journal article·2024-05-14Open access

XAI-IDS: Toward Proposing an Explainable Artificial Intelligence Framework for Enhancing Network Intrusion Detection Systems

Osvaldo Arreche, Tanish Guntur, Mustafa Abdallah

Applied Sciences· Volume 14· Issue 10

Abstract

The exponential growth of network intrusions necessitates the development of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) techniques for intrusion detection systems (IDSs). However, the reliance on AI for IDSs presents several challenges, including the performance variability of different AI models and the opacity of their decision-making processes, hindering comprehension by human security analysts. In response, we propose an end-to-end explainable AI (XAI) framework tailored to enhance the interpretability of AI models in network intrusion detection tasks. Our framework commences with benchmarking seven black-box AI models across three real-world network intrusion datasets, each characterized by distinct features and challenges. Subsequently, we leverage various XAI models to generate both local and global explanations, shedding light on the underlying rationale behind the AI models’ decisions. Furthermore, we employ feature extraction techniques to discern crucial model-specific and intrusion-specific features, aiding in understanding the discriminative factors influencing the detection outcomes. Additionally, our framework identifies overlapping and significant features that impact multiple AI models, providing insights into common patterns across different detection approaches. Notably, we demonstrate that the computational overhead incurred by generating XAI explanations is minimal for most AI models, ensuring practical applicability in real-time scenarios. By offering multi-faceted explanations, our framework equips security analysts with actionable insights to make informed decisions for threat detection and mitigation. To facilitate widespread adoption and further research, we have made our source code publicly available, serving as a foundational XAI framework for IDSs within the research community.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Network Security and Intrusion Detection · Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA

Computer and Information Science Department, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA

Computer and Information Technology Department, Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA

Funding

Lilly Endowment · Enhanced Mentoring Program with Opportunities for Ways to Excel in Research (EMPOWER) · Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis · the Indiana University Pervasive Technology Institute

References (99)

