Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using Machine Learning to Quantify the Multimedia Risk Due to Fuzzing

  • 1219: Multimedia Security Based on Quantum Cryptography and Blockchain
  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There have been considerable advancements in multimedia technologies over the past 5 years. It has been observed that state-of-the-art multimedia systems face three broad categories of challenges: (1) Dependency on continuous network connections, (2) Data-sharing applications & collaboration, and (3) Security issues. Among these, security vulnerability poses a major threat to modern multimedia systems. Therefore, it is imperative to carefully investigate the security issues that can endanger wireless and mobile communications. At present, multimedia security research mainly focuses on wireless traffic monitoring, wireless system attacks, and wireless and mobile security. In this paper, we have used the network attack-type, “Reconnaissance”, which contains two types of malicious activities: (1) OS scanning, and (2) Fuzzing. The goal of this paper is to quantify multimedia security risks due to Fuzzing by using various types of machine learning models. The highest accuracy i.e., 96.8%, is obtained using the XGBoost classifier, which is good compared to the existing models present in the literature. This is the first paper, to the best of our knowledge, that uses machine learning methods to differentiate between benign and malignant Fuzzing attacks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Code Availability

Not Applicable.

References

  1. https://www.aon.com/getmedia/952b6e59-0f6b-4970-aa6e-9f7809b28abe/PWC_global-economic-crime-and-fraud-survey-2018.aspx. Accessed 15 June 2021

  2. Mirsky, Y., Doitshman, T., Elovici, Y., Shabtai, A.: Kitsune: an ensemble of autoencoders for online network intrusion detection. In: arXiv.org.(2018). https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.09089. Accessed 15 June 2021

  3. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3875.txt. Accessed 15 June 2021

  4. Conole, A.: sfuzz | Penetration Testing Tools. https://tools.kali.org/%20vulnerability-analysis/sfuzz. Accessed 15 June 2021

  5. Abubakar, A., Pranggono, B.: Machine learning based intrusion detection system for software defined networks. 2017 Seventh International Conference on Emerging Security Technologies (EST) (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/est.2017.8090413

  6. Pahl, M.O., Aubet, F.X.: All eyes on you: distributed multi-dimensional IoT microservice anomaly detection. In: Ieee.org (2018). https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8584985. Accessed 16 June 2021

  7. LiuLiuLiuYang XYALT (2018) Defending ON–OFF attacks using light probing messages in smart sensors for industrial communication systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 14:3801–3811. https://doi.org/10.1109/tii.2018.2836150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. DiroChilamkurti AAN (2018) Distributed attack detection scheme using deep learning approach for Internet of Things. Futur. Gen. Comput. Syst. 82:761–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2017.08.04

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Anthi, E., Williams, L., Burnap, P.: Pulse: an adaptive intrusion detection for the internet of things. Theietorg (2018). https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2018.0035

  10. PajouhJavidanKhayami HHHHR et al (2019) A two-layer dimension reduction and two-tier classification model for anomaly-based intrusion detection in IoT backbone networks. IEEE Trans Emerg Top Comput 7:314–323. https://doi.org/10.1109/tetc.2016.2633228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. D’angeloPalmieri GF, FiccoRampone MS (2015) An uncertainty-managing batch relevance-based approach to network anomaly detection. Appl Soft Comput 36:408–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.07.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lippmann, R.P., Fried, D.J., Graf, I., et al.: Evaluating intrusion detection systems: the 1998 DARPA off-line intrusion detection evaluation. Proceedings DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition DISCEX’00 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1109/discex.2000.821506

  13. Hasan M, Islam MdM, Zarif MII, Hashem MMA (2019) Attack and anomaly detection in IoT sensors in IoT sites using machine learning approaches. Internet Things 7:100059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iot.2019.100059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. https://www.imperva.com/learn/data-security/data-security/. Accessed 18 June 2021

  15. Ognawala, S., Amato, R.N., Pretschner, A., Kulkarni, P.: Automatically assessing vulnerabilities discovered by compositional analysis | Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Machine Learning and Software Engineering in Symbiosis. In: Acm.org (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3243127.3243130

  16. https://www.mbsd.jp/blog/takaesu_index.html. Accessed 18 June 2021

  17. https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/03/17/slides_987676587434243.pdf. Accessed 18 June 2021 

  18. Attia, A., Faezipour, M., Abuzneid, A.: Network intrusion detection with XGBoost and deep learning algorithms: an evaluation study. 2020 international conference on computational science and computational intelligence (CSCI) (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/csci51800.2020.00031

  19. Marteau P-F (2021) Random partitioning forest for point-wise and collective anomaly detection—application to network intrusion detection. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Security 16:2157–2172. https://doi.org/10.1109/tifs.2021.3050605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. https://www.kaggle.com/francoisxa/ds2ostraffictraces. Accessed 18 June 2021 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, SEST, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, India

    Gautam Siddharth Kashyap & Samar Wazir

  2. USICT- Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi, India

    Karan Malik

  3. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, ABES Institute of Technology, Ghaziabad, India

    Rijwan Khan

Authors
  1. Gautam Siddharth Kashyap
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karan Malik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Samar Wazir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rijwan Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: [GSK] and [KM]; Methodology: [GSK] and [KM]; Software: [GSK] and [KM]; Validation: [SW]; Experiment Analysis: [GSK] and [KM]; Investigation: [SW]; Writing—Original Draft Preparation: [GSK] and [KM]; Writing—Review and Editing: [SW]; Supervision: [SW]; Project Administration: [SW]; Funding Acquisition: NA. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gautam Siddharth Kashyap.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Not Applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kashyap, G.S., Malik, K., Wazir, S. et al. Using Machine Learning to Quantify the Multimedia Risk Due to Fuzzing. Multimed Tools Appl 81, 36685–36698 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-021-11558-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-021-11558-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation