The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automatically Evading Classifiers: A Case Study on PDF Malware Classifiers
Open accessAbstract
Machine learning is widely used to develop classifiers for security tasks.However, the robustness of these methods against motivated adversaries is uncertain.In this work, we propose a generic method to evaluate the robustness of classifiers under attack.The key idea is to stochastically manipulate a malicious sample to find a variant that preserves the malicious behavior but is classified as benign by the classifier.We present a general approach to search for evasive variants and report on results from experiments using our techniques against two PDF malware classifiers, PDFrate and Hidost.Our method is able to automatically find evasive variants for both classifiers for all of the 500 malicious seeds in our study.Our results suggest a general method for evaluating classifiers used in security applications, and raise serious doubts about the effectiveness of classifiers based on superficial features in the presence of adversaries.
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
Detection and analysis of drive-by-download attacks and malicious JavaScript code
Cova, M., Kruegel, C., & Vigna, G. (2010) · Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1772690.1772720 · Cited by 580
Malicious PDF detection using metadata and structural features
Smutz, C., & Stavrou, A. (2012) · Proceedings of the 28th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference · doi:10.1145/2420950.2420987 · Cited by 271
Cited by
Practical Black-Box Attacks against Machine Learning
Papernot, N., McDaniel, P., Goodfellow, I., Jha, S., Celik, Z. B., & Swami, A. (2017) · Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security · doi:10.1145/3052973.3053009 · Cited by 3,495
Deep Models Under the GAN: Information Leakage from Collaborative Deep Learning
Hitaj, B., Ateniese, G., & Perez-Cruz, F. (2017) · Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security · doi:10.1145/3133956.3134012 · Cited by 1,377
SoK: Security and Privacy in Machine Learning
Papernot, N., McDaniel, P., Sinha, A., & Wellman, M. P. (2018) · 2018 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P) · doi:10.1109/eurosp.2018.00035 · Cited by 502
Stealing Hyperparameters in Machine Learning
Wang, B., & Gong, N. Z. (2018) · 2018 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) · doi:10.1109/sp.2018.00038 · Cited by 470
A Survey on Security Threats and Defensive Techniques of Machine Learning: A Data Driven View
Liu, Q., Li, P., Zhao, W., Cai, W., Yu, S., & Leung, V. C. M. (2018) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2805680 · Cited by 421
Metadata
- Authors
- Xu, W., Qi, Y., & Evans, D.
- Venue
- Proceedings 2016 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium
- Publisher
- Internet Society
- Published
- 2016
- OpenAlex
- W2574797807
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 17.06
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Automatically Evading Classifiers: A Case Study on PDF Malware Classifiers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.14722/ndss.2016.23115
- The paper
- Xu, W., Qi, Y., & Evans, D. (2016). Automatically Evading Classifiers: A Case Study on PDF Malware Classifiers. Proceedings 2016 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium. https://doi.org/10.14722/ndss.2016.23115
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.