Show source-provided references
1. Northcutt, S., and Novak, J. (2002). Network Intrusion Detection, Sams Publishing.
2. Vasiliadis, G., Antonatos, S., Polychronakis, M., Markatos, E.P., and Ioannidis, S. (2008, January 15–17). Gnort: High performance network intrusion detection using graphics processors. Proceedings of the Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection: 11th International Symposium, RAID 2008, Cambridge, MA, USA. Proceedings 11.
3. Modeling realistic adversarial attacks against network intrusion detection systems10.1145/3469659 ↗
4. Wolsing, K., Wagner, E., Saillard, A., and Henze, M. (2022, January 26–28). IPAL: Breaking up silos of protocol-dependent and domain-specific industrial intrusion detection systems. Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Research in Attacks, Intrusions and Defenses, Limassol, Cyprus.10.1145/3545948.3545968 ↗
5. An overview of anomaly detection techniques: Existing solutions and latest technological trends10.1016/j.comnet.2007.02.001 ↗
6. Dynamical analysis of diversity in rule-based open source network intrusion detection systems10.1007/s10664-021-10046-w ↗
7. State transition analysis: A rule-based intrusion detection approach10.1109/32.372146 ↗
8. A novel rule-based Intrusion Detection System using data mining
9. Snapp, S.R., Smaha, S.E., Teal, D.M., and Grance, T. (1992, January 8–12). The {DIDS}(Distributed Intrusion Detection System) Prototype. Proceedings of the USENIX Summer 1992 Technical Conference (USENIX Summer 1992 Technical Conference), San Antonio, TX, USA.
10. Jackson, K.A., DuBois, D.H., and Stallings, C.A. (1991). An Expert System Application for Network Intrusion Detection, Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL). Technical report.
11. Intelligent Intrusion Detection System for Apache Web Server Empowered with Machine Learning Approaches
12. Tabassum, A., Erbad, A., and Guizani, M. (2019, January 24–28). A survey on recent approaches in intrusion detection system in iots. Proceedings of the 2019 15th International Wireless Communications & Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC), Tangier, Morocco.10.1109/IWCMC.2019.8766455 ↗
13. A survey of data mining and machine learning methods for cyber security intrusion detection10.1109/COMST.2015.2494502 ↗
14. Intrusion detection based on Machine Learning techniques in computer networks10.1016/j.iot.2021.100462 ↗
15. Zamani, M., and Movahedi, M. (2013). Machine learning techniques for intrusion detection. arXiv.
16. Kim, J., Shin, N., Jo, S.Y., and Kim, S.H. (2017, January 13–16). Method of intrusion detection using deep neural network. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Big Data and Smart Computing (BigComp), Jeju, Republic of Korea.
17. Tang, C., Luktarhan, N., and Zhao, Y. (2020). SAAE-DNN: Deep learning method on intrusion detection. Symmetry, 12.10.3390/sym12101695 ↗
18. An improved intrusion detection algorithm based on GA and SVM10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2810198 ↗
19. SVM-based intrusion detection system for wireless ad hoc networks10.1109/VETECF.2003.1285404 ↗
20. Ingre, B., Yadav, A., and Soni, A.K. (2018). Information and Communication Technology for Intelligent Systems (ICTIS 2017)-Volume 2, Proceedings of the ICTIS 2017: Second International Conference on Information and Communication Technology for Intelligent Systems, Ahmedabad, India, 25–26 March 2017, Springer.
21. Ferrag, M.A., Maglaras, L., Ahmim, A., Derdour, M., and Janicke, H. (2020). Rdtids: Rules and decision tree-based intrusion detection system for internet-of-things networks. Future Internet, 12.10.3390/fi12030044 ↗
22. An intelligent tree-based intrusion detection model for cyber security10.1007/s10922-021-09591-y ↗
23. Amor, N.B., Benferhat, S., and Elouedi, Z. (2004, January 14–17). Naive bayes vs decision trees in intrusion detection systems. Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, Nicosia, Cyprus.10.1145/967900.967989 ↗
24. Intrusion detection in cyber–physical environment using hybrid Naïve Bayes—Decision table and multi-objective evolutionary feature selection10.1016/j.comcom.2022.03.009 ↗
25. Balyan, A.K., Ahuja, S., Lilhore, U.K., Sharma, S.K., Manoharan, P., Algarni, A.D., Elmannai, H., and Raahemifar, K. (2022). A hybrid intrusion detection model using ega-pso and improved random forest method. Sensors, 22.10.3390/s22165986 ↗
26. Waskle, S., Parashar, L., and Singh, U. (2020, January 2–4). Intrusion detection system using PCA with random forest approach. Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Electronics and Sustainable Communication Systems (ICESC), Coimbatore, India.10.1109/ICESC48915.2020.9155656 ↗
