2021 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICPSC) | 13 – 14 May 2021 | Coimbatore
A Survey on Attack Detection Methods For IOT
Using Machine Learning And Deep Learning
Meenigi Ramesh Babu
School of Electronics and communication Engineering
2021 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICPSC) | 978-1-6654-2864-4/20/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ICSPC51351.2021.9451740
Reva University
Bangalore, India
ramesh010777@gmail.com
Abstract— The Internet of Things (IoT) models are
getting more complicated day by day with the rising
demand in IoT automated network system. As the
devices use wireless medium for broadcasting the data,
it is easy to target for an attack. Due to the addition of
different protocols in IoT, lakhs of attacks are emerging
every day, which often provokes the computing process
worsen, unstable, non-effective as well. In the local
network, the normal communication attack is restricted
to small local domain or local nodes. However, the
attack present in IoT devices gets expanded to a large
area that would cause destructive effects. The
heterogeneity, distribution of IoT services/applications
make the security of IoT a more challenging and
complex one. Implementing security measures, such as
encryption, authentication, access control, network
security and application security, for IoT devices and
their inherent vulnerabilities is ineffective. Thus,
existing security techniques should be improved to
secure the IoT environment viably. (ML/DL) have
progressed impressively throughout the most recent
couple of years, and machine intelligence has
transitioned from laboratory curiosity to practical
machinery in various significant applications. The
objective of this work is to give a thorough study of ML
techniques and ongoing advances in DL methods that
can be utilized to create upgraded attack detection
models for IoT frameworks. We discuss the features
and research gaps for each method in applying Machine
learning and deep learning to IoT security.
Keywords— IoT; Security; Attack detection;t;
Machine learning; Deep learning
I. INTRODUCTION
With the advanced technologies, IoT has widely
emerged with data collection, processing, and
communication as well in smart applications. There
has been growing interest in understanding rising
cyber threats in IoT. It is forecast to play important
role in future technical revolutions, and its usage is
probably to increase exponentially over the coming
years. Due to the growing wide variety of IoT devices
and the big amount of data related to them, the
difficulty of security inside the IoT has been raised.
Security in the IoT suggests the requirement for the
defence of IoT applications and the IoT framework.
Many IoT devices may be without difficulty targeted
via intrusion because they are related with outside
resources at the network layer, and they do no longer
have right security defence.
As such, an attacker can compromise the network
layer and obtain control over an IoT device, which can
then be used maliciously, or it can compromise other
nearby devices connected to it. According to a report
from Statists, the number of devices connected
978-1-6654-2864-4/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on December 13,2021 at 12:32:34 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
K.N. Veena
School of Electronics and communication Engineering
Reva University
Bangalore, India
through the Internet is expected to reach 75.44 billion
worldwide by 2025. The increasing number of IoT
devices will provide many opportunities for attackers
to compromise them through malicious emails,
collusion attacks, and denial of service attacks among
many other types of attack. The HP report stated that
70% of IoT devices are subject to various network
attacks that exploit various vulnerabilities, such as
encryption and password security. Thus, network
attacks are now emerging as a key barrier to the more
widespread adoption of IoT services, and they can be
detected at the network layers of the IoT framework.
IoT systems are accessible worldwide, consist
mainly of constrained resources and constructed by
lossy links. Therefore, crucial modifications of
existing security concepts for information and wireless
networks should be implemented to provide effective
IoT security methods. Applying existing defence
mechanisms, such as encryption, authentication,
access control, network security and application
security, is challenging and insufficient for mega
systems with many connected devices, with each part
of the system having inherent vulnerabilities
The current system for detection of attack on
wireless network works at the centralized cloud,
which can't satisfy the different requirements of
the IoT, such as scalability, distribution, useful
resource obstacles, and low latency, to call however
some. In the IoT, In the IoT, a number of
communication and control operations are performed
among different set of devices. On the different
hand, cloud computing works as a kind of the front
end in the IoT that allows end users to use the
complete range of services supported over the internet
to carry out their computing operations. It also
affords high-overall performance, reliability, and
ubiquity to the IoT.
The IoT comprises of networks of interconnected
objects, computing systems, physical or mechanical
machines that are capable of sending and receiving
data through network without human intervention [1].
IoT seems to be the common infrastructure for
supporting numerous modern services and
applications, including smart healthcare,
environmental protection, industrial monitoring,
public safety and smart homes [2] [3].
Along with the increasing advancements in IoT
infrastructures, undesirable issues are also raising day
by day that affects the security of the networks.
Network security and threats are becoming more
frequent issues of IoT devices in today's world [4].
Thus, vulnerability of IoT system allows the intruder
to collect the significant sensitive materials of
625
 2021 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICPSC) | 13 – 14 May 2021 | Coimbatore
organizations. Further, the IoT frameworks are
subjected to different security attacks, such as type
probing, malicious operations, data spying, malicious
control, denial of service and DDoS [5] [6]. These
attacks and issues can cause substantial damages to
the IoT services and smart environment appliances in
an IoT environment.
There are certain trivial techniques introduced in
the literature to resolve the issues on security.
Moreover, ML models such as DT, SVM, LR, a ANN
ndRF [7] [8] are commonly used in the conventional
works to detect the attacks. In signature oriented
technique, threats and attacks are formerly stored in
database, and it is tested at specific time intervals.
Moreover, this method causes processing overhead
and susceptible to anonymous threats.
Each fog nodes present in fog layer is responsible
to detect the attacks in IoT devices [9] [10]. At the fog
layer, the storage and complex computation are
offloaded from IoT devices by distributed attack
detection. Moreover, the detection of attack in IoT
devices is broadly divided into two groups; they are an
anomaly and signature-based detection. However,
each group has its advantages and drawbacks [11]
[12]. The attacks present in IoT devices were
determined by gathering several data and computing
those data by implementing patterns or rules in
signature-based detection. Moreover, anomaly-based
detection has designed an approach that includes the
samples of normal behaviors with the consideration of
deviation in the model. Nevertheless, these methods
could not support the zero day attack detection [13]
[14]. The most important problem in the attack
detection model is to detect the attack without any
predefined patterns or rule sets.
Recently, IoT devices have only some security
features to protect against attacks. However, the
systems must be safe from outside attacks and threats
for better processing. It is not possible to provide
device-level protection in heterogeneous nvironments
[15] [16]. Stateful methods of the protocol are very
expensive and protocol-dependent in computing,
whereas the deep packet inspection in networks with
high-speed becomes a bottleneck. Because of these
limitations, the research is focused on flow-based IDS
as an option to secure IP networks. Still, the
cyberattacks in CPS leads to failures and faults in
physical systems. The most challenging aspect in the
system is the automated compensation of fault effect
and the maintainability of device performance to the
acceptable level [17] [18]. The purpose of the control
system is to maximize the availability of the system
by implementing control algorithms which can
maintain the stability and the performance of the
network even in the presence of attacks. More
research works explicitly with the impact of
Metaheuristic algorithms in enhancing the detection
performance of the attacks [19].
626
Authorized licensed use limited to: BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on December 13,2021 at 12:32:34 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
II . RELATED WORKS
Before you In 2020, Zubair et al. [11] have
exploited ADE in IoT networks based on DoS attack
detection for feature ranking, testing, training and data
generation. The DoS attack was described as a large
volume of network traffic that included a set of
sensory nodes produced to overpower a data capture
node. The selection and generation of features based
on pre-processed data was carried out for classifying
the features and it also created additional features of
statistical network knowledge. At last, the simulation
outcomes of the proposed method have shown better
results than other existing models.
In 2018, Rathore et al. [12] have developed the
proposed ESFCM method based on distributed attack
detection framework in the Internet of Things. Here,
detection of attack based on fog method was proposed
which relied on the ESFCM and fog computing
paradigm. The ESFCM method withstand the labelled
data problem for delivering the excellent outcomes
with high detection rate. Finally, the Performance of
proposed method on various datasets have shown
better results than other existing schemes.
In 2019, Hasan et al. [13] investigated model for
detection of attack in the Internet of Things sensors
using machine learning methods. The performance of
several machine learning techniques was compared
precisely with predicting attacks and irregularities on
IoT systems. Accordingly, a robust algorithm was
developed for detecting the attacks in IoT that focused
on virtual environment. At last, the proposed system
has shown better accuracy than other existing models.
In 2020, Khan et al. [14] have determined the
detection of attack in the Internet of Things IoTs
utilizing data analytics. Throughout this IoT network,
the external data was first collected from the database
and the features relevant to attributes were extracted.
Here, the data was filtered in offline database based on
further activities that includes testing and training
processes. At last, the performance of the proposed
method has shown improvement in accuracy than
other existing models.
In 2020, Zuchao et al. [15] have suggested the
multiple-mix-attack detection in IoT networks through
consensus-based trust management. The impartiality
of IoT nodes were reviewed by proposed DCONST
Model shared specific data known as cognition.
Especially, DCONST could identify malicious nodes
and examine the attack behaviors by K-Means
clustering technique. Finally, the experimental
outcomes of the proposed method have shown better
efficiency than other traditional models.
In 2020, Yisroel et al. [16] have introduced the
Lightweight collaborative anomaly detection model
using block chain for IoT. A new method for
lightweight model and a anomaly detection that
utilized the block chain for assembling an anomaly
detection method. An attacker might attempt a DoS
attack for overloading the agent thereby disrupting
the connection of the agent. At last, the proposed
 2021 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICPSC) | 13 – 14 May 2021 | Coimbatore
method has shown better outcomes compared to other
traditional models.
In 2020, Ravi et al. [17] have presented the
mitigation of DDoS attack and learning-driven
detection in IoT through SDN-Cloud architecture.
This approach aims to tackle the DDoS attacks
activated in IoT servers using malevolent wireless
IoT. Further, the proposed LEDEM were detected by
mitigates DDoS and semi supervised ML algorithm.
Finally, the performances of the adopted method have
shown better accuracy than other models.
In 2020, Samy et al. [18] have introduced the
detection of attack method based on fog implementing
DL algorithms in IoT. The presented work
implemented on fog nodes owing to its distributed
nature and higher computation efficiency.
Accordingly, various DL versions were measured to
determine the highest functioning DL configuration.
Finally, the proposed method performance have
shown better outcomes than other traditional models.
In 2020, Sudhakaran et al. [19] have presented the
avoidance framework, attack detection, and
authorization structure for IoT devices. The traffic
collection agent has collected the flow level
information and packet-level data based on a specific
period. Here, the DA has validated the gathered data
with the attack rules table. If the attack pattern was
matched, the attack type was informed to RA.
Moreover, if no matching pattern is obtained, then the
classification agent has applied the multi-class SVM
algorithm. At last, the experimental outcomes of the
presented work have shown better detection accuracy,
improved FPR, and reduced unauthorized access than
other existing models.
In 2020, Hossain et al. [20] have introduced an
attack scenario in co-located CR-IoT network. The
attack could interfere the transmission via HTE attack.
The behaviour of HTE attacker and the benign hidden
terminal was captured by parsimonious Markov
models. The proposed method has implemented the
hypothesis based on Markov chain testing (i.e.), 3rd
eye based on the solution of context-aware detection.
This is the first work that the benign interference
sources are considered by hidden terminals and
leverages the traditional carrier sensing approach as an
efficient way for detecting the various attacks.
In 2018, Shailendra et al. [21] have proposed the
fog-based attack detection approach, which has relied
on the fog computing environment. Also, they have
proposed an ESFCM method. The cloud computing
process was extended to fog computing that supported
the distributed attack detection and has allowed the
attack detection in network edges. Also, the proposed
ESFCM framework has handled the labelled data
problems. ELM algorithm was used to obtain the fast
detection rate. Finally, the performance of the adopted
method has achieved less detection time and a higher
detection accuracy rate than the traditional models.
In 2019, Liang et al. [22] have developed a PD
model that used K-means and perceptron model for
627
Authorized licensed use limited to: BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on December 13,2021 at 12:32:34 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
detection of the unwanted nodes and for computing
IoT nodes’ values. The proposed method has
examined the problems and then formalized a
multiple-mix- attack framework. For increasing the
accuracy during detection, the route of the network
was optimized and designed a PDE based on the
enhanced perceptron learning process. At last, the
simulation outcomes of the presented framework have
achieved improved performance and higher detection
accuracy of malicious nodes.
