2018
DOI: 10.1007/s12652-018-1140-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new method for assigning appropriate labels to create a 28 Standard Android Botnet Dataset (28-SABD)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[9] NB, BN, & DT 98.00 [10] Not ML method 99.00 [11] ANN, SVM, k-NN, NB, & GBM 97.00 [12] k-NN, DT, & RF 70.00 [13] ANN, SVM, NB, DT, RF, LR. & BNet 99.47 [14] NB & DT 97.00 [15] DT 99.00 [16] K-means 82.10 [17] DT 97.00 [18] RF 86.41 [19] ANN, SVM, & NB 93.90 [44] Not ML method 99.82 [20] k-NN & RF 91.10 [21] ANN 97.87 [22] DT 90.40 [23] DT 99.46 [24] ANN, SVM, & k-NN 99.00 [45] Not ML method 95.50 [46] Not ML method 99.68 [25] SVM & ANN 94.00 [47] Not ML method 99.70 [26] DT & ANN 99.20 [48] Not ML method 99.00 [27] KNN, SVM, DT, RF, & ANN 99.00 [28] SVM 99.15 [29] k-NN 94.00 [49] Not ML method 96.20 [50] Not ML method 99.35 [51] Not ML method 92.92 [52] Not ML method 98.70 [53] Not ML method 97.00 [54] Not ML method 98.70 [55] Not ML method *100 [56] Not ML method 99.94 [57] Not ML method 99.60 [58] Not ML method 98.60 [59] Not ML method 97.20 [30] k-NN, NB, DT, RF, & SVM 91.80 [31] ANN 99.60 This research LR, LR, DT, NB, k-NN, RF, GBM, SVM, K-means, K-medians, mini batch, HC, ANN, DBSCAN, GMM, LAC, AP, and ensemble learning…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[9] NB, BN, & DT 98.00 [10] Not ML method 99.00 [11] ANN, SVM, k-NN, NB, & GBM 97.00 [12] k-NN, DT, & RF 70.00 [13] ANN, SVM, NB, DT, RF, LR. & BNet 99.47 [14] NB & DT 97.00 [15] DT 99.00 [16] K-means 82.10 [17] DT 97.00 [18] RF 86.41 [19] ANN, SVM, & NB 93.90 [44] Not ML method 99.82 [20] k-NN & RF 91.10 [21] ANN 97.87 [22] DT 90.40 [23] DT 99.46 [24] ANN, SVM, & k-NN 99.00 [45] Not ML method 95.50 [46] Not ML method 99.68 [25] SVM & ANN 94.00 [47] Not ML method 99.70 [26] DT & ANN 99.20 [48] Not ML method 99.00 [27] KNN, SVM, DT, RF, & ANN 99.00 [28] SVM 99.15 [29] k-NN 94.00 [49] Not ML method 96.20 [50] Not ML method 99.35 [51] Not ML method 92.92 [52] Not ML method 98.70 [53] Not ML method 97.00 [54] Not ML method 98.70 [55] Not ML method *100 [56] Not ML method 99.94 [57] Not ML method 99.60 [58] Not ML method 98.60 [59] Not ML method 97.20 [30] k-NN, NB, DT, RF, & SVM 91.80 [31] ANN 99.60 This research LR, LR, DT, NB, k-NN, RF, GBM, SVM, K-means, K-medians, mini batch, HC, ANN, DBSCAN, GMM, LAC, AP, and ensemble learning…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experiment results show that overall 99.3% accuracy and 99.1% F1-score can be achieved. In [17], the authors have created a 28 Standard Android Botnet Dataset (28-SABD), an Android botnet malware dataset including 14 families of Android botnet malware traffic. They used the ensemble K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) technique to improve overall detection accuracy.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is a new dataset specific to the Android botnet created by [12]. This dataset presents a new dataset based on the ISCX dataset that includes features derived via dynamic analysis in the form of vectors of zeros and ones.…”
Section: ) 28-sabdmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example in [28], the authors have employed the tPacketCapture pro tool to collect network visitors of software from the Gnome dataset. Another study by [12] analyzed the network traffic from botnet apps derived from the ISCX dataset using four actual machines and a BlueStack emulator. Network traffic has been shown to be the most trustworthy characteristic according to several studies such as [18] and [29].…”
Section: Dynamic Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%