Efficient Malware Detection in Cybersecurity: Leveraging Advanced Data Structures for Enhanced Threat Identification

Year : 2024 | Volume : 02 | Issue : 02 | Page : 32 40
    By

    P. Devi Sravanthi,

  • Manas Kumar Yogi,

  1. Post Graduate Student, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Pragati Engineering College (A), Surampalem, Andhra Pradesh, India
  2. Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Pragati Engineering College (A), Surampalem, Andhra Pradesh, India

Abstract

The cybersecurity landscape is constantly changing with more advanced malware creating major challenges for detection systems. To address these challenges effectively, advanced data structures have become essential in optimizing how data is managed, processed, and analyzed for malware detection. This review paper delves into the role of several cutting-edge data structures—bloom filters, tries, hash tables, graphs, decision trees, and suffix trees—in enhancing the efficiency and accuracy of malware detection mechanisms. Bloom filters offer rapid membership testing, crucial for initial checks of malware signatures with minimal memory usage. Tries facilitating efficient string searches, making them ideal for managing and matching malware signatures. Hash tables enable quick lookups of malware behavior profiles, supporting real-time detection. Graphs model malware propagation and network activity, aiding in identifying and mitigating threats. Decision trees classify files and activities based on learned features, enhancing classification accuracy. Suffix trees detect variants of known malware by analyzing common patterns. The paper provides a comprehensive examination of these structures, their applications, benefits, limitations, and potential advancements in improving malware detection systems.

Keywords: Cybersecurity, attack, tries, bloom filters, hash tables

[This article belongs to International Journal of Data Structure Studies ]

How to cite this article:
P. Devi Sravanthi, Manas Kumar Yogi. Efficient Malware Detection in Cybersecurity: Leveraging Advanced Data Structures for Enhanced Threat Identification. International Journal of Data Structure Studies. 2024; 02(02):32-40.
How to cite this URL:
P. Devi Sravanthi, Manas Kumar Yogi. Efficient Malware Detection in Cybersecurity: Leveraging Advanced Data Structures for Enhanced Threat Identification. International Journal of Data Structure Studies. 2024; 02(02):32-40. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/ijdss/article=2024/view=181591


References

  1. Aghaeikheirabady M, Farshchi SMR, Shirazi H. A new approach to malware detection by comparative analysis of data structures in a memory image. 2014 International Congress on Technology, Communication and Knowledge (ICTCK), Mashhad, Iran. 2014. p. 1–4. DOI: 10.1109/ICTCK.2014.7033519.
  2. Aslan O, Samet R. A comprehensive review on malware detection approaches. IEEE Access. 2020;8:6249–71. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2963724.
  3. Vinayakumar R, Alazab M, Soman KP, Poornachandran P, Venkatraman S. Robust intelligent malware detection using deep learning. IEEE Access. 2019;7:46717–38. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2906934.
  4. Bilot T, El Madhoun N, Al Agha K, Zouaoui A. A survey on malware detection with graph representation learning. ACM Comput Surv. 2024;56:1–36. DOI: 10.1145/3664649.
  5. Tahir R. A study on malware and malware detection techniques. Int J Educ Manag Eng. 2018;8:20–30. DOI: 10.5815/ijeme.2018.02.03.
  6. Oak R, Du M, Yan D, Takawale H, Amit I. Malware detection on highly imbalanced data through sequence modeling. Proceedings of the 12th ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security (AISec’19). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2019. p. 37–48. DOI: 10.1145/3338501.3357374.
  7. Qiu J, Zhang J, Luo W, Pan L, Nepal S, Xiang Y. A survey of android malware detection with deep neural models. ACM Comput Surv. 2021;53:1–36. DOI: 10.1145/3417978.
  8. Jeon J, Park JH, Jeong YS. Dynamic analysis for IoT malware detection with convolution neural network model. IEEE Access. 2020;8:96899–911. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2995887.
  9. Sihwail R, Omar K, Zainol Ariffin KA. A survey on malware analysis techniques: Static, dynamic, hybrid and memory analysis. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol. 2018;8:1662–71. DOI: 10.18517/ijaseit.8.4-2.6827.
  10. Xu K, Li Y, Deng R, Chen K, Xu J. Droidevolver: Self-evolving android malware detection system. 2019 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), Stockholm, Sweden. 2019. p. 47–62. DOI: 10.1109/EuroSP.2019.00014.
  11. Alasmary H, Khormali A, Anwar A, Park J, Choi J, Abusnaina A, Awad A, Nyang D, Mohaisen A. Analyzing and detecting emerging Internet of Things malware: A graph-based approach. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019;6:8977–88. DOI: 10.1109/JIOT.2019.2925929.
  12. Ngo QD, Nguyen HT, Le VH, Nguyen DH. A survey of IoT malware and detection methods based on static features. ICT Express. 2020;6:280–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.icte.2020.04.005.
  13. Akcora CG, Li Y, Gel YR, Kantarcioglu M. BitcoinHeist: Topological data analysis for ransomware detection on the bitcoin blockchain. [Preprint]. Arxiv:1906.07852 [cs.CR]. 2019. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1906.07852.
  14. Taheri R, Shojafar M, Alazab M, Tafazolli R. FED-IIoT: A robust federated malware detection architecture in industrial IoT. IEEE Trans Ind Inform. 2021;17:8442–52. DOI: 10.1109/TII.2020.3043458.
  15. Yan J, Qi Y, Rao Q. Detecting malware with an ensemble method based on deep neural network. Secur Commun Netw. 2018;2018:1–16. DOI: 10.1155/2018/7247095.
Regular Issue Subscription Review Article
Volume 02
Issue 02
Received 18/09/2024
Accepted 12/10/2024
Published 07/11/2024
364

Login


My IP

PlumX Metrics