Enhancing IoT Security: Optimizing Anomaly Detection through Machine Learning
-
Published:2024-05-31
Issue:11
Volume:13
Page:2148
-
ISSN:2079-9292
-
Container-title:Electronics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Electronics
Author:
Balega Maria12, Farag Waleed1, Wu Xin-Wen3ORCID, Ezekiel Soundararajan1, Good Zaryn1
Affiliation:
1. Department of Mathematical and Computer Sciences, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, PA 15705, USA 2. Information Networking Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15289, USA 3. Department of Computer Science, University of Mary Washington, Fredericksburg, VA 22401, USA
Abstract
As the Internet of Things (IoT) continues to evolve, securing IoT networks and devices remains a continuing challenge. Anomaly detection is a crucial procedure in protecting the IoT. A promising way to perform anomaly detection in the IoT is through the use of machine learning (ML) algorithms. There is a lack of studies in the literature identifying optimal (with regard to both effectiveness and efficiency) anomaly detection models for the IoT. To fill the gap, this work thoroughly investigated the effectiveness and efficiency of IoT anomaly detection enabled by several representative machine learning models, namely Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Support Vector Machines (SVMs), and Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (DCNNs). Identifying optimal anomaly detection models for IoT anomaly detection is challenging due to diverse IoT applications and dynamic IoT networking environments. It is of vital importance to evaluate ML-powered anomaly detection models using multiple datasets collected from different environments. We utilized three reputable datasets to benchmark the aforementioned machine learning methods, namely, IoT-23, NSL-KDD, and TON_IoT. Our results show that XGBoost outperformed both the SVM and DCNN, achieving accuracies of up to 99.98%. Moreover, XGBoost proved to be the most computationally efficient method; the model performed 717.75 times faster than the SVM and significantly faster than the DCNN in terms of training times. The research results have been further confirmed by using our real-world IoT data collected from an IoT testbed consisting of physical devices that we recently built.
Reference36 articles.
1. Hossain, M., Kayas, G., Hasan, R., Skjellum, A., Noor, S., and Islam, S.M.R. (2024). A Holistic Analysis of Internet of Things (IoT) Security: Principles, Practices, and New Perspectives. Future Internet, 16. 2. Cole, T. (2022, April 01). Interview with Kevin Ashton—Inventor of IoT: Is Driven by the Users. Available online: https://www.avnet.com/wps/portal/silica/resources/article/interview-with-iot-inventor-kevin-ashton-iot-is-driven-by-the-users/. 3. Al-Hejri, I., Azzedin, F., Almuhammadi, S., and Eltoweissy, M. (2024). Lightweight Secure and Scalable Scheme for Data Transmission in the Internet of Things. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 4. Vailshery, L.S. (2022, April 01). Global IoT and Non-IoT Connections 2010–2025. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1101442/iot-number-of-connected-devices-worldwide/. 5. Posey, B., and Shea, S. (2022, April 01). What Are IoT Devices?—Definition from Techtarget.com. Available online: https://internetofthingsagenda.techtarget.com/definition/IoT-device.
|
|