Skip to main content

Decepticon: A Hidden Markov Model Approach to Counter Advanced Persistent Threats

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Secure Knowledge Management In Artificial Intelligence Era (SKM 2019)

Abstract

Deception has been proposed in the literature as an effective defense mechanism to address Advanced Persistent Threats (APT). However, administering deception in a cost-effective manner requires a good understanding of the attack landscape. The attacks mounted by APT groups are highly diverse and sophisticated in nature and can render traditional signature based intrusion detection systems useless. This necessitates the development of behavior oriented defense mechanisms. In this paper, we develop Decepticon (Deception-based countermeasure) a Hidden Markov Model based framework where the indicators of compromise (IoC) are used as the observable features to aid in detection. This framework would help in selecting an appropriate deception script when faced with APTs or other similar malware and trigger an appropriate defensive response. The effectiveness of the model and the associated framework is demonstrated by considering ransomware as the offending APT in a networked system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Baksi, R.P., Upadhyaya, S.J.: Kidemonas: the silent guardian. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.00841 (2017)

  2. Baksi, R.P., Upadhyaya, S.J.: A comprehensive model for elucidating advanced persistent threats (APT). In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Security and Management (SAM), pp. 245–251. The Steering Committee of The World Congress in Computer Science, Computer Engineering and Applied Computing (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bencsáth, B., Pék, G., Buttyán, L., Felegyhazi, M.: The cousins of stuxnet: Duqu, flame, and gauss. Future Internet 4(4), 971–1003 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bennett, J.T., Moran, N., Villeneuve, N.: Poison ivy: assessing damage and extracting intelligence. FireEye Threat Research Blog (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Çeker, H., Zhuang, J., Upadhyaya, S., La, Q.D., Soong, B.-H.: Deception-based game theoretical approach to mitigate DoS attacks. In: Zhu, Q., Alpcan, T., Panaousis, E., Tambe, M., Casey, W. (eds.) GameSec 2016. LNCS, vol. 9996, pp. 18–38. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47413-7_2

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen, M.Y., Kundu, A., Zhou, J.: Off-line handwritten word recognition using a hidden Markov model type stochastic network. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 16(5), 481–496 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Clark, Z.: The worm that spreads WanaCrypt0r. Malwarebytes Labs, May 2017. https://blog.malwarebytes.com/threat-analysis/2017/05/the-worm-that-spreadswanacrypt0r/

  8. Costan, V., Devadas, S.: Intel SGX explained. IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch. 2016(086), 1–118 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Falliere, N., Murchu, L.O., Chien, E.: W32. Stuxnet dossier. White paper, Symantec Corporation, Security Response 5(6), 29 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Greenberg, A.: Hackers are trying to reignite WannaCry with nonstop botnet attacks. Wired Security, May 2017. https://www.wired.com/2017/05/wannacry-ransomware-ddos-attack/

  11. Hutchins, E.M., Cloppert, M.J., Amin, R.M.: Intelligence-driven computer network defense informed by analysis of adversary campaigns and intrusion kill chains. Lead. Issues Inf. Warfare Secur. Res. 1(1), 80 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jang, J., et al.: PrivateZone: providing a private execution environment using arm trustzone. IEEE Trans. Depend. Secure Comput. 15(5), 797–810 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Langner, R.: Stuxnet: dissecting a cyberwarfare weapon. IEEE Secur. Priv. 9(3), 49–51 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Leonard, C.: 2015 threat report. Websense Security Labs (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ljolje, A., Levinson, S.E.: Development of an acoustic-phonetic hidden Markov model for continuous speech recognition. IEEE Trans. Sig. Process. 39(1), 29–39 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ponemon Institute LLC: The state of advanced persistent threats. Ponemon Institute Research Report, December 2013

    Google Scholar 

  17. LogRhythm: The APT lifecycle and its log trail. Technical report, July 2013

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lorch, J.R., Wang, Y.M., Verbowski, C., Wang, H.J., King, S.: Isolation environment-based information access, 20 September 2011. US Patent 8,024,815

    Google Scholar 

  19. Madnick, S.E., Donovan, J.J.: Application and analysis of the virtual machine approach to information system security and isolation. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Virtual Computer Systems, pp. 210–224. ACM, New York (1973). https://doi.org/10.1145/800122.803961

  20. Mehresh, R.: Schemes for surviving advanced persistent threats. Faculty of the Graduate School of the University at Buffalo, State University of New York (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mehresh, R., Upadhyaya, S.: A deception framework for survivability against next generation cyber attacks. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Security and Management (SAM). p. 1. The Steering Committee of The World Congress in Computer Science, Computer Computer Engineering and Applied Computing (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Messaoud, B.I., Guennoun, K., Wahbi, M., Sadik, M.: Advanced persistent threat: new analysis driven by life cycle phases and their challenges. In: 2016 International Conference on Advanced Communication Systems and Information Security (ACOSIS), pp. 1–6. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Pauna, A.: Improved self adaptive honeypots capable of detecting rootkit malware. In: 2012 9th International Conference on Communications (COMM), pp. 281–284. IEEE (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Piolle, E.: Simplified schema of a trusted platform module (TPM). Wikipedia, September 2008. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TPM.svg

  25. Rabiner, L.R.: A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proc. IEEE 77(2), 257–286 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rashid, A., et al.: Detecting and preventing data exfiltration (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kumar Sasidharan, S., Thomas, C.: A survey on metamorphic malware detection based on hidden Markov model. In: 2018 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI), pp. 357–362. IEEE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Secureworks: WCry Ransomware Campaign. Secureworks Inc., May 2017. https://www.secureworks.com/blog/wcry-ransomware-campaign

  29. Shepherd, C., et al.: Secure and trusted execution: past, present, and future-a critical review in the context of the internet of things and cyber-physical systems. In: 2016 IEEE Trustcom/BigDataSE/ISPA, pp. 168–177. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  30. TCG: TPM main specification. Trusted Computing Group, March 2011. https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/tpm-main-specification/

  31. Vukalović, J., Delija, D.: Advanced persistent threats-detection and defense. In: 2015 38th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), pp. 1324–1330. IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Zakaria, W.Z.A., Abdollah, M.F., Mohd, O., Ariffin, A.F.M.: The rise of ransomware. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Software and e-Business, pp. 66–70. ACM (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Zhao, C., Saifuding, D., Tian, H., Zhang, Y., Xing, C.: On the performance of Intel SGX. In: 2016 13th Web Information Systems and Applications Conference (WISA), pp. 184–187. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This research is supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DGE – 1754085. Usual disclaimers apply.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rudra Prasad Baksi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Baksi, R.P., Upadhyaya, S.J. (2020). Decepticon: A Hidden Markov Model Approach to Counter Advanced Persistent Threats. In: Sahay, S., Goel, N., Patil, V., Jadliwala, M. (eds) Secure Knowledge Management In Artificial Intelligence Era. SKM 2019. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1186. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3817-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3817-9_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-3816-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-3817-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics