Semi-supervised classification for dynamic Android malware detection
April 19, 2017 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐ Conference on Computer and Communications Security
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Li Chen, Mingwei Zhang, Chih-Yuan Yang, Ravi Sahita
arXiv ID
1704.05948
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Cross-listed
cs.LG,
stat.ML
Citations
27
Venue
Conference on Computer and Communications Security
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
A growing number of threats to Android phones creates challenges for malware detection. Manually labeling the samples into benign or different malicious families requires tremendous human efforts, while it is comparably easy and cheap to obtain a large amount of unlabeled APKs from various sources. Moreover, the fast-paced evolution of Android malware continuously generates derivative malware families. These families often contain new signatures, which can escape detection when using static analysis. These practical challenges can also cause traditional supervised machine learning algorithms to degrade in performance. In this paper, we propose a framework that uses model-based semi-supervised (MBSS) classification scheme on the dynamic Android API call logs. The semi-supervised approach efficiently uses the labeled and unlabeled APKs to estimate a finite mixture model of Gaussian distributions via conditional expectation-maximization and efficiently detects malwares during out-of-sample testing. We compare MBSS with the popular malware detection classifiers such as support vector machine (SVM), $k$-nearest neighbor (kNN) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA). Under the ideal classification setting, MBSS has competitive performance with 98\% accuracy and very low false positive rate for in-sample classification. For out-of-sample testing, the out-of-sample test data exhibit similar behavior of retrieving phone information and sending to the network, compared with in-sample training set. When this similarity is strong, MBSS and SVM with linear kernel maintain 90\% detection rate while $k$NN and LDA suffer great performance degradation. When this similarity is slightly weaker, all classifiers degrade in performance, but MBSS still performs significantly better than other classifiers.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
๐ Similar Papers
In the same crypt โ Cryptography & Security
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Models
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Practical Black-Box Attacks against Machine Learning
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networks
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models
Died the same way โ ๐ป Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted