The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Random-Forests-Based Network Intrusion Detection Systems
Abstract
Prevention of security breaches completely using the existing security technologies is unrealistic. As a result, intrusion detection is an important component in network security. However, many current intrusion detection systems (IDSs) are rule-based systems, which have limitations to detect novel intrusions. Moreover, encoding rules is time-consuming and highly depends on the knowledge of known intrusions. Therefore, we propose new systematic frameworks that apply a data mining algorithm called random forests in misuse, anomaly, and hybrid-network-based IDSs. In misuse detection, patterns of intrusions are built automatically by the random forests algorithm over training data. After that, intrusions are detected by matching network activities against the patterns. In anomaly detection, novel intrusions are detected by the outlier detection mechanism of the random forests algorithm. After building the patterns of network services by the random forests algorithm, outliers related to the patterns are determined by the outlier detection algorithm. The hybrid detection system improves the detection performance by combining the advantages of the misuse and anomaly detection. We evaluate our approaches over the knowledge discovery and data mining 1999 (KDDpsila99) dataset. The experimental results demonstrate that the performance provided by the proposed misuse approach is better than the best KDDpsila99 result; compared to other reported unsupervised anomaly detection approaches, our anomaly detection approach achieves higher detection rate when the false positive rate is low; and the presented hybrid system can improve the overall performance of the aforementioned IDSs.
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
Cited by
A Survey of Data Mining and Machine Learning Methods for Cyber Security Intrusion Detection
Buczak, A. L., & Guven, E. (2016) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2015.2494502 · Cited by 3,332
A Deep Learning Approach for Intrusion Detection Using Recurrent Neural Networks
Yin, C., Zhu, Y., Fei, J., & He, X. (2017) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2762418 · Cited by 2,100
Data mining for credit card fraud: a comparative study
Bhattacharyya, S., Jha, S., Tharakunnel, K., & Westland, J. C. (2011) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2010.08.008 · Cited by 1,108
Cybersecurity data science: an overview from machine learning perspective
Sarker, I. H., Kayes, A. S. M., Badsha, S., Alqahtani, H., Watters, P., & Ng, A. (2020) · Journal of Big Data · doi:10.1186/s40537-020-00318-5 · Cited by 766
Future Intelligent and Secure Vehicular Network Toward 6G: Machine-Learning Approaches
Tang, F., Kawamoto, Y., Kato, N., & Liu, J. (2020) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2019.2954595 · Cited by 620
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, J., Zulkernine, M., & Haque, A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews)
- Published
- 2008-09
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 649-659
- ISSN
- 1094-6977 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2100537916
- Cited by
- 574
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.68
- Type
- journal article
- 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: Random-Forests-Based Network Intrusion Detection Systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tsmcc.2008.923876
- The paper
- Zhang, J., Zulkernine, M., & Haque, A. (2008). Random-Forests-Based Network Intrusion Detection Systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews). https://doi.org/10.1109/tsmcc.2008.923876
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.