skip to main content
10.1145/3384419.3430462acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessensysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

How robust are malware detection models for Android smartphones against adversarial attacks?: poster abstract

Published:16 November 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Android-based smartphones and IoT devices have grown at an exponential rate in the last decade. Meanwhile, malicious applications have also increased dramatically, which threaten the Android ecosystem. The anti-malware community has proposed data mining based malware detection models which have shown encouraging results. However, these detection models are vulnerable to adversarial attacks. In this work, we first acted as an adversary and performed adversarial attacks on eight different malware detection models. We found all the eight detection models vulnerable to adversarial attacks and fooling rate of more than 90% was achieved against each of them. We also propose defence against these attacks by adversarial retraining and accomplish encouraging results to improve the overall robustness of malware detection models.

References

  1. Daniel Arp, Michael Spreitzenbarth, Malte Hubner, Hugo Gascon, and Konrad Rieck. 2014. Drebin: Effective and explainable detection of android malware in your pocket.. In NDSS, Vol. 14. 23--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Ian J Goodfellow, Jonathon Shlens, and Christian Szegedy. 2014. Explaining and harnessing adversarial examples. (ICLR) arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6572 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Sandy Huang, Nicolas Papernot, Ian Goodfellow, Yan Duan, and Pieter Abbeel. 2017. Adversarial attacks on neural network policies. ICLR (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jin Li, Lichao Sun, Qiben Yan, Zhiqiang Li, Witawas Srisa-An, and Heng Ye. 2018. Significant permission identification for machine-learning-based android malware detection. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 14, 7 (2018), 3216--3225.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Mohit Sewak, Sanjay K Sahay, and Hemant Rathore. 2020. DOOM: a novel adversarial-DRL-based op-code level metamorphic malware obfuscator for the enhancement of IDS. In ACM UbiComp. 131--134.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Ke Xu, Yingjiu Li, and Robert H Deng. 2016. Iccdetector: Icc-based malware detection on android. IEEE TIFS 11, 6 (2016), 1252--1264.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Yanfang Ye, Tao Li, Donald Adjeroh, and S Sitharama Iyengar. 2017. A survey on malware detection using data mining techniques. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 50, 3 (2017), 1--40.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. How robust are malware detection models for Android smartphones against adversarial attacks?: poster abstract

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SenSys '20: Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems
      November 2020
      852 pages
      ISBN:9781450375900
      DOI:10.1145/3384419

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 16 November 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • short-paper

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate174of867submissions,20%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader