FS-Net: A Flow Sequence Network For Encrypted Traffic Classification
Abstract
With more attention paid to user privacy and communication security, the volume of encrypted traffic rises sharply, which brings a huge challenge to traditional rule-based traffic classification methods. Combining machine learning algorithms and manual-design features has become the mainstream methods to solve this problem. However, these features depend on professional experience heavily, which needs lots of human effort. And these methods divide the encrypted traffic classification problem into piece-wise sub-problems, which could not guarantee the optimal solution. In this paper, we apply the recurrent neural network to the encrypted traffic classification problem and propose the Flow Sequence Network (FS-Net). The FS-Net is an end-to-end classification model that learns representative features from the raw flows, and then classifies them in a unified framework. Moreover, we adopt a multi-layer encoder-decoder structure which can mine the potential sequential characteristics of flows deeply, and import the reconstruction mechanism which can enhance the effectiveness of features. Our comprehensive experiments on the real-world dataset covering 18 applications indicate that FS-Net achieves an excellent performance (99.14% TPR, 0.05% FPR and 0.9906 FTF) and outperforms the state-of-the-art methods.
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?
Existing deep learning methods for encrypted traffic classification highly rely on the amount and distribution of labelled training data, which causes model bias and poor adaptation to newly emerged encryption.
“However, these methods highly rely on the amount and distribution of labelled training data, which is easy to cause model bias and hard to adapt to newly emerged encryption.”
From ET-BERT: A Contextualized Datagram Representation with Pre-training Transformers for Encrypted Traffic Classification (2022) · cites this paper as [22]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 35 · Cited by 630
- Authors
- Liu, C., He, L., Xiong, G., Cao, Z., & Li, Z.
- Affiliations
- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- National Computer Network Emergency Response Technical Team/Coordination Center of Chinar (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE INFOCOM 2019 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2019-04
- Pages
- 1171-1179
- OpenAlex
- W2919493784
- Cited by
- 630
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 129 · 2025: 157 · 2024: 113 · 2023: 81 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 14.35
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Wireless Signal Modulation Classification
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Video Quality Assessment
- Keywords
- encrypted traffic classification, recurrent neural networks, encoder-decoder architecture, end-to-end classification, feature reconstruction, application-level traffic classification, network traffic analysis
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