Moving Target Defense Quantification

Moving Target Defense (MTD) has the potential to increase the cost and complexity for threat actors by creating asymmetric uncertainty in the cyber security landscape. The tactical advantages that MTD can provide to the defender have led to the development of a vast array of diverse techniques, which are designed to operate under different constraints and against different classes of threats. Due to the diverse nature of these various techniques and the lack of shared metrics to assess their benefits and cost, comparing multiple techniques is not a trivial task. We addressed this gap by designing a framework to enable a uniform approach to the analysis and quantification of MTD techniques. This framework looks at each MTD technique in terms of the attacker’s knowledge it is capable of compromising, thus enabling direct comparison of any two techniques or set of techniques.

[1]  Shin-Guang Chen.  Reduced Recursive Inclusion-exclusion Principle for the probability of union events , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management.

[2]  Ehab Al-Shaer,et al.  Spatio-temporal Address Mutation for Proactive Cyber Agility against Sophisticated Attackers , 2014, MTD '14.

[3]  Daniel A. Menascé,et al.  An Autonomic Framework for Integrating Security and Quality of Service Support in Databases , 2012, 2012 IEEE Sixth International Conference on Software Security and Reliability.

[4]  Angelos D. Keromytis,et al.  SQLrand: Preventing SQL Injection Attacks , 2004, ACNS.

[5]  Joshua Taylor,et al.  A Quantitative Framework for Moving Target Defense Effectiveness Evaluation , 2015, MTD@CCS.

[6]  Daniel A. Menascé,et al.  Performance Modeling of Moving Target Defenses , 2017, MTD@CCS.

[7]  Luan Huy Pham,et al.  Analysis of Concurrent Moving Target Defenses , 2018, MTD@CCS.

[8]  George Cybenko,et al.  Quantification of moving target cyber defenses , 2015, Defense + Security Symposium.

[9]  Leon S. Lasdon,et al.  Nonlinear optimization using the generalized reduced gradient method , 1974 .

[10]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  An Attack Graph-Based Probabilistic Security Metric , 2008, DBSec.

[11]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  Topological analysis of network attack vulnerability , 2006, PST.

[12]  Massimiliano Albanese,et al.  A Framework for Moving Target Defense Quantification , 2017, SEC.

[13]  Marco Carvalho,et al.  Quantifying & minimizing attack surfaces containing moving target defenses , 2015, 2015 Resilience Week (RWS).

[14]  Wei Hu,et al.  A Model for Evaluating and Comparing Moving Target Defense Techniques Based on Generalized Stochastic Petri Net , 2016, ACA.

[15]  Fei Li,et al.  Catch Me If You Can: A Cloud-Enabled DDoS Defense , 2014, 2014 44th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks.

[16]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  Moving Target Defense - Creating Asymmetric Uncertainty for Cyber Threats , 2011, Moving Target Defense.

[17]  Hovav Shacham,et al.  On the effectiveness of address-space randomization , 2004, CCS '04.

[18]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  A Moving Target Defense Approach to Disrupting Stealthy Botnets , 2016, MTD@CCS.

[19]  Thomas E. Carroll,et al.  Analysis of network address shuffling as a moving target defense , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC).

[20]  Angelos Stavrou,et al.  MOTAG: Moving Target Defense against Internet Denial of Service Attacks , 2013, 2013 22nd International Conference on Computer Communication and Networks (ICCCN).