Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,100

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The evaluation of Network Anomaly Detection Systems: Statistical analysis of the UNSW-NB15 data set and the comparison with the KDD99 data set

Moustafa, Nour, Slay, Jill·2016·Information Security Journal: A Global Perspective

Abstract

Over the last three decades, Network Intrusion Detection Systems (NIDSs), particularly, Anomaly Detection Systems (ADSs), have become more significant in detecting novel attacks than Signature Detection Systems (SDSs). Evaluating NIDSs using the existing benchmark data sets of KDD99 and NSLKDD does not reflect satisfactory results, due to three major issues: (1) their lack of modern low footprint attack styles, (2) their lack of modern normal traffic scenarios, and (3) a different distribution of training and testing sets. To address these issues, the UNSW-NB15 data set has recently been generated. This data set has nine types of the modern attacks fashions and new patterns of normal traffic, and it contains 49 attributes that comprise the flow based between hosts and the network packets inspection to discriminate between the observations, either normal or abnormal. In this paper, we demonstrate the complexity of the UNSW-NB15 data set in three aspects. First, the statistical analysis of the observations and the attributes are explained. Second, the examination of feature correlations is provided. Third, five existing classifiers are used to evaluate the complexity in terms of accuracy and false alarm rates (FARs) and then, the results are compared with the KDD99 data set. The experimental results show that UNSW-NB15 is more complex than KDD99 and is considered as a new benchmark data set for evaluating NIDSs.

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 · 10.1080/19393555.2015.1125974

Cites

1 of 1 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

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. 10.1007/978-3-319-00930-8_19 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00930-8_19
  2. 10.1109/SURV.2013.052213.00046 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1136/bmj.310.6980.633 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Bouzida Y., 2006, Neural networks vs. decision trees for intrusion detection
  5. 10.1002/9780470140529 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1007/s10115-008-0139-1 · DOI
  7. Cunningham R., 2000, MIT Lincoln Laboratory–Presentation to CERIAS, 11, 29
  8. 10.1109/TSE.1987.232894 · DOI · Paper page
  9. DeWeese S., 2009, Capability of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to conduct cyber warfare and computer network exploitation
  10. 10.1016/j.cose.2008.08.003 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Hall M. A., 1998, Computer Science ’98 Proceedings of the 21st Australasian Computer Science Conference ACSC’98, 181
  12. 10.1016/j.patcog.2005.01.012 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1016/S0167-7152(97)00020-5 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1093/biomet/57.3.519 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1145/382912.382923 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Moustafa N., 2015, Creating novel features to anomaly network detection using DARPA-2009 data set
  17. Moustafa N., 2015, UNSW-NB15: A comprehensive data set for network intrusion detection
  18. 10.1016/j.jnca.2004.01.003 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Panda M., 2007, International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, 7, 258
  20. 10.5121/ijnsa · doi:10.5121/ijnsa
  21. Sharif I., 2012, Unsupervised clustering approach for network anomaly detection, networked digital technologies. In Benlamri, R., (Ed), Networked Digital Technologies
  22. 10.1007/11941439_114 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Vatis M. A., 2001, Cyber attacks during the war on terrorism: A predictive analysis, 10.21236/ADA386280 · doi:10.21236/ada386280
  24. 10.3233/JCS-1999-7103 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Witten I. H., 2005, Practical machine learning tools and techniques (The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management Systems)

Cited by

See all 1,100

Metadata

Authors
Moustafa, N., & Slay, J.
Venue
Information Security Journal: A Global Perspective
Published
2016-01-11
Volume
25
Issue
1-3
Pages
18-31
ISSN
  • 1939-3547 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-3555
OpenAlex
W2334853001
Cited by
1,100
References
1
FWCI
57.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Funders
School of Engineering and information technology, University of New South Wales (5025758)

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: The evaluation of Network Anomaly Detection Systems: Statistical analysis of the UNSW-NB15 data set and the comparison with the KDD99 data set. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/19393555.2015.1125974
The paper
Moustafa, N., & Slay, J. (2016). The evaluation of Network Anomaly Detection Systems: Statistical analysis of the UNSW-NB15 data set and the comparison with the KDD99 data set. Information Security Journal: A Global Perspective. https://doi.org/10.1080/19393555.2015.1125974

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.