Using patterns position distribution for software failure detection

Pattern-based software failure detection is an important topic of research in recent years. In this method, a set of patterns from program execution traces are extracted, and represented as features, while their occurrence frequencies are treated as the corresponding feature values. But this conventional method has its limitation due to ignore the pattern’s position information, which is important for the classification of program traces. Patterns occurs in the different positions of the trace are likely to represent different meanings. In this paper, we present a novel approach for using pattern’s position distribution as features to detect software failure. The comparative experiments in both artificial and real datasets show the effectiveness of this method

Learning Fast and Slow: PROPEDEUTICA for Real-time Malware Detection

In this paper, we introduce and evaluate PROPEDEUTICA, a novel methodology and framework for efficient and effective real-time malware detection, leveraging the best of conventional machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) algorithms. In PROPEDEUTICA, all software processes in the system start execution subjected to a conventional ML detector for fast classification. If a piece of software receives a borderline classification, it is subjected to further analysis via more performance expensive and more accurate DL methods, via our newly proposed DL algorithm DEEPMALWARE. Further, we introduce delays to the execution of software subjected to deep learning analysis as a way to "buy time" for DL analysis and to rate-limit the impact of possible malware in the system. We evaluated PROPEDEUTICA with a set of 9,115 malware samples and 877 commonly used benign software samples from various categories for the Windows OS. Our results show that the false positive rate for conventional ML methods can reach 20%, and for modern DL methods it is usually below 6%. However, the classification time for DL can be 100X longer than conventional ML methods. PROPEDEUTICA improved the detection F1-score from 77.54% (conventional ML method) to 90.25%, and reduced the detection time by 54.86%. Further, the percentage of software subjected to DL analysis was approximately 40% on average. Further, the application of delays in software subjected to ML reduced the detection time by approximately 10%. Finally, we found and discussed a discrepancy between the detection accuracy offline (analysis after all traces are collected) and on-the-fly (analysis in tandem with trace collection). Our insights show that conventional ML and modern DL-based malware detectors in isolation cannot meet the needs of efficient and effective malware detection: high accuracy, low false positive rate, and short classification time.Comment: 17 pages, 7 figure

A Brief History of Web Crawlers

Web crawlers visit internet applications, collect data, and learn about new web pages from visited pages. Web crawlers have a long and interesting history. Early web crawlers collected statistics about the web. In addition to collecting statistics about the web and indexing the applications for search engines, modern crawlers can be used to perform accessibility and vulnerability checks on the application. Quick expansion of the web, and the complexity added to web applications have made the process of crawling a very challenging one. Throughout the history of web crawling many researchers and industrial groups addressed different issues and challenges that web crawlers face. Different solutions have been proposed to reduce the time and cost of crawling. Performing an exhaustive crawl is a challenging question. Additionally capturing the model of a modern web application and extracting data from it automatically is another open question. What follows is a brief history of different technique and algorithms used from the early days of crawling up to the recent days. We introduce criteria to evaluate the relative performance of web crawlers. Based on these criteria we plot the evolution of web crawlers and compare their performanc