2015
DOI: 10.1007/s00500-015-1863-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

P2P and P2P botnet traffic classification in two stages

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Table 5 shows the summary regarding the approach used in the first and second step classification process along with the classification accuracy of various existing hybrid P2P traffic classification techniques. During the classification process, the techniques used in [5,[19][20][21]52,55], rely on the signature-based approach, which is computationally expensive [6,30,31] and has various other limitations as discussed in Section 2. In addition, the techniques in [19][20][21] do not classify the UDP traffic.…”
Section: Datasets Validation and Experimental Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Table 5 shows the summary regarding the approach used in the first and second step classification process along with the classification accuracy of various existing hybrid P2P traffic classification techniques. During the classification process, the techniques used in [5,[19][20][21]52,55], rely on the signature-based approach, which is computationally expensive [6,30,31] and has various other limitations as discussed in Section 2. In addition, the techniques in [19][20][21] do not classify the UDP traffic.…”
Section: Datasets Validation and Experimental Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this technique also relies on the payload based approach, which has various limitations. Ye and Cho [19][20][21] proposed a hybrid technique to classify P2P traffic in two steps. The first step performs classification at the packet-level by combining signature-based and heuristic-based techniques.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proposed scheme showed low overhead & high scalability and was able to achieve the accuracy rates of 98.19 & 99.82 % in terms of flows and bytes. The authors in [97] used similar hybrid approach to classify and distinguish between P2P botnet traffic from P2P traffic. The botnet traffic of Storm, Waledac, Conficker, C&C and Zeus were mixed to create three datasets.…”
Section: Classification Of Traffic In the Darkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, if there was only one zombie host in the current network, or if no traffic from different zombie hosts was found in the captured packets, this method was demonstrated inefficient by Zhang [17]. The three DT algorithms REPTree, Carriage, and C45 were analyzed in the study [23,24], where C45 with the lowest performance because its algorithm was easily under pruning, and the overfitting algorithm was more severe than REPTree. Encrypted P2P or unknown traffic could be classified by the statistics-based method, but it is not highly accurate, and could not identify untrained P2P traffic correctly [23].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%