Existing literature on adversarial Machine Learning (ML) focuses either on showing attacks that break every ML model or defenses that withstand most attacks. Unfortunately, little consideration is given to the actual feasibility of the attack or the defense. Moreover, adversarial samples are often crafted in the “feature-space,” making the corresponding evaluations of questionable value. Simply put, the current situation does not allow one to estimate the actual threat posed by adversarial attacks, leading to a lack of secure ML systems.

We aim to clarify such confusion in this article. By considering the application of ML for Phishing Website Detection (PWD), we formalize the “evasion-space,” in which an adversarial perturbation can be introduced to fool an ML-PWD—demonstrating that even perturbations in the “feature-space” are useful. Then, we propose a realistic threat model describing evasion attacks against ML-PWD that are cheap to stage, and hence intrinsically more attractive for real phishers. After that, we perform the first statistically validated assessment of state-of-the-art ML-PWD against 12 evasion attacks. Our evaluation shows (i) the true efficacy of evasion attempts that are more likely to occur; and (ii) the impact of perturbations crafted in different evasion-spaces; our realistic evasion attempts induce a statistically significant degradation (3–10% at p< 0.05), and their cheap cost makes them a subtle threat. Notably, however, some ML-PWD are immune to our most realistic attacks (p = 0.22).

Finally, as an additional contribution of this journal publication, we are the first to propose and empirically evaluate the intriguing case wherein an attacker introduces perturbations in multiple evasion-spaces at the same time. These new results show that simultaneously applying perturbations in the problem- and feature-space can cause a drop in the detection rate from 0.95 to 0.

Our contribution paves the way for a much-needed re-assessment of adversarial attacks against ML systems for cybersecurity.@en

Machine learning based phishing website detectors (ML-PWD) are a critical part of today's anti-phishing solutions in operation. Unfortunately, ML-PWD are prone to adversarial evasions, evidenced by both academic studies and analyses of real-world adversarial phishing webpages. However, existing works mostly focused on assessing adversarial phishing webpages against ML-PWD, while neglecting a crucial aspect: investigating whether they can deceive the actual target of phishing - -the end users. In this paper, we fill this gap by conducting two user studies (n=470) to examine how human users perceive adversarial phishing webpages, spanning both synthetically crafted ones (which we create by evading a state-of-the-art ML-PWD) as well as real adversarial webpages (taken from the wild Web) that bypassed a production-grade ML-PWD. Our findings confirm that adversarial phishing is a threat to both users and ML-PWD, since most adversarial phishing webpages have comparable effectiveness on users w.r.t. unperturbed ones. However, not all adversarial perturbations are equally effective. For example, those with added typos are significantly more noticeable to users, who tend to overlook perturbations of higher visual magnitude (such as replacing the background). We also show that users' self-reported frequency of visiting a brand's website has a statistically negative correlation with their phishing detection accuracy, which is likely caused by overconfidence. We release our resources.

@en

Did you know that over 70 million of Dota2 players have their in-game data freely accessible? What if such data is used in malicious ways? This paper is the first to investigate such a problem. Motivated by the widespread popularity of video games, we propose the first threat model for Attribute Inference Attacks (AIA) in the Dota2 context. We explain how (and why) attackers can exploit the abundant public data in the Dota2 ecosystem to infer private information about its players. Due to lack of concrete evidence on the efficacy of our AIA, we empirically prove and assess their impact in reality. By conducting an extensive survey on 500 Dota2 players spanning over 26k matches, we verify whether a correlation exists between a player's Dota2 activity and their real-life. Then, after finding such a link (p < 0.01 and ρ > 0.3), we ethically perform diverse AIA. We leverage the capabilities of machine learning to infer real-life attributes of the respondents of our survey by using their publicly available in-game data. Our results show that, by applyingdomain expertise, some AIA can reach up to 98% precision and over 90% accuracy. This paper hence raises the alarm on a subtle, but concrete threat that can potentially affect the entire competitive gaming landscape. We alerted the developers of Dota2.

@en

Existing literature on adversarial Machine Learning (ML) focuses either on showing attacks that break every ML model, or defenses that withstand most attacks. Unfortunately, little consideration is given to the actual cost of the attack or the defense. Moreover, adversarial samples are often crafted in the "feature-space", making the corresponding evaluations of questionable value. Simply put, the current situation does not allow to estimate the actual threat posed by adversarial attacks, leading to a lack of secure ML systems. We aim to clarify such confusion in this paper. By considering the application of ML for Phishing Website Detection (PWD), we formalize the "evasion-space"in which an adversarial perturbation can be introduced to fool a ML-PWD-demonstrating that even perturbations in the "feature-space"are useful. Then, we propose a realistic threat model describing evasion attacks against ML-PWD that are cheap to stage, and hence intrinsically more attractive for real phishers. Finally, we perform the first statistically validated assessment of state-of-the-art ML-PWD against 12 evasion attacks. Our evaluation shows (i) the true efficacy of evasion attempts that are more likely to occur; and (ii) the impact of perturbations crafted in different evasion-spaces. Our realistic evasion attempts induce a statistically significant degradation (3-10% at p < 0.05), and their cheap cost makes them a subtle threat. Notably, however, some ML-PWD are immune to our most realistic attacks (p=0.22). Our contribution paves the way for a much needed re-assessment of adversarial attacks against ML systems for cybersecurity.

@en

Enhancing Network Intrusion Detection Systems (NIDS) with supervised Machine Learning (ML) is tough. ML-NIDS must be trained and evaluated, operations requiring data where benign and malicious samples are clearly labeled. Such labels demand costly expert knowledge, resulting in a lack of real deployments, as well as on papers always relying on the same outdated data. The situation improved recently, as some efforts disclosed their labeled datasets. However, most past works used such datasets just as a 'yet another' testbed, overlooking the added potential provided by such availability. In contrast, we promote using such existing labeled data to cross-evaluate ML-NIDS. Such approach received only limited attention and, due to its complexity, requires a dedicated treatment. We hence propose the first cross-evaluation model. Our model highlights the broader range of realistic use-cases that can be assessed via cross-evaluations, allowing the discovery of still unknown qualities of state-of-the-art ML-NIDS. For instance, their detection surface can be extended - at no additional labeling cost. However, conducting such cross-evaluations is challenging. Hence, we propose the first framework, XeNIDS, for reliable cross-evaluations based on Network Flows. By using XeNIDS on six well-known datasets, we demonstrate the concealed potential, but also the risks, of cross-evaluations of ML-NIDS.

@en