The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detecting Internet of Things attacks using distributed deep learning
Abstract
Abstract The reliability of Internet of Things (IoT) connected devices is heavily dependent on the security model employed to protect user data and prevent devices from engaging in malicious activity. Existing approaches for detecting phishing, distributed denial of service (DDoS), and Botnet attacks often focus on either the device or the back-end. In this paper, we propose a cloud-based distributed deep learning framework for phishing and Botnet attack detection and mitigation. The model comprises two key security mechanisms working cooperatively, namely: (1) a Distributed Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN) model embedded as an IoT device micro-security add-on for detecting phishing and application layer DDoS attacks; and (2) a cloud-based temporal Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM) network model hosted on the back-end for detecting Botnet attacks, and ingest CNN embeddings to detect distributed phishing attacks across multiple IoT devices. The distributed CNN model, embedded into a ML engine in the client's IoT device, allows us to detect and defend the IoT device from phishing attacks at the point of origin. We create a dataset consisting of both phishing and non-phishing URLs to train the proposed CNN add-on security model, and select the N_BaIoT dataset for training the back-end LSTM model. The joint training method minimizes communication and resource requirements for attack detection, and maximizes the usefulness of extracted features. In addition, an aggregation of schemes allows the automatic fusion of multiple requests to improve the overall performance of the system. Our experiments show that the IoT micro-security add-on running the proposed CNN model is capable of detecting phishing attacks with an accuracy of 94.3% and a F-1 score of 93.58%. Using the back-end LSTM model, the model detects Botnet attacks with an accuracy of 94.80% using all malicious data points in the used dataset. Thus, the findings demonstrate that the proposed approach is capable of detecting attacks, both at device and at the back-end level, in a distributed fashion.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A detailed analysis of the KDD CUP 99 data set
Tavallaee, M., Bagheri, E., Lu, W., & Ghorbani, A. A. (2009) · 2009 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications · doi:10.1109/cisda.2009.5356528 · Cited by 5,396
A Deep Learning Approach to Network Intrusion Detection
Shone, N., Ngoc, T. N., Phai, V. D., & Shi, Q. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tetci.2017.2772792 · Cited by 1,819
N-BaIoT—Network-Based Detection of IoT Botnet Attacks Using Deep Autoencoders
Meidan, Y., Bohadana, M., Mathov, Y., Mirsky, Y., Shabtai, A., Breitenbacher, D., & Elovici, Y. (2018) · IEEE Pervasive Computing · doi:10.1109/mprv.2018.03367731 · Cited by 1,483
Investigating Ad Transparency Mechanisms in Social Media: A Case Study of Facebook's Explanations
Andreou, A., Venkatadri, G., Goga, O., Gummadi, K. P., Loiseau, P., & Mislove, A. (2018) · Proceedings 2018 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium · doi:10.14722/ndss.2018.23191 · Cited by 1,477
Distributed attack detection scheme using deep learning approach for Internet of Things
Diro, A. A., & Chilamkurti, N. (2018) · Future Generation Computer Systems · doi:10.1016/j.future.2017.08.043 · Cited by 1,053
The 1999 DARPA off-line intrusion detection evaluation
Lippmann, R., Haines, J. W., Fried, D. J., Korba, J., & Das, K. (2000) · Computer Networks · doi:10.1016/s1389-1286(00)00139-0 · Cited by 876
Beyond blacklists: learning to detect malicious web sites from suspicious URLs
Ma, J., Saul, L. K., Savage, S., & Voelker, G. M. (2009) · Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining · doi:10.1145/1557019.1557153 · Cited by 803
Cantina: a content-based approach to detecting phishing web sites
Zhang, Y., Hong, J. I., & Cranor, L. F. (2007) · Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web · doi:10.1145/1242572.1242659 · Cited by 757
2017 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN)
(2017) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn39090.2017 · Cited by 722
Cited by
Opportunities and Challenges in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): A Survey
Das, A., & Rad, P. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.11371 · Cited by 504
Self-citationCyber risk and cybersecurity: a systematic review of data availability
Cremer, F., Sheehan, B., Fortmann, M., Kia, A. N., Mullins, M., Murphy, F., & Materne, S. (2022) · The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice · doi:10.1057/s41288-022-00266-6 · Cited by 355
Deep Cybersecurity: A Comprehensive Overview from Neural Network and Deep Learning Perspective
Sarker, I. H. (2021) · doi:10.20944/preprints202102.0340.v1 · Cited by 295
DCNNBiLSTM: An Efficient Hybrid Deep Learning-Based Intrusion Detection System
Hnamte, V., & Hussain, J. (2023) · Telematics and Informatics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.teler.2023.100053 · Cited by 259
Deep Learning-Based Intrusion Detection for Distributed Denial of Service Attack in Agriculture 4.0
Ferrag, M. A., Shu, L., Djallel, H., & Choo, K.-K. R. (2021) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics10111257 · Cited by 253
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- De La Torre Parra, G., Rad, P., Choo, K.-K. R., & Beebe, N.
- Venue
- Journal of Network and Computer Applications
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-08
- Volume
- 163
- Pages
- 102662
- ISSN
- 1084-8045 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3015447130
- Cited by
- 328
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 23.93
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Detecting Internet of Things attacks using distributed deep learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jnca.2020.102662
- The paper
- De La Torre Parra, G., Rad, P., Choo, K.-K. R., & Beebe, N. (2020). Detecting Internet of Things attacks using distributed deep learning. Journal of Network and Computer Applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2020.102662
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.