Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 159

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A deep learning approach for detecting malicious JavaScript code

Wang, Yao, Cai, Wan‐dong, Wei, Peng‐cheng·2016·Security and Communication Networks

Abstract

Malicious JavaScript code in webpages on the Internet is an emergent security issue because of its universality and potentially severe impact. Because of its obfuscation and complexities, detecting it has a considerable cost. Over the last few years, several machine learning‐based detection approaches have been proposed; most of them use shallow discriminating models with features that are constructed with artificial rules. However, with the advent of the big data era for information transmission, these existing methods already cannot satisfy actual needs. In this paper, we present a new deep learning framework for detection of malicious JavaScript code, from which we obtained the highest detection accuracy compared with the control group. The architecture is composed of a sparse random projection, deep learning model, and logistic regression. Stacked denoising auto‐encoders were used to extract high‐level features from JavaScript code; logistic regression as a classifier was used to distinguish between malicious and benign JavaScript code. Experimental results indicated that our architecture, with over 27 000 labeled samples, can achieve an accuracy of up to 95%, with a false positive rate less than 4.2% in the best case. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/sec.1441

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Metadata

Authors
Wang, Y., Cai, W., & Wei, P.
Venue
Security and Communication Networks
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-02-11
Volume
9
Issue
11
Pages
1520-1534
ISSN
  • 1939-0114 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0122
OpenAlex
W2290933337
Cited by
159
References
4
FWCI
17.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.