27. Negandhi, P., Trivedi, Y., and Mangrulkar, R. (2019). Emerging Research in Computing, Information, Communication and Applications, Springer.
28. Das, A., and Rad, P. (2020). Opportunities and challenges in explainable artificial intelligence (xai): A survey. arXiv.
29. Building a Cloud-IDS by Hybrid Bio-Inspired Feature Selection Algorithms Along With Random Forest Model10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3353055 ↗
30. Dhumal, C.T., and Pingale, S.V. (2024). Analysis of Intrusion Detection Systems: Techniques, Datasets and Research Opportunity. SSRN Electron. J., 1–8.10.2139/ssrn.4749820 ↗
31. Deep Learning for Intrusion Detection and Security of Internet of Things (IoT): Current Analysis, Challenges, and Possible Solutions10.1155/2022/4016073 ↗
32. Leveraging Deep Reinforcement Learning Technique for Intrusion Detection in SCADA Infrastructure10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3390722 ↗
33. A detailed analysis of CICIDS2017 dataset for designing Intrusion Detection Systems
34. A study on NSL-KDD dataset for intrusion detection system based on classification algorithms
35. Mihailescu, M.E., Mihai, D., Carabas, M., Komisarek, M., Pawlicki, M., Hołubowicz, W., and Kozik, R. (2021). The Proposition and Evaluation of the RoEduNet-SIMARGL2021 Network Intrusion Detection Dataset. Sensors, 21.10.3390/s21134319 ↗
36. CICIDS-2017 Dataset Feature Analysis With Information Gain for Anomaly Detection10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3009843 ↗
37. Warnecke, A., Arp, D., Wressnegger, C., and Rieck, K. (2020, January 7–11). Evaluating explanation methods for deep learning in security. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), Genoa, Italy.10.1109/EuroSP48549.2020.00018 ↗
38. Strom, B.E., Applebaum, A., Miller, D.P., Nickels, K.C., Pennington, A.G., and Thomas, C.B. (2018). Technical Report, The MITRE Corporation.
39. Lee, C.B., Roedel, C., and Silenok, E. (2003). Detection and Characterization of Port Scan Attacks, Univeristy of California, Department of Computer Science and Engineering.
40. Comprmoise, D. (2023, October 21). Drive-By Compromise. Available online: https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1189/.
41. Intrusion detection using multi-objective evolutionary convolutional neural network for Internet of Things in Fog computing10.1016/j.knosys.2022.108505 ↗
42. Stone-Gross, B., Cova, M., Cavallaro, L., Gilbert, B., Szydlowski, M., Kemmerer, R., Kruegel, C., and Vigna, G. (2009, January 9–13). Your botnet is my botnet: Analysis of a botnet takeover. Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Chicago, IL, USA.10.1145/1653662.1653738 ↗
43. Gorodetski, V., and Kotenko, I. (2002). International Workshop on Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium, RAID 2002, Zurich, Switzerland, 16–18 October 2002, Springer.
44. Khan, A., Kim, H., and Lee, B. (2021, January 11–13). M2MON: Building an MMIO-based Security Reference Monitor for Unmanned Vehicles. Proceedings of the 30th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 21), Virtual.
45. Hussain, S.R., Karim, I., Ishtiaq, A.A., Chowdhury, O., and Bertino, E. (2021, January 15–19). Noncompliance as deviant behavior: An automated black-box noncompliance checker for 4g lte cellular devices. Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Virtual.10.1145/3460120.3485388 ↗
46. Mirzaei, O., Vasilenko, R., Kirda, E., Lu, L., and Kharraz, A. (2021, January 14–16). Scrutinizer: Detecting code reuse in malware via decompilation and machine learning. Proceedings of the Detection of Intrusions and Malware, and Vulnerability Assessment: 18th International Conference, DIMVA 2021, Virtual Event. Proceedings 18.10.1007/978-3-030-80825-9_7 ↗
47. Lukacs, S., Sirb, C.B., Lutas, D.H., and Colesa, A.V. (2015). Strongly Isolated Malware Scanning Using Secure Virtual Containers. (9,117,081), U.S. Patent.
48. AI-IDS: Application of deep learning to real-time Web intrusion detection10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2986882 ↗
49. Challenges and pitfalls in malware research10.1016/j.cose.2021.102287 ↗
50. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions
51. Dieber, J., and Kirrane, S. (2020). Why model why? Assessing the strengths and limitations of LIME. arXiv.
52. DCunha, S.D. (2021, October 21). Is AI Shifting the Human-in-the-Loop Model in Cybersecurity?. Available online: https://datatechvibe.com/ai/is-ai-shifting-the-human-in-the-loop-model-in-cybersecurity/.
