DOCSLIB.ORG

Effectiveness of Machine Learning for Intrusion Detection Systems. Heuristic-Based Network Intrusion Detection System Over Supervised Learning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Effectiveness of Machine Learning for Intrusion Detection Systems. Heuristic-Based Network Intrusion Detection System Over Supervised Learning Effectiveness of Machine Learning for Intrusion Detection Systems. Heuristic-based Network Intrusion Detection System over Supervised Learning Valiente Sanchez, Joel Curs 2019-2020 Director: Vanesa Daza GRAU EN ENGINYERIA INFORMÀTICA Treball de Fi de Grau ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To my family, for supporting me as much as they can for getting this university degree and completing this project. To my supervisor, Vanesa Daza, for encouraging me to develop this project. All the advice and corrections provided were necessary for completing this project. To all of you, thanks for providing me all the love and opportunities I needed. iii ABSTRACT Network Intrusion Detection Systems (NIDS) are software applications monitoring a network and the systems using this network for detecting malicious activities. These activities are reported to the administrator in the form of alarms. No further actions are taken to prevent these attacks, the creation of these alarms is the desired output of any NIDS. The administrator, using these alarms, realise what attacks are being performed. In front of successful attacks the source of the problem (vulnerability) is described by the alarms and, therefore, the administrator knows what needs to be fixed indeed. It is currently an expanding area and many companies provide software compatible with most used OS (Windows, Linux and Mac OS), for instance, Snort is the most used NIDS worldwide (owned and maintained by Cisco from 2013) which supports both Windows and Linux. Most used NIDSs are rule-based: administrators defines rules that match corresponding attacks. These rules can be provided by some NIDS vendors to detect well known attacks. The amount of rules is considerable and usually the management of them becomes a full-time work. As a result, researches are currently developing new NIDS using the power of Machine Learning in order to automatize this task. However, open source and free options are scarce which leads to performing this final degree project. RESUM Network Intrusion Detection Systems (NIDS) són aplicacions software monitorant una xarxa i els sistemes utilitzant-la per detectar activitats malicioses. Aquestes activitats són enviades a l’administrador en forma d’alarmes. Cap acció extra es pren per evitar aquests atacs, la creació d’aquestes alarmes és la resposta esperada de qualsevol NIDS. L’administrador, utilitzant les alarmes, s’adona de quins atacs s’estan executant. Davant d’atacs realitzats amb èxit, la font del problema (vulnerabilitat) es descriu en les alarmes i, per tant, l’administrador comprèn què necessita ser fixat. Actualment és una àrea en expansió i diferents empreses proporcionen software compatible amb els SO més utilitzats (Windows, Linux i Mac OS), per exemple, Snort és el NIDS més utilitzat internacionalment (apropiat i mantingut per Cisco des del 2013). el qual suporta Windows i Linux. Els NIDS més utilitzats es basen en regles: administrador defineixen regles les quals coincideixen amb els atacs corresponents. Aquestes regles poden ser proporcionades per alguns venedors de NIDS per detectar atacs ben coneguts. La quantitat de regles és considerable i sovint la seva gestió es converteix en treball a temps complet. Com a resultat, els investigadors estan actualment desenvolupant nous NIDS utilitzant la potència del Machine Learning per automatitzar aquesta tasca. Malgrat això, les opcions open source i gratuïtes són escasses la qual cosa va donar lloc a la creació d’aquest treball final de grau. v PROLOG Cybersecurity concerns with protecting users information against attackers. Cybercriminals are constantly trying to steal as much information as possible for malicious purposes. Normally, the targeted victims are enterprises offering services for users. For protecting their systems, enterprises make use of Network Intrusion Detection Systems. These systems are responsible for detecting and notifying enterprises that cyberattacks are being performed. Normally, these systems detect attacks by means of rules. Thus, these systems are known as rule-based Network Intrusion Detection Systems. Alerts are triggered for attacks matching rules defined by administrators. Moreover, administrators spend a lot of hours maintaining the rules used to detect attacks. It becomes a full-time job in most enterprises as each day new attacks emerge. As a result, a new type of those systems detecting and alerting from attacks appears for solving the management problem. The name of this new type is heuristic-based Network Intrusion Detection Systems. These systems does not require administrators procedures as it is managed by itself. In other words, these systems are intelligent. Machine Learning, a subset of Artificial intelligence, is used in these systems. The systems are somehow trained for detecting if attacks are being performed. No rules are needed and administrators are not involved in it. Researchers are improving these intelligent systems for detecting as many attacks as possible. Also, as new attacks constantly appear, researchers are trying to supply enough intelligence to systems for learning how to detect new attacks. Most of the Network Intrusion Detection Systems used worldwide are not intelligent. Administrators are involved in the process as rules are used. This systems are tools installed in machines. The tools are publicly available on the Internet in most cases. Users and enterprises can use them for free. These tools are known as open-source as its code is also available. However, heuristic-based detection systems are less common that rule-based. There are a few tools available on the Internet for free but enterprises are not using them indeed. openNIDS is a heuristic-based Network Intrusion Detection System provided for solving this problem. It is completely free to use and the code is publicly available as well. The purpose of this tool is bringing users and enterprises a tool using Machine Learning for detecting attacks. Moreover, the results are shown in a Graphical User Interface for making them understandable by a large audience. Systems intelligence provided by Machine Learning algorithms needs data from where to lean. Dataset is the technical name given to data used by these algorithms. Security data from enterprises is very scarce on the Internet or too old. This is a problem for developing that kind of systems as the correct behaviour of them strictly depends on the data used. openNIDS is not worried about this problem as it is trained with open-source data. vii CONTENTS ABSTRACT............................................................................................ vii PROLOG................................................................................................. ix FIGURES LIST....................................................................................... xii TABLES LIST........................................................................................ xiii 1. NIDS.................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Background...................................................................................... 1 a) Anatomy.......................................................................................... 1 b) Location.......................................................................................... 2 1.2. Types of NIDS................................................................................. 4 a) Rule-based....................................................................................... 4 b) Heuristic-based............................................................................... 5 1.3 State-of-the-art software.................................................................... 7 a) Snort................................................................................................ 7 b) Suricata........................................................................................... 9 c) Zeek................................................................................................. 11 d) Hogzilla........................................................................................... 12 e) Closing comments…....................................................................... 15 2. SOFTWARE DEVELOPED............................................................... 17 2.1. Machine Learning............................................................................ 18 a) Random forest................................................................................. 18 b) Dataset............................................................................................. 22 c) HPC................................................................................................. 30 d) ML models...................................................................................... 32 e) Evaluation metrics........................................................................... 33 2.2. GUI................................................................................................... 40 a) Design............................................................................................. 40 b) Implementation............................................................................... 42 c) Real-time demo............................................................................... 45 2.3. License............................................................................................. 46 3. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Running Bro on BSD
    Running Bro on BSD An analysis of high performance solutions running on BSD operating systems. Michael Shirk BroCon 2016 @Shirkdog http://github.com/Shirkdog Agenda l Introduction l Bro is awesome l Why FreeBSD? l High Performance and FreeBSD l FreeBSD at the Berkley Lab l PF_RING vs. netmap l OpenBSD Rant Warning l Whenever you see the beastie with a hammer, there is a potential for some BSD bias to slip in. l The goal is to minimize this throughout the talk. l All information not cited in this talk is based on personal experience or opinion (marked with an asterisk *). Introduction l Worked in IDS/IPS since 2003 (various positions including consulting) - Engines: Snort, Suricata, Dragon and now Bro (also had to work with McAfee, ISS, NFR … others) - Signatures for Emerging Threats (since they were Bleeding Edge Snort) l Support Open Source Security Tools and Software - Maintain pulledpork for Snort/Suricata (rule updating script): http://github.com/shirkdog/pulledpork - Active community member of open source projects: l Operating Systems: FreeBSD, OpenBSD, HardenedBSD l Security Tools: Snort, Suricata, AIDE, Bro (starting) Bro Beginnings l 2013 – Bro setup on Linux with PF_RING and Suricata ( Dell R610 12 Core 32GB Appliance) - PoC was Security Onion, the production setup was on Ubuntu with PF_RING, Suricata and nothing else. - Gigamon TAP aggregated data to a single 10Gb Fiber interface fed to the Bro/Suricata sensor. - ~700Mbps peak, ~350Mbps non-peak l Bro logs were fed into Splunk (modified Splunk_TA_Bro to work with log formats) l Set it and forget it, it's just that simple.
