Learn Practical Maths

Machine learning and math can’t trump smart attackers

Machine learning and math can’t trump smart attackers math capsule


When you’ve been fighting black-hat hackers for many years, you learn a factor or 2 regarding them. Obviously, they're dangerous, and that they wish to play with code. however most significantly, they’re frequently learning and you would like to stay up if you wish to guard your customers’ businesses from their sticky fingers.



Now, if we tend to were a post-truth security marketer, we'd speak plenty regarding however our machine learning makes US acceptable the fight, or however arithmetic will predict associate attacker’s each move. we'd additionally try and downplay the actual fact that even advanced technologies are often fooled by adversaries.

But at ESET, we tend to worth the reality. notwithstanding however good a machine learning algorithmic program is, it's a slim focus and learns from a selected information set. against this, attackers possess supposed general intelligence and square measure able to assume outside of the box. they'll learn from context and like inspiration, that no machine or algorithmic program will predict.
Take self-driving cars as associate example. These good machines find out how to drive in associate atmosphere with road signs and pre-set rules.

But what if somebody covers all the signs or manipulates them? while not such a significant part, the cars begin to form wrong selections that may finish in a very fatal crash, or just immobilize the vehicle.

In computer network, malware writers concentrate on such malicious behavior. they fight to cover truth purpose of their code, by “covering” it with obfuscation or cryptography. If the algorithmic program cannot look behind this mask, it will create a wrong call, labeling a malicious item as clean – inflicting a probably dangerous miss.

However, recognizing the mask doesn’t continually reveal the code’s true nature, and while not execution the sample there's no approach of knowing what's underneath the hood. to try and do this ESET uses a simulated atmosphere – called sandboxing – deprecated by several of the post-truth vendors. They claim their technology will acknowledge malice just by viewing a sample and doing the “math”.

How would that job in real life? try to confirm a house’s worth simply by viewing an image of it. you'll be able to use some options, like the amount of windows or floors to urge a rough estimate. however while not knowing wherever the home is situated, what's within, and alternative details, there's a high chance of error.

On high of that, the arithmetic itself contradicts these post-truth claims – by concerning what’s called associate “undecidable problem”, i.e. determinant whether or not a program can behave maliciously in step with its external look – as incontestible by the pc mortal UN agency developed the definition of bug, Fred Cohen.

Moreover, in cybersecurity, thusme issues need such a lot process capability – or square measure so long – that even a machine learning algorithmic program would be ineffective in resolution them – creating them much undecidable.
Now place all this info into associate equation with a sensible, dynamic opponent and your endpoints will find yourself infected.

ESET has considerable  expertise with intelligent adversaries and is aware of that machine learning alone isn't enough to guard endpoints. we've been victimization this technology for years and have fine-tuned it to figure with a range of alternative layers of protection that square measure underneath the hood of our security solutions.

Moreover, our detection engineers and malware researchers perpetually supervise “the machine” to avoid uncalled-for errors on the approach, making certain that detection runs swimmingly while not bothering ESET business customers with false positives.

The whole series:
Editorial: Fighting post-truth with reality in cybersecurity
What is machine learning and artificial intelligence?
Most frequent misconceptions regarding cc and AI
Why ML-based security doesn’t scare intelligent adversaries
Why one line of cyberdefense isn't enough, although it’s machine learning
Chasing ghosts: the important prices of high false positive rates in cybersecurity
How updates create your security resolution stronger
We know ML, we’ve been victimization it for over a decade
With contribution of Jakub Debski & Peter Kosinar

View More ->>