skip to main content
10.1145/2851613.2851799acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Reading between the fields: practical, effective intrusion detection for industrial control systems

Authors Info & Claims
Published:04 April 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Detection of previously unknown attacks and malicious messages is a challenging problem faced by modern network intrusion detection systems. Anomaly-based solutions, despite being able to detect unknown attacks, have not been used often in practice due to their high false positive rate, and because they provide little actionable information to the security officer in case of an alert. In this paper we focus on intrusion detection in industrial control systems networks and we propose an innovative, practical and semantics-aware framework for anomaly detection. The network communication model and alerts generated by our framework are userunderstandable, making them much easier to manage. At the same time the framework exhibits an excellent tradeoff between detection rate and false positive rate, which we show by comparing it with two existing payload-based anomaly detection methods on several ICS datasets.

References

  1. Digital bond's scada security portal. http://www.digitalbond.com/tools/quickdraw/, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Siemens s7-1200 plc vulnerabilities. https://icscert. us-cert.gov/alerts/ICS-ALERT-11-161-01, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Desrics: Datasets enabling security research for industrial control systems. http://desrics.com/, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. S7comm wireshark dissector plugin. http://s7commwireshark.sourceforge.net/, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. J. Beaver, R. Borges-Hink, and M. Buckner. An evaluation of machine learning methods to detect malicious scada communications. In International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications, volume 2, pages 54--59, Dec 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. G. Combs et al. Wireshark, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. E. Costante, J. den Hartog, M. Petković, S. Etalle, and M. Pechenizkiy. Hunting the unknown. In Data and Applications Security and Privacy XXVIII, pages 243--259. Springer, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. H. Dreger, A. Feldmann, M. Mai, V. Paxson, and R. Sommer. Dynamic application-layer protocol analysis for network intrusion detection. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference on USENIX Security Symposium - Volume 15, USENIX-SS'06, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2006. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. P. Düssel, C. Gehl, P. Laskov, J.-U. Bußer, C. Störmann, and J. Kästner. Cyber-critical infrastructure protection using real-time payload-based anomaly detection. In E. Rome and R. Bloomfield, editors, Critical Information Infrastructures Security, LNCS 6027, pages 85--97. Springer, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. P. Düssel, C. Gehl, P. Laskov, and K. Rieck. Incorporation of application layer protocol syntax into anomaly detection. In R. Sekar and A. Pujari, editors, Information Systems Security, LNCS 5352, pages 188--202. Springer, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. N. Falliere, L. Murchu, and E. Chien. W32. stuxnet dossier. Technical Report November, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. D. Hadžiosmanović, R. Sommer, E. Zambon, and P. H. Hartel. Through the eye of the plc: Semantic security monitoring for industrial processes. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, ACSAC '14, pages 126--135, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. D. Hadziosmanovic, D. Bolzoni, S. Etalle, and P. Hartel. Challenges and opportunities in securing industrial control systems. In Complexity in Engineering, 2012, pages 1--6. IEEE, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. D. Hadziosmanovic, L. Simionato, D. Bolzoni, E. Zambon, and S. Etalle. N-gram against the machine: On the feasibility of the n-gram network analysis for binary protocols. In D. Balzarotti, S. Stolfo, and M. Cova, editors, Research in Attacks, Intrusions, and Defenses, LNCS 7462, pages 354--373. Springer, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Honeywell. Modbus rtu serial communications user manual, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. E. Knapp and J. Langill. Industrial network security: securing critical infrastructure networks for smart grid, scada, and other industrial control systems. Access Online via Elsevier, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. C. Kruegel and G. Vigna. Anomaly detection of web-based attacks. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS '03, pages 251--261. ACM, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. H. Lin, A. Slagell, Z. Kalbarczyk, P. W. Sauer, and R. K. Iyer. Semantic security analysis of scada networks to detect malicious control commands in power grids. In Proceedings of the First ACM Workshop on Smart Energy Grid Security, SEGS '13, pages 29--34, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. B. Miller and D. Rowe. A survey SCADA of and critical infrastructure incidents. Proceedings of the 1st Annual conference on Research in information technology - RIIT '12, page 51, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. V. Paxson. Bro: a system for detecting network intruders in real-time. Computer networks, 31(23):2435--2463, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. R. Perdisci, D. Ariu, P. Fogla, G. Giacinto, and W. Lee. McPAD: A multiple classifier system for accurate payload-based anomaly detection. Computer Networks, (October 2008). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. R. L. Plackett. Karl pearson and the chi-squared test. International Statistical Review / Revue Internationale de Statistique, 51(1):pp. 59--72, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. F. Schuster, A. Paul, and H. König. Towards learning normality for anomaly detection in industrial control networks. In Emerging Management Mechanisms for the Future Internet, pages 61--72. Springer, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. D. W. Scott. Scott's rule. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2(4):497--502, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Siemens. Cpu-cpu communication with simatic controllers, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. A. Swales. Open modbus/tcp specification. Schneider Electric, 29, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. S. Wu and W. Banzhaf. The use of computational intelligence in intrusion detection systems: A review. Applied Soft Computing, (November), 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Reading between the fields: practical, effective intrusion detection for industrial control systems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SAC '16: Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
      April 2016
      2360 pages
      ISBN:9781450337397
      DOI:10.1145/2851613

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 4 April 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      SAC '16 Paper Acceptance Rate252of1,047submissions,24%Overall Acceptance Rate1,650of6,669submissions,25%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader