Paper detail

Assessment of the Relative Importance of different hyper-parameters of LSTM for an IDS

Recurrent deep learning language models like the LSTM are often used to provide advanced cyber-defense for high-value assets. The underlying assumption for using LSTM networks for malware-detection is that the op-code sequence of malware could be treated as a (spoken) language representation. There are differences between any spoken-language (sequence of words/sentences) and the machine-language (sequence of op-codes). In this paper, we demonstrate that due to these inherent differences, an LSTM model with its default configuration as tuned for a spoken-language, may not work well to detect malware (using its op-code sequence) unless the network's essential hyper-parameters are tuned appropriately. In the process, we also determine the relative importance of all the different hyper-parameters of an LSTM network as applied to malware detection using their op-code sequence representations. We experimented with different configurations of LSTM networks, and altered hyper-parameters like the embedding-size, number of hidden layers, number of LSTM-units in a hidden layer, pruning/padding-length of the input-vector, activation-function, and batch-size. We discovered that owing to the enhanced complexity of the malware/machine-language, the performance of an LSTM network configured for an Intrusion Detection System, is very sensitive towards the number-of-hidden-layers, input sequence-length, and the choice of the activation-function. Also, for (spoken) language-modeling, the recurrent architectures by-far outperform their non-recurrent counterparts. Therefore, we also assess how sequential DL architectures like the LSTM compare against their non-sequential counterparts like the MLP-DNN for the purpose of malware-detection.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.