# ML-based IoT Malware Detection Under Adversarial Settings: A Systematic Evaluation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.13373 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.13373/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 14 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Aug 2021.

## Builds on (most cited first, 14 of 14)

- [Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6572/) (2014)
- [Intriguing properties of neural networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6199/) (2013)
- [Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.04644/) (2016)
- [Adversarial examples in the physical world](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1607.02533/) (2016)
- [DeepFool: a simple and accurate method to fool deep neural networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1511.04599/) (2015)
- [Practical Black-Box Attacks against Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.02697/) (2016)
- [The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1511.07528/) (2015)
- [Countering Adversarial Images using Input Transformations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00117/) (2017)
- [Generating Adversarial Malware Examples for Black-Box Attacks Based on GAN](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.05983/) (2017)
- [Adversarial Malware Binaries: Evading Deep Learning for Malware Detection in Executables](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.04173/) (2018)
- [A New Defense Against Adversarial Images: Turning a Weakness into a Strength](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.07629/) (2019)
- [Novel Feature Extraction, Selection and Fusion for Effective Malware Family Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1511.04317/) (2015)
- [Deceiving End-to-End Deep Learning Malware Detectors using Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.04528/) (2018)
- [Explanation-Guided Backdoor Poisoning Attacks Against Malware Classifiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.01031/) (2020)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid growth of the Internet of Things (IoT) devices is paralleled by them being on the front-line of malicious attacks. This has led to an explosion in the number of IoT malware, with continued mutations, evolution, and sophistication. These malicious software are detected using machine learning (ML) algorithms alongside the traditional signature-based methods. Although ML-based detectors improve the detection performance, they are susceptible to malware evolution and sophistication, making them limited to the patterns that they have been trained upon. This continuous trend motivates the large body of literature on malware analysis and detection research, with many systems emerging constantly, and outperforming their predecessors. In this work, we systematically examine the state-of-the-art malware detection approaches, that utilize various representation and learning techniques, under a range of adversarial settings. Our analyses highlight the instability of the proposed detectors in learning patterns that distinguish the benign from the malicious software. The results exhibit that software mutations with functionality-preserving operations, such as stripping and padding, significantly deteriorate the accuracy of such detectors. Additionally, our analysis of the industry-standard malware detectors shows their instability to the malware mutations.