Internet of Things Malware : A Survey

Karanja, Evanson Mwangi; Masupe, Shedden; Jeffrey, Mandu

doi:10.5121/ijcses.2017.8301

Cited by 14 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The IoT denotes a global infrastructure linking digital communication systems to living bodies and institutional power-knowledge ensembles with codified operational standards and formalized (though flexible) rules of engagement enshrined in technoscientific discursive practices. This definition is broadly consistent with Karanja et al's survey of IoT definitions, characterizations, and applications [8]; however, the specific quality of the IoT with which this paper is most concerned is largely absent from those surveyed in [8], since the latter only indirectly capture the quality of the IoT as a "web of weapons" [9, p. 106] in and through which hi-tech cognitive, psychological, informational, biological, and kinetic (including nuclear) wars may be waged. Schneier [10] and, more recently, Dyer-Witheford and Matviyenko [9] and Scharre [11], have more directly elaborated this facet of the IoT.…”

Section: Overview: An Era Of Cognitive Warfare and Biohackingsupporting

confidence: 83%

Untitled

2022

IJCSES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science and technology are converging with centralized political and economic interests in research fields and industries such as neurology, weapons manufacturing, AI, biosurveillance, and human augmentation. This convergence is international in scope and entails a technoscientific intensification of anti-democratic governing procedures. It therefore poses an international challenge to democracy. In this paper, I critically survey diverse applications of a key governing procedure according to which this convergence is being engineered. I also highlight apposite features of the political/libidinal economy through which it operates. To do so, I merge Achille Mbembe's analyses of necropolitics/necropower with Deleuze and Guattari's diagrammatic analyses of paranoic-fascisizing procedures of unconscious social production, linking both to the IoT. With the latter established as a universal infrastructure, necropower deploys global and specific (in contrast to partial and nonspecific), anti-democratic integrative procedures in both scientific R&D and geopolitics to decode the human brain, hack biosystems, and engineer social apartheid.

show abstract

Section: Overview: An Era Of Cognitive Warfare and Biohackingsupporting

confidence: 83%

Untitled

2022

IJCSES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Karanja et al [109] focused on surveying general IoT malware characteristics. They elicit the need for IoT benchmark datasets and software tools for completeness in feature extraction attempts.…”

Section: A Surveys On Iot Malware Threat Huntingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey on Cross-Architectural IoT Malware Threat Hunting

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the increase in non-Windows malware threats had turned the focus of the cybersecurity community. Research works on hunting Windows PE-based malwares are maturing, whereas the developments on Linux malware threat hunting are relatively scarce. With the advent of the Internet of Things (IoT) era, smart devices that are getting integrated into human life have become a hackers' highway for their malicious activities. The IoT devices employ various Unix-based architectures that follow ELF (Executable and Linkable Format) as their standard binary file specification. This study aims at providing a comprehensive survey on the latest developments in cross-architectural IoT malware detection and classification approaches. Aided by a modern taxonomy, we discuss the feature representations, feature extraction techniques, and machine learning models employed in the surveyed works. We further provide more insights on the practical challenges involved in cross-architectural IoT malware threat hunting and discuss various avenues to instill potential future research.

show abstract

“…3) scalability where the network on IoT devices is globally distributed but can be scaled in an application. 4) resource constraints where low energy requirements make the IoT design minimalist, so sensors and actuators limit security [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The trend malware source of IoT network

Susanto¹,

Arifin

Stiawan

et al. 2021

IJEECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<span>Malware may disrupt the internet of thing (IoT) system/network when it resides in the network, or even harm the network operation. Therefore, malware detection in the IoT system/network becomes an important issue. Research works related to the development of IoT malware detection have been carried out with various methods and algorithms to increase detection accuracy. The majority of papers on malware literature studies discuss mobile networks, and very few consider malware on IoT networks. This paper attempts to identify problems and issues in IoT malware detection presents an analysis of each step in the malware detection as well as provides alternative taxonomy of literature related to IoT malware detection. The focuses of the discussions include malware repository dataset, feature extraction methods, the detection method itself, and the output of each conducted research. Furthermore, a comparison of malware classification approaches accuracy used by researchers in detecting malware in IoT is presented.</span>

show abstract

Internet of Things Malware : A Survey

Abstract: ABSTRACT

Cited by 14 publications

References 88 publications

Untitled

Untitled

A Survey on Cross-Architectural IoT Malware Threat Hunting

The trend malware source of IoT network

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About