Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 169

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

An analysis of Recurrent Neural Networks for Botnet detection behavior

Torres, Pablo, Catania, Carlos, Garcia, Sebastian, Garino, Carlos Garcia·2016·2016 IEEE Biennial Congress of Argentina (ARGENCON)

Abstract

A Botnet can be conceived as a group of compromised computers which can be controlled remotely to execute coordinated attacks or commit fraudulent acts. The fact that Botnets keep continuously evolving means that traditional detection approaches are always one step behind. Recently, the behavior analysis of network traffic has arisen as a way to tackle the Botnet detection problem. The behavioral analysis approach aims to look at the common patterns that Botnets follow across their life cycle, trying to generalize in order to become capable of detecting unseen Botnet traffic. This work provides an analysis of the viability of Recurrent Neural Networks (RNN) to detect the behavior of network traffic by modeling it as a sequence of states that change over time. The recent success applying RNN to sequential data problems makes them a viable candidate on the task of sequence behavior analysis. The performance of a RNN is evaluated considering two main issues, the imbalance of network traffic and the optimal length of sequences. Both issues have a great impact in potentially real-life implementation. Evaluation is performed using a stratified k-fold cross validation and an independent test is conducted on not previously seen traffic belonging to a different Botnet. Preliminary results reveal that the RNN is capable of classifying the traffic with a high attack detection rate and an very small false alarm rate, which makes it a potential candidate for implementation and deployment on real-world scenarios. However, experiments exposed the fact that RNN detection models have problems for dealing with traffic behaviors not easily differentiable as well as some particular cases of imbalanced network traffic.

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 · 10.1109/argencon.2016.7585247

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

Cited by

See all 169

Metadata

Authors
Torres, P., Catania, C., Garcia, S., & Garino, C. G.
Venue
2016 IEEE Biennial Congress of Argentina (ARGENCON)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2016-06
Pages
1-6
OpenAlex
W2528827134
Cited by
169
References
1
FWCI
10.60
Type
conference paper
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: An analysis of Recurrent Neural Networks for Botnet detection behavior. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/argencon.2016.7585247
The paper
Torres, P., Catania, C., Garcia, S., & Garino, C. G. (2016). An analysis of Recurrent Neural Networks for Botnet detection behavior. 2016 IEEE Biennial Congress of Argentina (ARGENCON). https://doi.org/10.1109/argencon.2016.7585247

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.