53. Han, D., Wang, Z., Chen, W., Zhong, Y., Wang, S., Zhang, H., Yang, J., Shi, X., and Yin, X. (2021, January 15–19). DeepAID: Interpreting and Improving Deep Learning-based Anomaly Detection in Security Applications. Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Virtual.10.1145/3460120.3484589 ↗
54. Wu, C., Qian, A., Dong, X., and Zhang, Y. (2020, January 11–13). Feature-oriented Design of Visual Analytics System for Interpretable Deep Learning based Intrusion Detection. Proceedings of the 2020 International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering (TASE), Hangzhou, China.10.1109/TASE49443.2020.00019 ↗
55. Mirsky, Y., Doitshman, T., Elovici, Y., and Shabtai, A. (2018). Kitsune: An Ensemble of Autoencoders for Online Network Intrusion Detection. arXiv.10.14722/ndss.2018.23204 ↗
56. Classification and regression by randomForest
57. Aggarwal, C.C., Hinneburg, A., and Keim, D.A. (2001, January 4–6). On the surprising behavior of distance metrics in high dimensional space. Proceedings of the Database Theory—ICDT 2001: 8th International Conference, London, UK. Proceedings 8.10.1007/3-540-44503-X_27 ↗
58. Chicco, D., and Jurman, G. (2020). The advantages of the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) over F1 score and accuracy in binary classification evaluation. BMC Genom., 21.10.1186/s12864-019-6413-7 ↗
59. Salih, A., Raisi-Estabragh, Z., Galazzo, I.B., Radeva, P., Petersen, S.E., Menegaz, G., and Lekadir, K. (2023). Commentary on explainable artificial intelligence methods: SHAP and LIME. arXiv.
60. Garreau, D., and von Luxburg, U. (2020). Explaining the Explainer: A First Theoretical Analysis of LIME. arXiv.
61. Ma, X., Hou, M., Zhan, J., and Liu, Z. (2023). Interpretable Predictive Modeling of Tight Gas Well Productivity with SHAP and LIME Techniques. Energies, 16.10.3390/en16093653 ↗
62. Roberts, C.V., Elahi, E., and Chandrashekar, A. (2022). On the Bias-Variance Characteristics of LIME and SHAP in High Sparsity Movie Recommendation Explanation Tasks. arXiv.
63. (2024, April 09). Flow Information Elements—Nprobe 10.1 Documentation. Available online: https://www.ntop.org/guides/nprobe/flow_information_elements.html.
64. Ahlashkari (2024, April 09). CICFLOWMETER/README.TXT at Master · Ahlashkari/Cicflowmeter. Available online: https://github.com/ahlashkari/CICFlowMeter/blob/master/ReadMe.txt.
65. Claise, B. (2024, April 09). Cisco Systems Netflow Services Export Version 9; Technical Report. Available online: https://www.cisco.com/en/US/technologies/tk648/tk362/technologies_white_paper09186a00800a3db9.html.
66. Towards a reliable intrusion detection benchmark dataset
67. Tavallaee, M., Bagheri, E., Lu, W., and Ghorbani, A.A. (2009, January 8–10). A detailed analysis of the KDD CUP 99 data set. Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications, Ottawa, ON, Canada.10.1109/CISDA.2009.5356528 ↗
68. Zhao, R. (2024, April 09). NetFlow Version 9 Flow-Record Format. Available online: https://ieee-dataport.org/documents/nsl-kdd-0.
69. Brownlee, J. (2024, April 09). How to Choose a Feature Selection Method for Machine Learning. Available online: https://machinelearningmastery.com/feature-selection-with-real-and-categorical-data/.
70. Neupane, S., Ables, J., Anderson, W., Mittal, S., Rahimi, S., Banicescu, I., and Seale, M. (2022). Explainable Intrusion Detection Systems (X-IDS): A Survey of Current Methods, Challenges, and Opportunities. arXiv.10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3216617 ↗
71. Explainable AI (XAI): Core Ideas, Techniques, and Solutions10.1145/3561048 ↗
72. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) to enhance trust management in intrusion detection systems using decision tree model10.1155/2021/6634811 ↗
73. Patil, S., Varadarajan, V., Mazhar, S.M., Sahibzada, A., Ahmed, N., Sinha, O., Kumar, S., Shaw, K., and Kotecha, K. (2022). Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Intrusion Detection System. Electronics, 11.10.3390/electronics11193079 ↗
74. Islam, S.R., Eberle, W., Ghafoor, S.K., Siraj, A., and Rogers, M. (2019). Domain knowledge aided explainable artificial intelligence for intrusion detection and response. arXiv.
75. Roponena, E., Kampars, J., Grabis, J., and Gailītis, A. (2022, January 19). Towards a Human-in-the-Loop Intelligent Intrusion Detection System. Proceedings of the CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Trier, Germany.10.22364/bjmc.2022.10.4.06 ↗
76. Chaddad, A., Peng, J., Xu, J., and Bouridane, A. (2023). Survey of Explainable AI Techniques in Healthcare. Sensors, 23.10.3390/s23020634 ↗
77. Nwakanma, C.I., Ahakonye, L.A.C., Njoku, J.N., Odirichukwu, J.C., Okolie, S.A., Uzondu, C., Ndubuisi Nweke, C.C., and Kim, D.S. (2023). Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) for Intrusion Detection and Mitigation in Intelligent Connected Vehicles: A Review. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app13031252 ↗
78. XAI-ADS: An Explainable Artificial Intelligence Framework for Enhancing Anomaly Detection in Autonomous Driving Systems10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3383431 ↗
79. Ram, A., Veni, K., and Zeadally, S. (2024). An intelligent SDN-IoT enabled intrusion detection system for healthcare systems using a hybrid deep learning and machine learning approach. China Commun., 1–21.10.23919/JCC.ja.2022-0681 ↗
80. An Explainable AI-Based Intrusion Detection System for DNS Over HTTPS (DoH) Attacks10.1109/TIFS.2022.3183390 ↗
81. Han, D., Wang, Z., Chen, W., Wang, K., Yu, R., Wang, S., Zhang, H., Wang, Z., Jin, M., and Yang, J. (March, January 27). Anomaly Detection in the Open World: Normality Shift Detection, Explanation, and Adaptation. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS), San Diego, CA, USA.
82. An Explainable Machine Learning Framework for Intrusion Detection Systems10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988359 ↗
83. E-XAI: Evaluating Black-Box Explainable AI Frameworks for Network Intrusion Detection10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3365140 ↗
84. Alazab, A., Hobbs, M., Abawajy, J., and Alazab, M. (2012, January 2–5). Using feature selection for intrusion detection system. Proceedings of the 2012 International Symposium on Communications and Information Technologies (ISCIT), Gold Coast, Australia.10.1109/ISCIT.2012.6380910 ↗
85. Network intrusion detection system using supervised learning paradigm
86. Kamalov, F., Moussa, S., Zgheib, R., and Mashaal, O. (2020, January 12–13). Feature selection for intrusion detection systems. Proceedings of the 2020 13th International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Design (ISCID), Hangzhou, China.10.1109/ISCID51228.2020.00065 ↗
87. LNNLS-KH: A feature selection method for network intrusion detection
88. Guo, W., Mu, D., Xu, J., Su, P., Wang, G., and Xing, X. (2018, January 15–19). LEMNA: Explaining Deep Learning Based Security Applications. Proceedings of the CCS ’18, 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Toronto, ON, Canada.10.1145/3243734.3243792 ↗
89. Yang, L., Guo, W., Hao, Q., Ciptadi, A., Ahmadzadeh, A., Xing, X., and Wang, G. (2021, January 11–13). CADE: Detecting and Explaining Concept Drift Samples for Security Applications. Proceedings of the 30th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 21), Virtual.
90. Explainable artificial intelligence for cybersecurity: A literature survey10.1007/s12243-022-00926-7 ↗
91. Insights, I. (2023, March 10). 42 Cyber Attack Statistics by Year: A Look at the Last Decade. Available online: https://sectigostore.com/blog/42-cyber-attack-statistics-by-year-a-look-at-the-last-decade/.
92. Moustafa, N., and Slay, J. (2015, January 10–12). UNSW-NB15: A comprehensive data set for network intrusion detection systems (UNSW-NB15 network data set). Proceedings of the 2015 Military Communications and Information Systems Conference (MilCIS), Canberra, Australia.10.1109/MilCIS.2015.7348942 ↗
93. (2023, November 10). CSE-CIC-IDS2018. CSE-CIC-IDS2018 on AWS. Available online: https://www.unb.ca/cic/datasets/ids-2018.html/.
94. Garcia, S., Grill, M., Stiborek, J., and Zunino, A. (2024, April 09). CTU-13: Botnet Detection from Network Traffic, StratosphereLab@CTU Prague. Available online: https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/dhoogla/ctu13.
95. Repository, U.T. (2022, November 21). UMass Trace Repository. Available online: http://traces.cs.umass.edu/index.php/Network/Network.
96. Dong, Y., Guo, W., Chen, Y., Xing, X., Zhang, Y., and Wang, G. (2019, January 14–16). Towards the Detection of Inconsistencies in Public Security Vulnerability Reports. Proceedings of the 28th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 19), Santa Clara, CA, USA.
97. Hoffman, R.R., Mueller, S.T., Klein, G., and Litman, J. (2019). Metrics for Explainable AI: Challenges and Prospects. arXiv.
98. Sundararajan, M., Taly, A., and Yan, Q. (2017, January 6–11). Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, Sydney, Australia.
99. D’hooge, L., Verkerken, M., Volckaert, B., Wauters, T., and De Turck, F. (July, January 29). Establishing the Contaminating Effect of Metadata Feature Inclusion in Machine-Learned Network Intrusion Detection Models. Proceedings of the International Conference on Detection of Intrusions and Malware, and Vulnerability Assessment, Cagliari, Italy.