Multilayer hybrid strategy for phishing email zero-day filtering

被引:14
作者
Chowdhury, M. U. [1 ]
Abawajy, J. H. [1 ]
Kelarev, A. V. [1 ]
Hochin, T. [2 ]
机构
[1] Deakin Univ, Sch Informat Technol, Locked Bag 20000, Geelong, Vic 3220, Australia
[2] Kyoto Inst Technol, Grad Sch Sci & Technol, Div Informat Sci, Kyoto, Japan
关键词
attribute selection; ensembles; filtering; multilayer strategy; phishing emails; pruning; PRUNING ALGORITHM; ENSEMBLE; CLASSIFICATION;
D O I
10.1002/cpe.3929
中图分类号
TP31 [计算机软件];
学科分类号
081202 ; 0835 ;
摘要
The cyber security threats from phishing emails have been growing buoyed by the capacity of their distributors to fine-tune their trickery and defeat previously known filtering techniques. The detection of novel phishing emails that had not appeared previously, also known as zero-day phishing emails, remains a particular challenge. This paper proposes a multilayer hybrid strategy (MHS) for zero-day filtering of phishing emails that appear during a separate time span by using training data collected previously during another time span. This strategy creates a large ensemble of classifiers and then applies a novel method for pruning the ensemble. The majority of known pruning algorithms belong to the following three categories: ranking based, clustering based, and optimization-based pruning. This paper introduces and investigates a multilayer hybrid pruning. Its application in MHS combines all three approaches in one scheme: ranking, clustering, and optimization. Furthermore, we carry out thorough empirical study of the performance of the MHS for the filtering of phishing emails. Our empirical study compares the performance of MHS strategy with other machine learning classifiers. The results of our empirical study demonstrate that MHS achieved the best outcomes and multilayer hybrid pruning performed better than other pruning techniques. Copyright (c) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] Iterative construction of hierarchical classifiers for phishing website detection
    School of Information Technology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood 3125, Australia
    [J]. J. Netw., 8 (2089-2098):
  • [2] Abdi L, 2013, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V7802, P246, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-36546-1_26
  • [3] Classification of Phishing Email Using Random Forest Machine Learning Technique
    Akinyelu, Andronicus A.
    Adewumi, Aderemi O.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED MATHEMATICS, 2014,
  • [4] Alazab M., 2011, AusDM, V11, P171, DOI DOI 10.5555/2483628.2483648
  • [5] A Survey of Phishing Email Filtering Techniques
    Almomani, Ammar
    Gupta, B. B.
    Atawneh, Samer
    Meulenberg, A.
    Almomani, Eman
    [J]. IEEE COMMUNICATIONS SURVEYS AND TUTORIALS, 2013, 15 (04): : 2070 - 2090
  • [6] Almomani Ammar, 2012, INT J DIGIT CONTENT, V6, P119, DOI 10.4156/JDCTA.VOL6.ISSUE18.14,2012
  • [7] Why phishing still works: User strategies for combating phishing attacks
    Alsharnouby, Mohamed
    Alaca, Furkan
    Chiasson, Sonia
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN-COMPUTER STUDIES, 2015, 82 : 69 - 82
  • [8] [Anonymous], PHISH ACT TRENDS REP
  • [9] Intelligent phishing detection and protection scheme for online transactions
    Barraclough, P. A.
    Hossain, M. A.
    Tahir, M. A.
    Sexton, G.
    Aslam, N.
    [J]. EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2013, 40 (11) : 4697 - 4706
  • [10] Bhowan U, 2011, LECT NOTES ARTIF INT, V7106, P192, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-25832-9_20