Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Contextual Fuzzy Cognitive Map for Intrusion Response System

Abstract

An intrusion response system is charged with minimizing any losses caused by intrusion. It remains ineffective if the response to the intrusion does not bring the timely and adequate corrections required by the victim system. This paper proposes a new intrusion response system based on contextual fuzzy cognitive map. In this intrusion response system framework, a new ontology is defined based upon conceptual graphs in order to describe relationships between different intrusion concepts and recognize suspect connection as an intrusion which belongs to known intrusion class (DOS, PROBING, U2R or R2U). Fuzzy cognitive maps are used to assess the negative impact of an intrusion on the victim system. Specifying appropriate remedies for all damages which are caused by intrusion is considered as main task of intrusion response system. There are two kinds of remedies: direct or indirect remedies, the former is accomplished by acting directly on the victim system but the later is considered as remotely acting on damaged system. The proposed intrusion response system is multilayer system. The first layer is charged with the identification of the intrusion suspect intrusion using conceptual graphs to build a new ontology. The second layer assesses the effect of intrusion on the victim system using a fuzzy cognitive map. The third layer recommends a response in two ways: automatically by acting through a mobile agent, or manually by alerting the appropriate security administrator.

References (37)

  1. Anuar N.B., Papadaki M., Furnell S.M., Clarke N.L.: An investigation and survey of response options for Intrusion Response Systems (IRSs) Proceedings of the 9th Annual Information Security South Africa Conference, Sandton, South Africa, 2 -4 August, pp1-8, ISBN: 978-1-4244-5493-8, (2010)
  2. Arfaoui N., Jemili F., Zaghdoud M., Ben Ahmed M.: Comparative Study Between Bayesian Network And Possibilistic Network in Intrusion Detection », In Proc. of the International Conference on Security and Cryptography, Secrypt, Portugal (2006).
  3. Ivan B., Sergei M., Jeff R., and Karl L.: Using Specification-Based Intrusion Detection for Automated Response. International symposium on recent advances in intrusion detection N o 6, Pittsburgh PA , USA: September 08, 2003 , vol. 2820, pp. 136-154 (2003).
  4. Baudrit C. and Dubois D. : Représentation et propagation de connaissances imprécises et incertaines: Application à l'évaluation des risques liées aux sites et aux sols pollués. Université Toulouse III -Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France, Mars (2006).
  5. Bauer D. S. and Koblentz M. E.: NIDX: An Expert System for Real-Time Network Intrusion Detection," Proceedings of the Computer Networking Symposium, pp. 90-106, Washington, DC, April (1998).
  6. Boonthum C., Toida S. and Levinstein I. B.: Paraphrasing Recognition through Conceptual Graph, Department of Computer Science, Old Dominion Universiy, Norfolk, Virginia, USA, (2003)
  7. Cuppens F. and Ortalo R.: LAMBDA: A language to model a database for detection of attacks. In Third International Workshop on the Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection (RAID'2000), Toulouse, France, (2000).
  8. DARPA. Knowledge Discovery in Databases, 1999. DARPA archive. Task Description http://www.kdd.ics.uci.edu/databases/kddcup99/task.ht m Accessed October 10, (2007)
  9. DARPA Cyber Panel Program. DARPA cyber panel program grand challenge problem (GCP). http://www.grandchallengeproblem.net/, Accessed October 10, (2007).
  10. Eng, P., Haug, M.: Automatic Response to Intrusion Detection. Faculty of Engineering and Science, Agder University College, June (2004).
  11. Fessi B. A., Hamdi M., Benabdallah S., Boudriga N.: Automated Intrusion Response System: Surveys and Analysis. In Proceedings of Security and Management'2008. pp.149-155, (2008).
  12. Gruber T.: Ontology, Encyclopedia of Database Systems. Ling Liu and M. Tamer Özsu (Eds.), Springer- Verlag, (2008).
