Building survivable systems: an integrated approach based on intrusion detection and damage containment

Bowen, Thomas F.; Chee, Dana; Segal, Mark E.; Sekar, R.; Shanbhag, T.; Uppuluri, Prem

doi:10.1109/discex.2000.821511

Cited by 32 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…projects (supported by two grants from NSF and two earlier grants from DARPA) [11,3,13,8,9], and the model-checking based vulnerability analysis projects (supported by an NSF ITR award) [7,6] at Stony Brook are all closely aligned with Dan's research background. During his tenure as a CIPIA Fellow, Dan was a key contributor in several research projects.…”

Section: Dsstribution Statement a Approved For Public Release Distribmentioning

confidence: 86%

Specification-Based Approaches for Information Assurance

DuVarney¹,

Sekar²

2003

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Dsstribution Statement a Approved For Public Release Distribmentioning

confidence: 86%

Specification-Based Approaches for Information Assurance

DuVarney¹,

Sekar²

2003

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…An overview of the research and development of intrusion response system in the last decade is given in [9] 1996 dynamic mapping delayed static cooperative CSM [29] 1996 dynamic mapping delayed/proactive static autonomous EMERALD [18,16] 1997 dynamic mapping delayed static cooperative BMSL-based response [6,26] Table 2: Classification of the surveyed systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other examples of autonomous response system include [23,6,26]. These are host-based systems specifically oriented to handle local intrusion detection and response.…”

Section: Autonomous Vs Cooperativementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Authors of [6,26] proposed an approach to intrusion detection and response based on the specifications of normal behavior expressed in BMSL (Behavioral Monitoring Specification Language). BMSL specifies system behavior in a finite state machine automata fashion and augments each intrusion specification path with a response action.…”

Section: Static Mapping Vs Dynamic Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A taxonomy of intrusion response systems

Stakhanova¹,

Basu²,

Wong³

2007

IJICS

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances in intrusion detection field brought new requirements to intrusion prevention and response. Traditionally, the response to an attack was manually triggered by an administrator. However, increased complexity and speed of the attack-spread during recent years showed acute necessity for complex dynamic response mechanisms. Although intrusion detection systems are being actively developed, research efforts in intrusion response are still isolated. In this work we present taxonomy of intrusion response systems, together with a review of current trends in intrusion response research. We also provide a set of essential fetures as a requirement for an ideal intrusion response system. DisciplinesInformation Security

show abstract

“…To deal with this problem, the Runtime Execution system shown in Figure 1 is equipped with a runtime monitoring mechanism which intercepts model-relevant itinerary events and matches them against models. The idea was proposed in [15,2] and experiments showed less than a 5% overhead to the execution time of most programs. Although their runtime monitoring system operates on system calls, we can adapt it to work on itinerary in our system.…”

Section: Runtime Verification Flowmentioning

confidence: 99%