2019 Design, Automation &Amp; Test in Europe Conference &Amp; Exhibition (DATE) 2019
DOI: 10.23919/date.2019.8715057
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lightweight Node-level Malware Detection and Network-level Malware Confinement in IoT Networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…IoT technology has different characteristics, so that it has a more significant problem in detecting malware in real-time. The first challenge is developing a fast and lightweight detection system without using huge costs [9]. Second, developing energy-efficient detection systems with limited resources [18], and the third one is identifying known malware and new malware in real cyberattacks using a small dataset at the time of the experiment [20].…”
Section: Discussion and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…IoT technology has different characteristics, so that it has a more significant problem in detecting malware in real-time. The first challenge is developing a fast and lightweight detection system without using huge costs [9]. Second, developing energy-efficient detection systems with limited resources [18], and the third one is identifying known malware and new malware in real cyberattacks using a small dataset at the time of the experiment [20].…”
Section: Discussion and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Through this method, the size of each block header is roughly decreased to 200 bytes; meanwhile, the nodes can still verify the payments through the root hash. To further reduce the storage consumption, a new kind of nodes termed light-nodes is introduced in [13], [14]. In contrast to the traditional fullnodes who preserving the complete blocks, the light-nodes merely store the block headers.…”
Section: A Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, they are unable to detect unknown threats making them unsuitable for devices with limited available computing and memory resources. The emergence of new malware threats requires patching or updating the software-based malware detection solutions (such as off-the-shelf anti-virus) that needs a vast amount of memory and hardware resources, which is not feasible for emerging computing systems especially in embedded mobile and IoT devices [3,14,15]. In addition, most of these advanced analysis techniques are architecture-dependent i.e., dependent on the underlying hardware, which makes the existing traditional malware detection techniques hard to import onto emerging embedded computing devices [4,14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…HMD methods reduce the latency of the detection process by order of magnitude with a small hardware overhead. In particular, recent studies have shown that malware can be differentiated from normal programs by classifying anomalies using Machine Learning (ML) techniques in low-level microarchitectural feature spaces captured by Hardware Performance Counters (HPCs) [4,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] to appropriately represent the application behavior. The HPCs are special-purpose registers implemented into modern microprocessors to capture the trace of hardware-related events such as executed instructions, suffered cache-misses, or mispredicted branches for a running program [16,18,23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%