Interoperability and Explicable AI-based Zero-Day Attacks Detection Process in Smart Community

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2408.02921
• Title: Interoperability and Explicable AI-based Zero-Day Attacks Detection Process in Smart Community
• Authors: Mohammad Sayduzzaman, Anichur Rahman, Jarin Tasnim Tamanna, Dipanjali Kundu, Tawhidur Rahman
• Classification: cs.CR (Cryptography and Security)
• Publication Date: August 2024 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.02921

Abstract

This paper proposes a zero-day attack detection framework based on interoperability and explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) specifically designed for smart community environments. The research aims to address the limitations of traditional intrusion detection and prevention systems (IDPS) in detecting unknown zero-day attacks by integrating emerging technologies including 6G mobile communications, Internet of Everything (IoE), artificial intelligence, and WiFi-8 based on WPA3 protocol to construct a multi-layered security protection system. The approach achieves significant improvements in accuracy and detection time through XAI technology for identifying unknown attack patterns.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problems

1. Zero-Day Attack Detection Challenge: Zero-day attacks exploit unknown vulnerabilities that traditional signature-based detection systems cannot identify due to the absence of known attack signatures
2. System Interoperability Challenge: Lack of effective coordination between existing security systems, preventing the formation of unified threat intelligence sharing mechanisms
3. Smart Community Security Requirements: The convergence of emerging technologies such as 6G, IoE, and WiFi-8 introduces new security challenges

Research Significance

• Zero-day attacks represent the most threatening attack type in cybersecurity, potentially causing data breaches, ransomware attacks, and significant economic losses
• The rapid development of smart cities and smart communities requires more intelligent and adaptive security protection mechanisms
• Traditional IDPS systems have limited effectiveness against polymorphic malware and sophisticated evasion techniques

Limitations of Existing Methods

1. Signature-Based Detection Systems: Unable to detect unknown attack patterns with poor performance against polymorphic malware
2. Anomaly-Based Detection Systems: Lack of historical data support with inherent trade-offs between sensitivity and false positive rates
3. Traditional Machine Learning Methods: Insufficient accuracy in zero-day attack detection with lack of interpretability

Core Contributions

1. Proposed a Three-Layer Architecture for Zero-Day Attack Detection: Comprising a generic layer (interoperability), intermediate layer (XAI+ML), and final detection layer (IDPS)
2. Innovatively Applied XAI Technology to Zero-Day Attack Pattern Recognition: Achieved feature extraction from unknown attack patterns through SHAP value analysis
3. Implemented an Interoperability Solution with Multi-Technology Fusion: Integrated 6G, IoE, and WiFi-8 technologies for real-time threat intelligence sharing
4. Validated Method Effectiveness on Multiple Datasets: Achieved 94.89% accuracy improvement compared to existing methods while significantly reducing computational time

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Input: Real-time network traffic and system activity data from 6G networks, IoE devices, and WiFi-8 access points Output: Zero-day attack detection results and security alerts Constraints: Maintain high detection accuracy while minimizing false positive rates and response time

Model Architecture

1. Generic Layer

• Function: Enables interoperability between 6G, IoE, and WiFi-8
• Core Mechanism: Real-time threat intelligence sharing
• Data Processing: Handles massive data volumes of approximately 100 ZB daily

2. Intermediate Layer - Core Innovation

• XAI Feature Extraction: Extracts 15 optimal features from 45 original features using SHAP value analysis
• Dual Detection Mechanism:
  • Attack Pattern Analysis: Detects unknown zero-day attack patterns
  • Anomaly Detection: Identifies known attack types
• SHAP Value Calculation Formula:

  f(x) = Σ(i=1 to P) φᵢ + Ex[f(x)]
  

  where φᵢ represents the SHAP value for feature i

3. Final Detection Layer

• IDPS Integration: Traditional intrusion detection and prevention systems
• Decision Mechanism: Final judgment based on attack patterns provided by the intermediate layer
• Response Strategy: Automatic isolation of suspicious users or traffic

Technical Innovation Points

1. XAI-Driven Zero-Day Detection: First systematic application of explainable AI technology to unknown zero-day attack pattern recognition
2. Multi-Layer Protection Architecture: Complete workflow from data collection to final detection through three-layer architecture
3. Enhanced Interoperability: Seamless collaboration between heterogeneous security systems
4. Real-Time Threat Intelligence: Supports cross-platform and cross-network real-time threat information sharing

Experimental Setup

Datasets

1. NSL-KDD: Standard network intrusion detection dataset for attack classification
2. UNSW-NB15: Network traffic feature extraction including modern network attack samples
3. ToN-IoT: Network security dataset in IoT environments

Evaluation Metrics

• Accuracy: (TP + TN) / (TP + TN + FP + FN)
• Detection Time: Algorithm processing time and response latency
• False Positive Rate: Proportion of false positive detections
• Novel Attack Pattern Recognition Rate: Detection capability for new attack patterns

Comparison Methods

• Sarhan et al. (MLP + RF): 85.5% accuracy
• Hindy et al. (SVM + Autoencoders): 92.96% accuracy
• Kumar et al. (Hitter + Graph): 88.98% accuracy
• Koroniotis et al. (Decision Tree): 93.2% accuracy

Implementation Details

• Training Data: Normal, DoS, and Fuzzers attack categories
• Test Scenarios: Novel Backdoor attack detection
• Feature Selection: Dimensionality reduction from 45 to 15 critical features
• Model Selection: Comparative analysis of multiple ML algorithms (AdaBoostM1, RandomSubspace, etc.)

Experimental Results

Main Results

1. Overall Accuracy: 94.89%, surpassing all comparison methods
2. Attack Pattern Detection: AdaBoostM1 demonstrates superior performance in zero-day attack pattern detection
3. Anomaly Detection: RandomSubspace achieves highest accuracy in conventional anomaly detection
4. Computational Efficiency: LogitBoost and DecisionTable show significantly reduced computation time after XAI application

Ablation Study

• XAI Effectiveness Verification: All ML models show improved accuracy after XAI application
• Time Efficiency Analysis: XAI technology significantly reduces computation time, particularly in LogitBoost and DecisionTable algorithms

Case Analysis

The experiment successfully detected Backdoor attacks unseen during training, demonstrating the method's effective detection capability for zero-day attacks. Through SHAP value analysis, the system identified critical feature combinations responsible for attacks.

Experimental Findings

1. Feature Importance: XAI analysis identified 15 critical network features most relevant to attack detection
2. Model Adaptability: Different ML algorithms demonstrate improved generalization capability after XAI enhancement
3. Real-Time Performance: The system achieves real-time detection while maintaining high accuracy

Related Work

Main Research Directions

1. Heuristic Analysis-Based Zero-Day Detection: Identifying anomalies through behavioral analysis
2. Deep Learning Methods: Pattern recognition utilizing neural networks
3. Federated Learning Applications: Collaborative learning in distributed environments
4. Threat Intelligence-Based Detection: Leveraging external intelligence sources to enhance detection capability

Advantages of This Work

• Multi-Technology Fusion: First systematic integration of interoperability, XAI, and zero-day detection
• Strong Practicality: Addresses actual deployment requirements for smart communities
• Superior Performance: Outperforms existing methods in both accuracy and efficiency

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. The proposed three-layer architecture effectively addresses limitations of traditional IDPS in zero-day attack detection
2. XAI technology successfully identifies unknown attack patterns, providing new insights for zero-day attack detection
3. The interoperability mechanism significantly enhances multi-system collaborative protection capability
4. Experiments validate significant advantages in accuracy and efficiency

Limitations

1. Dataset Limitations: Existing datasets may not fully reflect the complexity of real network environments
2. Computational Resource Requirements: XAI analysis and real-time processing demand substantial computational resources
3. Deployment Complexity: Multi-technology fusion architecture may face compatibility challenges in practical deployment
4. Adversarial Attacks: The paper insufficiently addresses adversarial attacks targeting XAI systems

Future Directions

1. Expand Dataset Scale: Construct larger and more diverse zero-day attack datasets
2. Optimize Algorithm Efficiency: Further reduce computational complexity of XAI analysis
3. Enhance Adversarial Robustness: Improve system resistance to adversarial attacks
4. Practical Deployment Validation: Verify system performance in real smart community environments

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Strong Innovation: First systematic application of XAI technology to zero-day attack detection with high academic value
2. Good Practicality: Addresses actual application requirements for smart communities with promising application prospects
3. Comprehensive Experiments: Thorough experimental validation across multiple standard datasets
4. Superior Performance: Achieves significant improvements in both accuracy and efficiency

Weaknesses

1. Insufficient Theoretical Analysis: Lacks theoretical explanation for XAI effectiveness in zero-day detection
2. Missing Real-World Validation: Lacks verification of system performance in actual environments
3. Inadequate Security Analysis: Insufficient analysis of system security and attack resistance
4. Absent Cost-Benefit Analysis: Lacks detailed deployment and maintenance cost analysis

Impact

1. Academic Contribution: Provides new technical pathways for zero-day attack detection research
2. Practical Value: Significant importance for smart city and smart community network security protection
3. Technology Promotion: Serves as technical reference for related security products and solutions

Applicable Scenarios

1. Smart Community Security: Suitable for large-scale smart community network security protection
2. Enterprise Network Security: Applicable to enterprise-level intrusion detection systems
3. Critical Infrastructure Protection: Suitable for security protection of power grids, transportation, and other critical infrastructure
4. IoT Device Security: Extensible application to large-scale IoT device security monitoring

References

The paper cites 50 relevant references covering important works in zero-day attack detection, machine learning, network security, and IoT security, providing a solid theoretical foundation for the research.

Overall Assessment: This is an innovative research work in the zero-day attack detection field that provides a new solution for smart community network security protection by combining XAI technology with interoperability mechanisms. Although theoretical analysis and real-world deployment validation require further refinement, the technical innovations and experimental results demonstrate the method's effectiveness and practical value.