  13. Hayes, P. J.: The Second Naïve Physics Manifesto. Hobbs and Moore (eds.), Formal Theories of the Common-Sense World, Norwood: Ablex, (1985).
  14. Jemili F., Zaghdoud M., Benahmed M.: HIDPAS: Hybrid Intrusion Detection and Prediction multiAgent System. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, Vol. 5, No.1, (2009).
  15. Jemili F., Zaghdoud M., Ben Ahmed M.: Intrusion Detection based on Hybrid Propagation in Bayesian Networks. In Proc. of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and security informatics, ISI (2009).
  16. Jemili F., Zaghdoud M., Ben Ahmed M.: Attack Prediction based on Hybrid Propagation in Bayesian Networks. In Proc. of the Internet Technology And Secured Transactions Conference, ICITST (2009).
  17. Kosko, B.: Fuzzy cognitive maps. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies.1986 (24) pp: 65- 75 (1986).
  18. Kosko, B.: Neural networks and fuzzy systems: A dynamical systems approach tomachine intelligence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.(1992).
  19. Kosko, B.: Fuzzy engineering. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.(1997).
  20. Kruegel C., Darren M. W., Robertson F. V. : Bayesian Event Classification for Intrusion Detection Reliable Software Group. University of California, Santa Barbara, (2003).
  21. Lee, K. C. and Kim H. S.: A causal knowledge driven inference engine for expert system. In Proceedings of the annual Hawaii international conference on system science. pp: 284-293 (1998).
  22. Mukherjee B., Heberlein T. L. and Levitt K. N.: Network intrusion detection. IEEE Network. 8(3):26{41, May/June (1994).
  23. Onashoga S. A., Akinde A. D., and Sodiya A. S.: A Strategic Review of Existing Mobile Agent-Based Intrusion Detection Systems. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology Volume 6, (2009).
  24. Rash M. et al.: Snort 2.1 Intrusion Detection, Chapter 12: Acrive Response, pp 605-670, Second edition, Syngress Publishing, (2004).
  25. Scarfon C., Mell P.: Guide of Intrusion Detection and Prevention System. National Institute of Standard and Tachnologies, NIST, Special Publication, 800-04, February (2007).
  26. Sebring M. M. et al.: Expert Systems in Intrusion Detection: A Case Study. Proceedings, 11th National Computer Security Conference, pp. 74-81, October (1988).
  27. Siraj A., Bridges S. M. and Vaughn R. B.: Fuzzy Cognitive Maps for Decision Support in an Intelligent Intrusion System. Department of Computer Science Mississippi State University Misstate, MS 39762, (2000).
  28. Smaha S. E.: Haystack: An Intrusion Detection System. Fourth Aerospace Computer Security Applications Conference, Orlando Florida, pp. 37- 44, December (1988).
  29. Sowa J. F.: Conceptual Structures: information Processing in Mind and Machine. Addison-Wesley, MA (1983).
  30. Sowa, J. F.: Conceptual Structures. Information Processing in Mind and Machine, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, (1984).
  31. Sowa, J. F.: Conceptual Graphs as a Universal Knowledge Representation. Computers Math. Application, 23(2-5): pp:75-93 (1992).
  32. Stakhanova, N., Basu, S., Wong, J.: Taxonomy of Intrusion Response Systems. International Journal of Information and Computer Security, Vol. 1, No. 1, (2006).
  33. Stakhanova N., Basu S., Wong J.: A Taxonomy of Intrusion Response Systems. International Journal of Information and Computer Security, Volume 1, Issue ½, Jannuary (2007).
  34. Tarantola C.: Ontology Engineering by Fuzzy Cognitive Maps. National Conference on Radio communications and Broadcasting, KKRRiT, VISNET, Warsaw, 16-18 June (2004).
  35. Tolman E.C., "Cognitive Maps in Rats and Men", Psychological Review, 42, 55, pp: 189-208, (1948).
  36. Wang a.b H., Wang a.b Li, Application of Improved Fuzzy Cognitive Map Based on Fuzzy Neural Network in Intrusion Detection, Journal of Information & Computational Science 10: 1 (2013) 271-278, Available at http://www.joics.com.
  37. Yue H., Chun-Mei L.: Partitioning Study of Complex System, WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS, Issue 12, Volume 7, ISSN: 1109-2777, December (2008).