Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 344

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

Bayesian event classification for intrusion detection

Kruegel, C., Mutz, D., Robertson, W., Valeur, F.·2004·19th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, 2003. Proceedings.

Abstract

Intrusion detection systems (IDSs) attempt to identify attacks by comparing collected data to predefined signatures known to be malicious (misuse-based IDSs) or to a model of legal behavior (anomaly-based IDSs). Anomaly-based approaches have the advantage of being able to detect previously unknown attacks, but they suffer from the difficulty of building robust models of acceptable behavior, which may result in a large number of false alarms. Almost all current anomaly-based intrusion detection systems classify an input event as normal or anomalous by analyzing its features, utilizing a number of different models. A decision for an input event is made by aggregating the results of all employed models. We have identified two reasons for the large number of false alarms, caused by incorrect classification of events in current systems. One is the simplistic aggregation of model outputs in the decision phase. Often, only the sum of the model results is calculated and compared to a threshold. The other reason is the lack of integration of additional information into the decision process. This additional information can be related to the models, such as the confidence in a model's output, or can be extracted from external sources. To mitigate these shortcomings, we propose an event classification scheme that is based on Bayesian networks. Bayesian networks improve the aggregation of different model outputs and allow one to seamlessly incorporate additional information. Experimental results show that the accuracy of the event classification process is significantly improved using our proposed approach.

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/csac.2003.1254306

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 344

Metadata

Authors
Kruegel, C., Mutz, D., Robertson, W., & Valeur, F.
Venue
19th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, 2003. Proceedings.
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2004-07-08
Pages
14-23
ISSN
1063-9527 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104593144
Cited by
344
References
1
FWCI
5.08
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: Bayesian event classification for intrusion detection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/csac.2003.1254306
The paper
Kruegel, C., Mutz, D., Robertson, W., & Valeur, F. (2004). Bayesian event classification for intrusion detection. 19th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, 2003. Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1109/csac.2003.1254306

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.