2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.smhl.2019.100103
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

IoT botnet detection via power consumption modeling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
42
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
42
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%
“…In [42], by using a test-bed, the range of attacks included flood attacks and SQL injection attacks, SYN Flood, TCP Flood, UDP Flood Detection, ICMP Flood Detection, and HTTP Flood Detection. In [35], the authors used a test-bed with a set of attacks against IoT, such as botnets attack, Mirai, Hajime, Bricker, BotIoT Reaper, Masuta, Sora. In [30], by using a test-bed, the range of the attacks included malicious scan, DoS attack, malicious control spying, malicious operation, wrong setting categories, and data probing.…”
Section: Analysis Of Type Of Attacks Detectedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reference [95] 99.98% accuracy for DenseNet and 83.15% for SVM. Reference [96] achieves up to 98.6% botnet detection accuracy on the self-tests and about 90% on the cross-evaluation test.…”
Section: Neural Network Detection Mechanismsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While this method requires too high computational costs to run in real time, they propose implementing a two-step algorithm in order to achieve fast, memory-efficient factorisation. More nontraditional methods like [96] seek to identify botnets through the usage of power consumption as the parameter for their CNN model. In [29] a similar lightweight solution is also mentioned for use in small memory capacity devices with low-power processors, since these are not able to have reliable anti-malware systems.…”
Section: Neural Network Detection Mechanismsmentioning
confidence: 99%