text: The widespread adoption of Internet of Things has led to many security issues. Post the Mirai-based DDoS attack in 2016 which compromised IoT devices, a host of new malware using Mirai's leaked source code and targeting IoT devices have cropped up, e.g. Satori, Reaper, Amnesia, Masuta etc. These malware exploit software vulnerabilities to infect IoT devices instead of open TELNET ports (like Mirai) making them more difficult to block using existing solutions such as firewalls. In this research, we present EDIMA, a distributed modular solution which can be used towards the detection of IoT malware network activity in large-scale networks (e.g. ISP, enterprise networks) during the scanning infecting phase rather than during an attack. EDIMA employs machine learning algorithms for edge devices' traffic classification, a packet traffic feature vector database, a policy module and an optional packet sub-sampling module. We evaluate the classification performance of EDIMA through testbed experiments and present the results obtained.
  @cite_0: To date, techniques to counter cyber-attacks have predominantly been reactive; they focus on monitoring network traffic, detecting anomalies and cyber-attack traffic patterns, and, a posteriori, combating the cyber-attacks and mitigating their effects. Contrary to such approaches, we advocate proactively detecting and identifying botnets prior to their being used as part of a cyber-attack (, 2006). In this paper, we present our work on using machine learning-based classification techniques to identify the command and control (C2) traffic of IRC-based botnets - compromised hosts that are collectively commanded using Internet relay chat (IRC). We split this task into two stages: (I) distinguishing between IRC and non-IRC traffic, and (II) distinguishing between botnet and real IRC traffic. For stage I, we compare the performance of J48, naive Bayes, and Bayesian network classifiers, identify the features that achieve good overall classification accuracy, and determine the classification sensitivity to the training set size. While sensitive to the training data and the attributes used to characterize communication flows, machine learning-based classifiers show promise in identifying IRC traffic. Using classification in stage II is trickier, since accurately labeling IRC traffic as botnet and non-botnet is challenging. We are currently exploring labeling flows as suspicious and non-suspicious based on telltales of hosts being compromised
  @cite_7: Botnets are now recognized as one of the most serious security threats. In contrast to previous malware, botnets have the characteristic of a command and control (C&C) channel. Botnets also often use existing common protocols, e.g., IRC, HTTP, and in protocol-conforming manners. This makes the detection of botnet C&C a challenging problem. In this paper, we propose an approach that uses network-based anomaly detection to identify botnet C&C channels in a local area network without any prior knowledge of signatures or C&C server addresses. This detection approach can identify both the C&C servers and infected hosts in the network. Our approach is based on the observation that, because of the pre-programmed activities related to C&C, bots within the same botnet will likely demonstrate spatial-temporal correlation and similarity. For example, they engage in coordinated communication, propagation, and attack and fraudulent activities. Our prototype system, BotSniffer, can capture this spatial-temporal correlation in network traffic and utilize statistical algorithms to detect botnets with theoretical bounds on the false positive and false negative rates. We evaluated BotSniffer using many real-world network traces. The results show that BotSniffer can detect real-world botnets with high accuracy and has a very low false positive rate.
  @cite_20: 
  @cite_17: Botnets are now the key platform for many Internet attacks, such as spam, distributed denial-of-service (DDoS), identity theft, and phishing. Most of the current botnet detection approaches work only on specific botnet command and control (C&C) protocols (e.g., IRC) and structures (e.g., centralized), and can become ineffective as botnets change their C&C techniques. In this paper, we present a general detection framework that is independent of botnet C&C protocol and structure, and requires no a priori knowledge of botnets (such as captured bot binaries and hence the botnet signatures, and C&C server names addresses). We start from the definition and essential properties of botnets. We define a botnet as a coordinated group of malware instances that are controlled via C&C communication channels. The essential properties of a botnet are that the bots communicate with some C&C servers peers, perform malicious activities, and do so in a similar or correlated way. Accordingly, our detection framework clusters similar communication traffic and similar malicious traffic, and performs cross cluster correlation to identify the hosts that share both similar communication patterns and similar malicious activity patterns. These hosts are thus bots in the monitored network. We have implemented our BotMiner prototype system and evaluated it using many real network traces. The results show that it can detect real-world botnets (IRC-based, HTTP-based, and P2P botnets including Nugache and Storm worm), and has a very low false positive rate.
summary: Our work addresses a few important gaps in the literature when it comes to distinguishing between legitimate and botnet IoT traffic. First, the works on detecting botnets using their CnC communication features @cite_0 @cite_20 @cite_7 @cite_17 are designed for PC-based botnets rather than IoT botnets which are the focus of our work. Second, we do not aim to detect botnets (networks of bots) but instead, network activity generated by individual bots. IoT botnets tend to consist of hundreds of thousands to millions of devices spread over vast geographies, hence, it is impractical to detect a whole network of IoT bots. Therefore, we do not require computationally expensive clustering algorithms as used in @cite_7 @cite_17 .