The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Deep neural network based malware detection using two dimensional binary program features
Abstract
In this paper we introduce a deep neural network based malware detection system that Invincea has developed, which achieves a usable detection rate at an extremely low false positive rate and scales to real world training example volumes on commodity hardware. We show that our system achieves a 95% detection rate at 0.1% false positive rate (FPR), based on more than 400,000 software binaries sourced directly from our customers and internal malware databases. In addition, we describe a non-parametric method for adjusting the classifier's scores to better represent expected precision in the deployment environment. Our results demonstrate that it is now feasible to quickly train and deploy a low resource, highly accurate machine learning classification model, with false positive rates that approach traditional labor intensive expert rule based malware detection, while also detecting previously unseen malware missed by these traditional approaches. Since machine learning models tend to improve with larger datasizes, we foresee deep neural network classification models gaining in importance as part of a layered network defense strategy in coming years.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538
ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. (2017) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3065386 · Cited by 112,155
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14539 · Cited by 84,126
The Elements of Statistical Learning
Hastie, T., Friedman, J., & Tibshirani, R. (2001) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-21606-5 · Cited by 24,162
Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classification
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2015) · 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2015.123 · Cited by 19,741
A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets
Hinton, G. E., Osindero, S., & Teh, Y.-W. (2006) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.2006.18.7.1527 · Cited by 16,336
Approximate nearest neighbors: towards removing the curse of dimensionality
Indyk, P., & Motwani, R. (1998) · Proceedings of the thirtieth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing - STOC '98 · doi:10.1145/276698.276876 · Cited by 4,188
Cited by
Adversarial Examples: Attacks and Defenses for Deep Learning
Yuan, X., He, P., Zhu, Q., & Li, X. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2018.2886017 · Cited by 1,733
Targeted Backdoor Attacks on Deep Learning Systems Using Data Poisoning
Chen, X., Liu, C., Li, B., Lu, K., & Song, D. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1712.05526 · Cited by 1,039
A Comprehensive Review on Malware Detection Approaches
Aslan, O., & Samet, R. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2963724 · Cited by 649
A Survey on Malware Detection Using Data Mining Techniques
Ye, Y., Li, T., Adjeroh, D., & Iyengar, S. S. (2018) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3073559 · Cited by 623
Security and privacy in smart farming: challenges and opportunities
Gupta, M., Abdelsalam, M., Khorsandroo, S., & Mittal, S. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2975142 · Cited by 609
Metadata
- Authors
- Saxe, J., & Berlin, K.
- Venue
- 2015 10th International Conference on Malicious and Unwanted Software (MALWARE)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2015-10
- Pages
- 11-20
- OpenAlex
- W1893133781
- Cited by
- 711
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 23.58
- 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
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.
