mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Improving Robustness of ML Classifiers against Realizable Evasion Attacks Using Conserved Features

arXiv 1708.08327 ↗First posted 28 Aug 2017cs.CR cs.LGcited by 18

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Machine learning (ML) techniques are increasingly common in security applications, such as malware and intrusion detection. However, ML models are often susceptible to evasion attacks, in which an adversary makes changes to the input (such as malware) in order to avoid being detected. A conventional approach to evaluate ML robustness to such attacks, as well as to design robust ML, is by considering simplified feature-space models of attacks, where the attacker changes ML features directly to effect evasion, while minimizing or constraining the magnitude of this change. We investigate the effectiveness of this approach to designing robust ML in the face of attacks that can be realized in actual malware (realizable attacks). We demonstrate that in the context of structure-based PDF malware detection, such techniques appear to have limited effectiveness, but they are effective with content-based detectors. In either case, we show that augmenting the feature space models with conserved features (those that cannot be unilaterally modified without compromising malicious functionality) significantly improves performance. Finally, we show that feature space models enable generalized robustness when faced with a variety of realizable attacks, as compared to classifiers which are tuned to be robust to a specific realizable attack.

Key facts. Cited by 18 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 28 Aug 2017.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 6; 2022: 5; 2023: 3; 2024: 3; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

18 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2021Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practicescited by 206
  2. 2022"Real Attackers Don't Compute Gradients": Bridging the Gap Between Adversarial ML Research and Practicecited by 55
  3. 2021Adversarial Robustness with Non-uniform Perturbationscited by 17
  4. 2022Robust Deep Reinforcement Learning through Bootstrapped Opportunistic Curriculumcited by 15
  5. 2024Preference Poisoning Attacks on Reward Model Learningcited by 14
  6. 2023SoK: Pragmatic Assessment of Machine Learning for Network Intrusion Detectioncited by 13
  7. 2023It Is All About Data: A Survey on the Effects of Data on Adversarial Robustnesscited by 9
  8. 2022Multi-SpacePhish: Extending the Evasion-space of Adversarial Attacks against Phishing Website Detectors using Machine Learningcited by 7
  9. 2022Wild Networks: Exposure of 5G Network Infrastructures to Adversarial Examplescited by 5
  10. 2024PhishLang: A Real-Time, Fully Client-Side Phishing Detection Framework Using MobileBERTcited by 3
  11. 2021Oriole: Thwarting Privacy against Trustworthy Deep Learning Modelscited by 2
  12. 2021Enhancing Robustness of Neural Networks through Fourier Stabilizationcited by 2
6 more
  1. 2023Open Image Content Disarm And Reconstructioncited by 2
  2. 2021On the Exploitability of Audio Machine Learning Pipelines to Surreptitious Adversarial Examplescited by 1
  3. 2022MaMaDroid2.0 -- The Holes of Control Flow Graphscited by 1
  4. 2024Counteracting Concept Drift by Learning with Future Malware Predictionscited by 1
  5. 2021Robusta: Robust AutoML for Feature Selection via Reinforcement Learningcited by 0
  6. 2026Robust Context-Aware Detection of Malicious Instructions in Textcited by 0