Federated Mimic Learning for Privacy Preserving Intrusion Detection
Abstract
Internet of things (IoT) devices are prone to attacks due to the limitation of their privacy and security components. These attacks vary from exploiting backdoors to disrupting the communication network of the devices. Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) play an essential role in ensuring information privacy and security of IoT devices against these attacks. Recently, deep learning-based IDS techniques are becoming more prominent due to their high classification accuracy. However, conventional deep learning techniques jeopardize user privacy due to the transfer of user data to a centralized server. Federated learning (FL) is a popular privacy-preserving decentralized learning method. FL enables training models locally at the edge devices and transferring local models to a centralized server instead of transferring sensitive data. Nevertheless, FL can suffer from reverse engineering ML attacks that can learn information about the user's data from model. To overcome the problem of reverse engineering, mimic learning is another way to preserve the privacy of ML-based IDS. In mimic learning, a student model is trained with the public dataset, which is labeled with the teacher model that is trained by sensitive user data. In this work, we propose a novel approach that combines the advantages of FL and mimic learning, namely federated mimic learning to create a distributed IDS while minimizing the risk of jeopardizing users' privacy, and benchmark its performance compared to other ML-based IDS techniques using NSL-KDD dataset. Our results show that we can achieve 98.11% detection accuracy with federated mimic learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Federated mimic learning achieves 98.11% detection accuracy compared to centralized machine learning-based IDSs.
“the results show 98.11% detection accuracy with federated mimic learning compared to centralized machine learningbased IDSs.”
From Federated Deep Learning for Cyber Security in the Internet of Things: Concepts, Applications, and Experimental Analysis (2021) · cites this paper as [89]
Cites
Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Data
McMahan, H. B., Moore, E., Ramage, D., Hampson, S., & Arcas, B. A. Y. (2016) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1602.05629 · Cited by 14,215 · see citing works
Federated Learning for Wireless Communications: Motivation, Opportunities, and Challenges
Niknam, S., Dhillon, H. S., & Reed, J. H. (2020) · IEEE Communications Magazine · doi:10.1109/mcom.001.1900461 · Cited by 820 · see citing works
A Comprehensive Study of Security of Internet-of-Things
Mosenia, A., & Jha, N. K. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing · doi:10.1109/tetc.2016.2606384 · Cited by 817 · see citing works
Revathi, S., & Malathi, A. (2013) · Cited by 409 · see citing works
6thSense: A Context-aware Sensor-based Attack Detector for Smart DevicesPreprint
Sikder, A. K., Aksu, H., & Uluagac, A. S. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.10220 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
A Subset Feature Elimination Mechanism for Intrusion Detection System
Nkiama, H., Zainudeen, S., & Saidu, M. (2016) · International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications · doi:10.14569/ijacsa.2016.070419 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Smart Solution, Poor Protection
Liu, H., Li, C., Jin, X., et al. (2017) · doi:10.1145/3139937.3139948 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Mimic Learning to Generate a Shareable Network Intrusion Detection Model
Shafee, A., Baza, M., Talbert, D. A., et al. (2020) · IEEE Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC) · doi:10.1109/ccnc46108.2020.9045236 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
An analysis of malicious threat agents for the smart connected home
Bugeja, J., Jacobsson, A., & Davidsson, P. (2017) · IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops) · doi:10.1109/percomw.2017.7917623 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Rawat, S., Srinivasan, A., & Vinayakumar, R. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.01114 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Intrusion detection system in Wireless Sensor Network based on mobile agent
Mourabit, Y. E., Toumanari, A., Bouirden, A., et al. (2014) · World Conference on Complex Systems · doi:10.1109/icocs.2014.7060910 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Karuppiah, A. B., Dalfiah, J., Yuvashri, K., et al. (2014) · International Conference on Eco-friendly Computing and Communication Systems (ICECCS) · doi:10.1109/eco-friendly.2014.94 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Karuppiah, A. B., Dalfiah, J., Yuvashri, K., et al. (2014) · International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems · doi:10.1109/iceccs.2014.94 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Privacy-Preserving Detection of IoT Devices Connected Behind a NAT in a Smart Home SetupPreprint
Meidan, Y., Sachidananda, V., Elovici, Y., et al. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1905.13430 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ferrag, M. A., Friha, O., Maglaras, L., Janicke, H., & Shu, L. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3118642 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
- Authors
- Al-Athba Al-Marri, N. A., Ciftler, B. S., & Abdallah, M. M.
- Affiliations
- Hamad bin Khalifa University (QA)
- ORCID
- Abdallah, Mohamed M.
- Venue
- 2020 IEEE International Black Sea Conference on Communications and Networking (BlackSeaCom)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2020-05-26
- Pages
- 1-6
- OpenAlex
- W3095460055
- Cited by
- 68
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8
- FWCI
- 3.15
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE International Black Sea Conference on Communications and Networking (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
- Keywords
- intrusion detection systems, privacy preservation, federated learning, Internet of Things security, reverse engineering attacks, deep learning-based intrusion detection, NSL-KDD dataset, distributed learning
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
