Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 72 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 57 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 43 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 23 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 107 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 219 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 465 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 39 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Comprehensive Efficiency Analysis of Machine Learning Algorithms for Developing Hardware-Based Cybersecurity Countermeasures (2201.07654v1)

Published 5 Jan 2022 in cs.CR and cs.LG

Abstract: Modern computing systems have led cyber adversaries to create more sophisticated malware than was previously available in the early days of technology. Dated detection techniques such as Anti-Virus Software (AVS) based on signature-based methods could no longer keep up with the demand that computer systems required of them. The complexity of modern malware has led to the development of contemporary detection techniques that use the machine learning field and hardware to boost the detection rates of malicious software. These new techniques use Hardware Performance Counters (HPCs) that form a digital signature of sorts. After the models are fed training data, they can reference these HPCs to classify zero-day malware samples. A problem emerges when malware with no comparable HPC values comes into contact with these new techniques. We provide an analysis of several machine learning and deep learning models that run zero-day samples and evaluate the results from the conversion of C++ algorithms to a hardware description language (HDL) used to begin a hardware implementation. Our results present a lack of accuracy from the models when running zero-day malware data as our highest detector, decision tree, was only able to reach 91.2% accuracy and had an F1-Score of 91.5% in the form of a decision tree. Next, through the Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) and area-under-the-curve (AUC), we can also determine that the algorithms did not present significant robustness as the largest AUC was only 0.819. In addition, we viewed relatively high overhead for our ensemble learning algorithm while also only having an 86.3% accuracy and 86% F1-Score. Finally, as an additional task, we adapted the one rule algorithm to fit many rules to make malware classification understandable to everyday users by allowing them to view the regulations while maintaining relatively high accuracy.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (1)