attacks, Anomaly-Based Intrusion Detection Systems has better significance than Misuse-Based Intrusion Detection Systems. The research on the datasets being used for training and testing purposes in the detection model is as important as the model. Better dataset quality can improve intrusion detection model results. This research presents the statistical analysis of labeled flow-based CIDDS-002 dataset using ensemble methods classifier. The analysis is done concerning some prominent evaluation metrics used for evaluating Intrusion Detection Systems including Detection Rate, Accuracy, and False Positive Rate. As a result, the accuracy of the Bagging (Decision Tree) is 99.71% and Bagging (Gaussian Naïve Bayes) is 67.57%.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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