2015
DOI: 10.1007/s10207-015-0281-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Behavior-based approach to detect spam over IP telephony attacks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 5 presents a comparison of ML algorithm performance and indicates that Logistic Regression and Neural Network were the most powerful and efficient algorithms in applying the naive approach. Chikha et al [24] used several ML algorithms (Naive Bayes, Bagging, AdaBoost, and Multilayer Perceptron) to detect SPIT. However, the authors reported only the resulting AUC for each algorithm and did not examine the individual algorithms in detail.…”
Section: ) Construction Of a Naive ML Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Figure 5 presents a comparison of ML algorithm performance and indicates that Logistic Regression and Neural Network were the most powerful and efficient algorithms in applying the naive approach. Chikha et al [24] used several ML algorithms (Naive Bayes, Bagging, AdaBoost, and Multilayer Perceptron) to detect SPIT. However, the authors reported only the resulting AUC for each algorithm and did not examine the individual algorithms in detail.…”
Section: ) Construction Of a Naive ML Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main aim of the current study was to apply algorithms to aid in detecting SPIT users. Many studies which investigated similar methods substantiated their research on artificially generated data ( [19], [23], [24], [36], [41]) rather than analysis of real-world data ( [26], [27]). The current study applied only real-world data collected from multiple sources (VoIP providers, honeypots, mobile devices and online data services) [21], [22], [33].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A semi-supervised clustering is used on call parameters to mark each call as spam or legitimate [29]. Whereas, [30] compares ten machine learning methods to classify callers into legitimate and spammers. However, machine learning requires supervised training data and high processing.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several solutions have been proposed for blocking the SPIT caller. These solutions operate independently as the standalone systems, and can be grouped into several classes: black-list or white-list based systems [12][13][14], systems analyzing the social behavior and reputation of the caller [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24], authenticating the caller by challenging him in the form of CAPTCHA and Turing test [25][26][27]8], imposing extra cost on the caller if he is flagged as unwanted [28] by recipients of call, systems processing speech content [29][30][31][32], analyzing the linguistics from the speech streams [33,34], and statistical systems that analyzes the flow of packets during the call setup phase [35,36] or analyze caller's behavior from the logged CDRs [37,38]. A single standalone SPIT solution can also be employed by combining many individual systems in the form of a collaborative multistage system [28,[39][40][41][42].…”
Section: Standalone Anti-spit Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%