[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.5555/3237383.3237833acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaamasConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Deceiving Cyber Adversaries: A Game Theoretic Approach

Published: 09 July 2018 Publication History

Abstract

An important way cyber adversaries find vulnerabilities in modern networks is through reconnaissance, in which they attempt to identify configuration specifics of network hosts. To increase uncertainty of adversarial reconnaissance, the network administrator (henceforth, defender) can introduce deception into responses to network scans, such as obscuring certain system characteristics. We introduce a novel game theoretic model of deceptive interactions of this kind between a defender and a cyber attacker, which we call the Cyber Deception Game. We consider both a powerful (rational) attacker, who is aware of the defender's exact deception strategy, and a naive attacker who is not. We show that computing the optimal deception strategy is NP-hard for both types of attackers. For the case with a powerful attacker, we provide a mixed-integer linear program solution as well as a fast and effective greedy algorithm. Similarly, we provide complexity results and propose exact and heuristic approaches when the attacker is naive. Our extensive experimental analysis demonstrates the effectiveness of our approaches.

References

[1]
Massimiliano Albanese, Ermanno Battista, and Sushil Jajodia . 2015. A deception based approach for defeating OS and service fingerprinting Communications and Network Security (CNS), 2015 IEEE Conference on. IEEE, 317--325.
[2]
Massimiliano Albanese, Ermanno Battista, and Sushil Jajodia . 2016. Deceiving Attackers by Creating a Virtual Attack Surface. Cyber Deception. Springer, 169--201.
[3]
Mohammed H Almeshekah and Eugene H Spafford . 2014. Planning and integrating deception into computer security defenses Proceedings of the 2014 Workshop on New Security Paradigms Workshop. ACM, 127--138.
[4]
Mohammed H Almeshekah and Eugene H Spafford . 2016. Cyber security deception. Cyber Deception. Springer-Verlag, 25--52.
[5]
Tansu Alpcan and Tamer Bacsar . 2010. Network security: A decision and game-theoretic approach. Cambridge University Press.
[6]
Nicola Basilico and Nicola Gatti . 2011. Automated Abstractions for Patrolling Security Games. AAAI.
[7]
Nicola Basilico, Nicola Gatti, and Francesco Amigoni . 2012. Patrolling security games: Definition and algorithms for solving large instances with single patroller and single intruder. Artificial Intelligence Vol. 184 (2012), 78--123.
[8]
David Barroso Berrueta . 2003. A practical approach for defeating Nmap OS- Fingerprinting. Retrieved March Vol. 12 (2003), 2009.
[9]
Christopher M Bishop . 2006. Pattern recognition and machine learning. springer.
[10]
Thomas E Carroll and Daniel Grosu . 2011. A game theoretic investigation of deception in network security. Security and Communication Networks Vol. 4, 10 (2011), 1162--1172.
[11]
Karel Durkota, Viliam Lisỳ, Branislav Bovsanskỳ, and Christopher Kiekintveld . 2015 a. Approximate solutions for attack graph games with imperfect information International Conference on Decision and Game Theory for Security. Springer, 228--249.
[12]
Karel Durkota, Viliam Lisỳ, Branislav Bosanskỳ, and Christopher Kiekintveld . 2015 b. Optimal Network Security Hardening Using Attack Graph Games. IJCAI. 526--532.
[13]
Vindu Goel and Nicole Perlroth . 2016 (accessed September 10, 2017). Yahoo Says 1 Billion User Accounts Were Hacked. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/14/technology/yahoo-hack.html
[14]
Ines Gutzmer . 2017 (accessed October 15, 2017). Equifax Announces Cybersecurity Incident Involving Consumer Information. https://investor.equifax.com/news-and-events/news/2017/09-07--2017--213000628
[15]
Sushil Jajodia, Noseong Park, Fabio Pierazzi, Andrea Pugliese, Edoardo Serra, Gerardo I Simari, and VS Subrahmanian . 2017. A Probabilistic Logic of Cyber Deception. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, Vol. 12, 11 (2017), 2532--2544.
[16]
Rob Joyce . 2016. Disrupting Nation State Hackers. USENIX Association, San Francisco, CA.
[17]
Christopher Kiekintveld, Viliam Lisỳ, and Radek P'ıbil . 2015. Game-theoretic foundations for the strategic use of honeypots in network security. Cyber Warfare. Springer, 81--101.
[18]
Aron Laszka, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik, and Xenofon D Koutsoukos . 2015. Optimal Personalized Filtering Against Spear-Phishing Attacks. AAAI. 958--964.
[19]
Gordon Fyodor Lyon . 2009. Nmap network scanning: The official Nmap project guide to network discovery and security scanning. Insecure.
[20]
Mandiant . 2013. APT1: Exposing One of China's Cyber Espionage Units. (2013).
[21]
NIST . 2017. National Vulnerability Database. https://nvd.nist.gov/
[22]
Jeffrey Pawlick and Quanyan Zhu . 2015. Deception by design: evidence-based signaling games for network defense. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.05458 (2015).
[23]
Radek Pıbil, Viliam Lisỳ, Christopher Kiekintveld, Branislav Bovsanskỳ, and Michal Pechoucek . 2012. Game theoretic model of strategic honeypot selection in computer networks. Decision and Game Theory for Security Vol. 7638 (2012), 201--220.
[24]
Aaron Schlenker, Haifeng Xu, Mina Guirguis, Chris Kiekintveld, Arunesh Sinha, Milind Tambe, Solomon Sonya, Darryl Balderas, and Noah Dunstatter . 2017. Don`t Bury your Head in Warnings: A Game-Theoretic Approach for Intelligent Allocation of Cyber-security Alerts. (2017).
[25]
Edoardo Serra, Sushil Jajodia, Andrea Pugliese, Antonino Rullo, and VS Subrahmanian . 2015. Pareto-optimal adversarial defense of enterprise systems. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC), Vol. 17, 3 (2015), 11.
[26]
Milind Tambe . 2011. Security and game theory: algorithms, deployed systems, lessons learned. Cambridge University Press.

Cited By

View all
  • (2019)General-Sum Cyber Deception Games under Partial Attacker Valuation InformationProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3306127.3332062(2215-2217)Online publication date: 8-May-2019
  • (2018)Designing the game to playProceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence10.5555/3304415.3304488(512-518)Online publication date: 13-Jul-2018

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
AAMAS '18: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems
July 2018
2312 pages

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

Publisher

International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

Richland, SC

Publication History

Published: 09 July 2018

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. cyber security
  2. game theory
  3. security games

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

AAMAS '18
Sponsor:
AAMAS '18: Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems
July 10 - 15, 2018
Stockholm, Sweden

Acceptance Rates

AAMAS '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 149 of 607 submissions, 25%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,155 of 5,036 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)125
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11
Reflects downloads up to 10 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2019)General-Sum Cyber Deception Games under Partial Attacker Valuation InformationProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3306127.3332062(2215-2217)Online publication date: 8-May-2019
  • (2018)Designing the game to playProceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence10.5555/3304415.3304488(512-518)Online publication date: 13-Jul-2018

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media