    [Show full text]
  • Ipv6 Security Training Course
    IPv6 Security Training Course References March 2021 Introduction During the IPv6 Security Course, many references are given, mostly IETF RFCs (Internet Engineering Task Force)(Request For Comments). You can also find useful references for RIPE NCC documents, security tools and sources of relevant security information. This document contain more details about those references, allowing the course participants to go deeper into details. In the case of RFCs, updated information about them, like the date of publication or if it still valid or has been obsoleted or update by another RFC, could be found in the www.rfc-editor.org web site. IETF Standards References [RFC2827] P. Ferguson, D. Senie, “Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing”, May 2000, Best Current Practice [RFC3704] F. Baker, P. Savola, “Ingress Filtering for Multihomed Networks”, March 2004, Best Current Practice [RFC3756] P. Nikander, Ed., J. Kempf, E. Nordmark, “IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (ND) Trust Models and Threats”, May 2004, Informational [RFC3849] G. Huston, A. Lord, P. Smith, "IPv6 Address Prefix Reserved for Documentation", July 2004 [RFC3971] J. Arkko, Ed., J. Kempf, B. Zill, P. Nikander, SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND), March 2005, Proposed Standard [RFC3972] T. Aura, “Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)”, March 2005, Proposed Standard [RFC4191] R. Draves, D. Thaler, “Default Router Preferences and More- Specific Routes”, November 2005, Proposed Standard [RFC4301] S. Kent, K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol”, December 2005, Proposed Standard [RFC4302] S. Kent, “IP Authentication Header”, December 2005, Obsoletes RFC 2402, Proposed Standard [RFC4303] S. Kent, “IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)”, December 2005, Obsoletes RFC 2406, Proposed Standard [RFC4443] A.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Intrusion Detection Systems in Ipv6 Networks
    Evaluation of Intrusion Detection Systems in IPv6 Networks Max Schrotter¨ 1, Thomas Scheffler2 and Bettina Schnor1 1Operating Systems and Distributed Systems, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany 2School of Engineering - Energy and Information, Hochschule fur¨ Technik und Wirtschaft Berlin, Berlin, Germany Keywords: IDS, IDSv6, Benchmark, IPv6. Abstract: This paper introduces a benchmark suite for the evaluation of intrusion detection systems in IPv6 environ- ments. We use this benchmark to evaluate the prominent intrusion detection systems Snort, Zeek and Suricata. Further, an IPv6 Plugin Suite is presented and evaluated which enhances Snort by stateful attack detection. The results of our evaluation demonstrate the current abilities to detect IPv6 link-local attacks. 1 INTRODUCTION This leads to a third approach, that focuses on network monitoring and anomaly detection. Work Relatively early after the finalization of the IPv6 stan- started with (Beck et al., 2007), which introduced the dard, it became apparent, that the automatic host con- host-based tool ndpmon that listens to all NDP mes- figuration mechanism defined in the protocol did not sages in order to detect NDP anomalies and report work well with the proposed IPsec security mech- them. Another suitable approach is based on the ex- anisms and that the Neighbor Discovery Protocol tension of Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) with ad- (NDP) (Narten et al., 2007) suffered from similar se- equate protocol support for the detection of specific curity problems as the Address Resolution Protocol IPv6-attacks. The authors of (Schutte¨ et al., 2012) (ARP) in IPv4 (Arkko et al., 2002). developed an IPv6 Plugin Suite for the well known IDS Snort 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Source Intrusion Detection Systems Evaluation for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprise Environments
    Open source intrusion detection systems evaluation for small and medium-sized enterprise environments Markku Hänninen Master’s Thesis December 2019 School of Technology Master’s degree programme in information technology Cyber Security Description Author(s) Type of publication Date Hänninen, Markku Mikael Master’s thesis 12/2019 Language of publication: English Number of pages Permission for web: 41 x Title of publication Open source IDS evaluation for small and medium-sized enterprise environments Degree programme Master’s degree programme in Information Technology Supervisor(s) Nevala Jarmo, Saharinen Karo Assigned by L aurio Markus, Paytrail Oyj Abstract Paytrail offers internet payment services to organizations and due to these services, Paytrail has a very public and visible presence on the Internet. Their information systems contain sensitive information about customers and general public using the services. One of the biggest threats to any company today is intrusion to their information systems and networks. While preventive methods can raise the cost of intrusion, there are no 100% secure systems and the next best thing is to notice the intrusion early on. The selected open source intrusion detection systems for networks were compared to provide awareness of their capabilities concerning detection, outputs, administration and software maintenance and development. The research method used a was collective case study. In collective case study a common set of research goals are used to study individual cases. The cases themselves were quantitative and qualitative evaluations of the capabilities mentioned above. These cases and their research results then provide the basis for comparing the different intrusion detection systems by the factors that had been set by Paytrail.
    [Show full text]
  • Bachelor Degree Project Comparison of Systems to Detect Rogue Access
    Bachelor Degree Project Comparison of systems to detect rogue access points Author: Alexander Lennartsson, Hilda Melander Supervisor: Ola Flygt Semester: VT 2019 Subject: Computer Science Abstract A hacker might use a rogue access point to gain access to a network, this poses a threat to the individuals connected to it. The hacker might have the potential to leak corporate data or steal private information. The detection of rogue access points is therefore of importance to prevent any damage to both businesses and individuals. Comparing different software that detects rogue access points increases the chance of someone finding a solution that suits their network. The different type of software that are compared are intrusion detection systems, wireless scanners and a Cisco wireless lan controller. The parameters that are being compared are; cost, compat- ibility, detection capability and implementation difficulty. In order to obtain results some of the parameters require testing. As there are three types of software, three experiment environments should be conducted. Our research indicates that already existing network equipment or the size of the network affects the results from the experiments. Keywords: Network Intrusion Detection, Rogue Access Points, Wireless Scanner, Wireless Lan Controller, Software Comparisons Contents List of FiguresI List of TablesII 1 Introduction1 1.1 Background.................................1 1.2 Related work................................1 1.3 Problem formulation............................2 1.4 Motivation..................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Security Onion Documentation Release 2.3
    Security Onion Documentation Release 2.3 Sep 27, 2021 Table of Contents 1 About 1 1.1 Security Onion..............................................1 1.2 Security Onion Solutions, LLC.....................................2 1.3 Documentation..............................................2 2 Introduction 5 2.1 Network Security Monitoring......................................7 2.2 Enterprise Security Monitoring.....................................7 2.3 Analysis Tools..............................................8 2.4 Deployment Scenarios.......................................... 12 2.5 Conclusion................................................ 12 3 License 13 4 First Time Users 15 5 Getting Started 39 5.1 Architecture............................................... 40 5.2 Hardware Requirements......................................... 48 5.3 Partitioning................................................ 53 5.4 Download................................................. 55 5.5 VMware................................................. 55 5.6 VirtualBox................................................ 57 5.7 Booting Issues.............................................. 58 5.8 Installation................................................ 58 5.9 AWS Cloud AMI............................................. 60 5.10 Azure Cloud Image............................................ 66 5.11 Configuration............................................... 71 5.12 Machine Learning............................................ 72 5.13 After Installation............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Automating Defences Against Cyber Operations in Computer Networks
    DOCTORAL THESIS Automating Defences against Cyber Operations in Computer Networks Mauno Pihelgas TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL TALLINN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY TALLINN 2021 TALLINN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY DOCTORAL THESIS 36/2021 Automating Defences against Cyber Operations in Computer Networks MAUNO PIHELGAS TALLINN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY School of Information Technologies Department of Software Science The dissertation was accepted for the defence of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science on 10 June 2021 Supervisor: Dr. Risto Vaarandi, Department of Software Science, School of Information Technologies, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia Co-supervisor: Professor Dr. Olaf Manuel Maennel, Department of Software Science, School of Information Technologies, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia Opponents: Professor Dr. Anja Feldmann, Max Planck Institute for Informatics, Saarbrücken, Germany Professor Dr. Jan Vykopal, Masaryk University, Brno, Czechia Defence of the thesis: 11 August 2021, Tallinn Declaration: Hereby I declare that this doctoral thesis, my original investigation and achievement, submitted for the doctoral degree at Tallinn University of Technology, has not been submitted for any academic degree elsewhere. Mauno Pihelgas signature Copyright: Mauno Pihelgas, 2021 ISSN 2585-6898 (publication) ISBN 978-9949-83-718-2 (publication) ISSN 2585-6901 (PDF) ISBN 978-9949-83-719-9 (PDF) Printed by Koopia Niini & Rauam TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL DOKTORITÖÖ 36/2021 Arvutivõrkude kaitse automatiseerimine
    [Show full text]
  • Security Onion Documentation Release 2.3
    Security Onion Documentation Release 2.3 Sep 24, 2021 Table of Contents 1 About 1 1.1 Security Onion..............................................1 1.2 Security Onion Solutions, LLC.....................................2 1.3 Documentation..............................................2 2 Introduction 5 2.1 Network Security Monitoring......................................7 2.2 Enterprise Security Monitoring.....................................7 2.3 Analysis Tools..............................................8 2.4 Deployment Scenarios.......................................... 12 2.5 Conclusion................................................ 12 3 License 13 4 First Time Users 15 5 Getting Started 39 5.1 Architecture............................................... 40 5.2 Hardware Requirements......................................... 48 5.3 Partitioning................................................ 53 5.4 Download................................................. 55 5.5 VMware................................................. 55 5.6 VirtualBox................................................ 57 5.7 Booting Issues.............................................. 58 5.8 Installation................................................ 58 5.9 AWS Cloud AMI............................................. 60 5.10 Azure Cloud Image............................................ 66 5.11 Configuration............................................... 70 5.12 Machine Learning............................................ 71 5.13 After Installation............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Network-Based APT Profiler
    Rochester Institute of Technology RIT Scholar Works Theses 11-22-2019 Network-based APT profiler Benjamin Bornholm [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses Recommended Citation Bornholm, Benjamin, "Network-based APT profiler" (2019). Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology. Accessed from This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Network-based APT profiler By: Benjamin Bornholm Committee Members: Justin Pelletier Bill Stackpole Robert Brandon Thesis In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Computing Security Rochester Institute of Technology B. Thomas Golisano College of Computing & Information Sciences Department of Computing Security Friday, November 22nd 2019 1 Copyright 2019 Ben Bornholm ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 2 Acknowledgments ● Thanks to Splunk for providing a license to perform the experiments ● Thanks to my loving and supportive parents ● Thanks to my capstone committee for guiding me on this adventure ● Thanks to the Threat Hunting Slack community for being great mentors 3 Table of contents Acknowledgments 2 Table of contents 3 Definitions 8 List of figures 10 List of tables 10 List of equations 11 Abstract 12 Introduction 13 Background 15 Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) 15 Techniques, tactics, and procedures (TTPs) 17 TTPs in perspective of the MITRE
    [Show full text]