Weighting versus Pruning in Rule Validation for Detecting Network and Host Anomalies
published: Sept. 14, 2007, recorded: September 2007, views: 65
Slides
Related content
16:51
394 views - Jure Leskovec, 2007
03:54:31
12746 views - Chih-Jen Lin, 2006
32:36
2891 views - Cynthia Rudin, 2005
20:00
430 views - Xiuyao Song, 2007
15:28
148 views - Ramesh Nallapati, 2007
07:35
78 views - Albina Saveliev, 2007
17:49
135 views - Kaustav Das, 2007
02:07:12
3950 views - Robert Schapire, 2005
05:02:23
7989 views - John Shawe-Taylor, 2004
05:17
702 views - Thorsten Joachims, 2007
Report a problem or upload files
If you have found a problem with this lecture or would like to send us extra material, articles, exercises, etc., please use our ticket system to describe your request and upload the data.Enter your e-mail into the 'Cc' field, and we will keep you updated with your request's status.
Description
For intrusion detection, the LERAD algorithm learns a succinct set of comprehensible rules for detecting anomalies, which could be novel attacks. LERAD validates the learned rules on a separate held-out validation set and removes rules that cause false alarms. However, removing rules with possible high coverage can lead to missed detections. We propose to retain these rules and associate weights to them. We present three weighting schemes and our empirical results indicate that, for LERAD, rule weighting can detect more attacks than pruning with minimal computational overhead.
See Also:
Download slides:
Tandon_kdd07talk.ppt (245.5 KB)
Launch in a standalone WM Player
Switch to Windows Media Player
Link this page
Would you like to put a link to this lecture on your homepage?Go ahead! Copy the HTML snippet !




Write your own review or comment: