Artificial Intelligence Review

, Volume 42, Issue 4, pp 1029–1044 | Cite as

Evaluation of artificial intelligent techniques to secure information in enterprises

Article

Abstract

Information security paradigm is under a constant threat in enterprises particularly. The extension of World Wide Web and rapid expansion in size and types of documents involved in enterprises has generated many challenges. Extensive research has been conducted to determine the effective solutions to detect and respond but still the space is felt for improvement. Factors that hinder the development of an accurate detection and response techniques have shown links to the amount of data processing involved, number of protocols and application running across and variation in users’ requirements and responses. This paper is aimed at discussing the current issue in artificial intelligent (A.I.) techniques that could help in developing a better threat detection algorithm to secure information in enterprises. It is also investigated that the current information security techniques in enterprises have shown an inclination towards A.I. Conventional techniques for detection and response mostly requires human efforts to extract characteristics of malicious intent, investigate and analyze abnormal behaviors and later encode the derived results into the detection algorithm. Instead, A.I. can provide a direct solution to these requirements with a minimal human input. We have made an effort in this paper to discuss the current issues in information security and describe the benefits of artificially trained techniques in security process. We have also carried out survey of current A.I. techniques for IDS. Limitations of the techniques are discussed to identify the factors to be taken into account for efficient performance. Lastly, we have provided a possible research direction in this domain.

Keywords

A.I. techniques Information security Network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) Threats Performance 

References

  1. Abu-Nimeh S, Nappa D, Wang X, Nair S (2007) A comparison of A.I. techniques for phishing detection. In: eCrime ’07: Proceedings of the anti-phishing working groups 2nd annual eCrime researchers summit, ACM, New York, USA, pp 60–69Google Scholar
  2. Ajendaro P (2004) A.I. techniques in masquerade detection, Master’s thesis, University of California, DavisGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson JP (1980) Computer security threat monitoring and surveillance. In: Technical report published by James P Anderson Co., Fort Washington, AprilGoogle Scholar
  4. Axelson S (1998) Research in intrusion detection systems: a survey. Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, technical reportGoogle Scholar
  5. Barbard D, Wu N, Jajodia S (2001) Detecting novel network intrusion using bayes estimators. In: Proceedings of the first SIAM international conference on data mining, pp 24–29Google Scholar
  6. Bridges SM, Vaughn RB (2000) Fuzzy data mining and genetic algorithms applied to intrusion detection. In: Proceedings of the National Information Systems security conference, pp 13–31Google Scholar
  7. Cannady J (1998) The application of artificial neural networks to misuse detection: initial results. In: Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on the recent advances in intrusion detection (RAID), pp 31–47Google Scholar
  8. Cansian AM, Moreira E, Carvalho A, Bonifacio JM (1997) Network intrusion detection using neural networks. In: International conference on computational intelligence and multimedia applications (ICCMA’97), pp 276–80Google Scholar
  9. Denning DE, Neuman P (1987) An intrusion-detection model. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 13(2):119–230Google Scholar
  10. Elarbi-Boudihir M, Rehman A, Saba T (2011) Video motion perception using operation gabor filter. Int J Phys Sci 6(12):2799–2806Google Scholar
  11. Elkan C (2000) Results of the KDD’99 classifier learning contest. ACM Trans Inf Syst Secur 3(4):262–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fogla P, Sharif M, Perdisci R, Kolersnikov O, Lee W (2006) Polymorphic blending attack. In: Proceedings of 15th USENIX security symposium abstract (USENIX security 2006), Vancouver, JulyGoogle Scholar
  13. Forrest S, et al (1996) A sense of self for Unix processes. In: Proceedings of IEEE symposium on security and privacy, Oakland, p 120Google Scholar
  14. Haron H, Rahim S, Rehman A, Saba T (2010) Curve length estimation using vertix chain code. Int J Comput Sci Eng 2(6):2110–2113Google Scholar
  15. Haron H, Rehman A, Wulandhari LA, Saba T (2011) Improved vertex chain code algorithm for curve length estimation. J Comput Sci 7(5):736–743. doi:10.3844/jcssp.2011.736.743 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haron H, Rehman A, Adi DIS, Lim SP, Saba T (2012) Parameterization method on B-spline curve. Math Probl Eng 2012: doi:10.1155/2012/640472
  17. Hu W et al (2003) Robust support vector machines for anomaly detection in computer security. International conference on A.I. and applications, Los Angeles, JulyGoogle Scholar
  18. Jha S, Tan K, Maxion R (2001) Markocv chains, classifiers and intrusion detection. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE computer security foundation workshops (CSFW), pp 206–219Google Scholar
  19. Joachims T (1998) Making large-scale SVM learning practical. LS8-report, University of Dortmund, LS VIII-reportGoogle Scholar
  20. Julisch K (2003) Clustering intrusion detection alarms to support root cause analysis. In: ACM transactions on information and system security (TISSEC), pp 443–471Google Scholar
  21. KDD-CUP-99 task descriptors. Online:http://kdd.ics.uci.edu/databases/kddcup99/task.htm
  22. Krugel C, Valeur F, Vigna C, Kemmerer R (2002) Stateful intrusion detection for high-speed networks. In: IEEE symposium on security and privacy, pp 285–94Google Scholar
  23. Kurniawan F, Rahim MSM, Daman D, Rehman A, Mohamad D, Mariyam S (2011) Region-based touched character segmentation in handwritten words. Int J Innovative Comput Inf Control 7(6):3107–3120Google Scholar
  24. Lippmann R, Cummingham S (1999) Improving intrusion detection performance using keyword selection and neural networks. In: Proceedings of the second international workshops on recent advances in intrusion detection (RAID 99), West LafayetteGoogle Scholar
  25. Markey J, Atlasis A (2009) Using decision tree analysis for intrusion detection. In: SANS Institute Info Sec Reading RoomGoogle Scholar
  26. Mitchell T (1997) Does A.I. really work ? In AI Magazine, pp 11–20Google Scholar
  27. Mukkamala S, Sung A (2004) Intrusion detection systems using adaptive regression splines. In: Proceedings of 16th conference on enterprise information systems, pp 26–33.19Google Scholar
  28. Mukkamal S, Janoski G, et al (2002) Intrusion detection: support vector machines and neural networks. In: Proceedings of IJCNN 2002, Honolulu, pp 1702–1707Google Scholar
  29. Pietrasze KT (2004) Using adaptive alert classification to reduce false positives in intrusion detection. Recent Adv Intrusion Detect 3224(2004):102–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rahim MSM, Rehman A, Faizal-Ab-Jabal M, Saba T (2011) Close spanning tree approach for error detection and correction for 2D CAD drawing. Int J Acad Res 3(4):525–535Google Scholar
  31. Rehman A, Saba T (2011) Performance analysis of segmentation approach for cursive handwritten word recognition on benchmark database. Digit Signal Process 21:486–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rehman A, Kurniawan F, Mohamad D (2009) Neuro-heuristic approach for segmenting cursive handwritten words. Int J Inf Process (IJIP), 3(2):37–46, Bangalore. ISSN 0973-8215Google Scholar
  33. Rehman A, Kurniawan F, Saba T (2010) An automatic approach for line detection and removal without characters smash-up. Imag Sci J 59:171–182Google Scholar
  34. Rehman A, Saba T (2012a) Analysis of advanced image processing to clinical and preclinical decision making with prospectus of quantitative imaging biomarkers. Artif Intell Rev. doi:10.1007/s10462-012-9335-1
  35. Rehman A, Saba T (2012b) Features extraction for soccer video semantic analysis: current achievements and remaining issues. Artif Intell Rev. doi:10.1007/s10462-012-9319-1
  36. Saba T, Rehman A (2011) Cursive script segmentation with neural confidence. Int J Innovative Comput Inf Control (IJICIC) 7(7):1–10Google Scholar
  37. Saba T, Rehman A (2012) Effects of artificially intelligent tools on pattern recognition. Int J Mach Learn Cybern. doi:10.1007/s13042-012-0082-z
  38. Saba T, Rehman A, Sulong G (2010a) Non-linear segmentation of touched roman characters based on genetic algorithm. Int J Comput Sci Eng 2(6):2167–2172Google Scholar
  39. Saba T, Rehman A, Sulong G (2010b) Improved offline connected script recognition based on hybrid strategy. Int J Eng Sci Technol 2(6):1603–1611Google Scholar
  40. Saba T, Rehman A, Elarbi-Boudihir M (2011a) Methods and strategies on off-line cursive touched characters segmentation: a directional review. Artif Intell Rev. doi:10.1007/s10462-011-9271-5
  41. Saba T, Rehman A, Sulong G (2011b) Improved statistical features for cursive character recognition. Int J Innovative Comput Inf Control (IJICIC) 7(9):5211–5224Google Scholar
  42. Saba T, Sulong G, Rehman A (2011c) Document image analysis: issues, comparison of methods and remaining problems. Artif Intell Rev 35(2):101–118. doi:10.1007/s10462-010-9186-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sanjay R, Pujari AK, Gulati VP, Vemuri VR (2004) Intrusion detection using text processing techniques with binary weighted cosine metric. Int J Inf Secur 32:189–199Google Scholar
  44. Shyu M, Chen S, et al (2003) A novel anomaly detection scheme based on principal component classifier. In: Proceedings of IEEE foundations and new directions of data mining workhops, in conjunction with the 3rd IEEE international conference on data minig (ICDM), pp 172–179Google Scholar
  45. Simon GJ, Xiong H, Eilertson E, Kumar V (2006) Scan detection—a data mining approach. In: proceedings of SIAM international conference on data mining, pp 118–129Google Scholar
  46. Vladimir VN (1995) The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer, BerlinMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. Wang W (2009) Statistical techniques for network security. Inf Sci Ref 14:75–76Google Scholar
  48. Wang Y, Cannady J (2005) A multinomial logistic regression modeling approach for anomaly intrusion detection. Comput Secur 24(8):662–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yihua L, Vemuri VR (2002) Using text categorization techniques for intrusion detection. In: Proceedings of Usenix San Francisco, AugustGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Computer Science and Information SystemsUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia, SkudaiJohorMalaysia
  2. 2.College of Engineering and Computer SciencesSalman Abdul Aziz UniversityAlkharjKSA

Personalised recommendations