In 2020, Manimurugan et al. [23] have introduced
a DBN algorithm for IDS. The DBN has included the
stacked RBMs to perform the execution during the
unsupervised domain and also the greedy layer-wise
training. Here, the DBN training was done layer by
layer. Moreover, every layer was executed as
Restricted Boltzmann Machine trained and hence
utilized in the pre-training stage. Also, they are turned
to the feed-forward network by tuning the weights via
various techniques. The performance analysis was
carried out using CICIDS 2017 dataset. At last, the
performance of the implemented method has achieved
better accuracy, higher F1 score, better detection rate,
maximum precision, and improved recall.
In 2019, Raoof et al. [24] have determined RPL
and the mitigation technique to counter the attacks in
the network. Moreover, a detailed study on RPL
standard has been included along with a recently
proposed modification. A first-of-its-kind
classification approach was introduced for the
mitigation process. The hybrid IDS along with RPL’s
Specification-based IDSs and SVELTE were the best
solution for mitigating various RPL attacks. Finally,
the simulation outcomes of the adopted model have
revealed the faster detection of attacks, longer network
lifetime, and better delivery rate as well.
In 2020, Farivar et al. [25] have presented a hybrid
intelligent-classic control model used for
compensation and reconstruction of cyberattacks.
Here, the cyberattacks were initiated in the inputs of
industrial IoT systems and nonlinear CPS worked in a
shared communication network. The class of n-order
nonlinear approaches was known as the CPS model
when the presence of cyberattacks in the forward
channel. To compensate the cyber-attacks, the
proposed work has developed an intelligent classic
control system. Moreover, the GRBFNN was used for
the reconstruction of cyber attacks and also for the
online estimation launched in network systems. At
last, the performance of the adopted method has
achieved better efficiency, increased safety, and
reliability than other existing models.
In 2020, Latif et al. [26] have implemented a novel
lightweight RaNN-based prediction model for
predicting the attacks in devices. While applying the
machine learning techniques, several cybersecurity
attacks such as scan, probing data type,wrong setup
and malicious control DoS were predicted in the
proposed work. Certain evaluation parameters like
accuracy, F1 score, recall, and precision were
calculated and compared with conventional SVM, DT,
 2021 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICPSC) | 13 – 14 May 2021 | Coimbatore
and ANN for estimating the performance of the
proposed RaNN-based prediction model. Finally,
adopted framework has proven lower processing time,
higher accuracy, improved precision, recall, and F1
score when compared to other traditional models.
Table 1 talks about the reviews on attack
detection model for IoT. Initially, ADE-based DoS
attack detection scheme was deployed in [11], which
presents higher accuracy, better precision and higher
Recall value; however various classes of mining
techniques are not used for improving detection
performance. ESFCM method was exploited in [12]
that offer faster detection rate, better performance,
lower detection time and better accuracy, but the
symbolic attributes were not processed by ELM.
Moreover, ANN scheme was deployed in [13] that
offer better accuracy, high precision, better recall and
improved F1-Score. Nevertheless, it needs to
consider the other unknown problems in RF.
Likewise, NN method was exploited in [14], which
offers reduced computational overhead, improved
attack detection accuracy and minimizing false
positives. However, it has to concern on attack
prevention from insider attacks. DCONST method
was exploited in [15] that reduced false alarm rate,
better detection rate, improved accuracy and
stability; however, it needs to explore the
optimization through ML models. In addition, EMM
scheme was introduced in [16], which offers reduced
false-alarm-rate, better efficiency and sufficient
training period. However, it has to focus more on
dynamic algorithm for choosing the appropriate
value of . LEDEM method was suggested in [17]
that offer improved accuracy rate, better detection-
response time and increased throughput. However, it
needs to improve the precision of attack detection
and hence insert the probe in other machine learning
models. Finally, LSTM scheme was implemented in
[18], which offers effective response time, better
detection accuracy and improved detection rate, but
need to compare the reinforcement learning and
proposed detection of attack with unsupervised Deep
learning methods by distributed computing
environment such as Apache Spark in various
datasets. Such limitations have to be taken into
account on detection of attack model for Internet of
Things in the proposed work effectively.SVM
method was presented in [19] that offers reduced
unauthorized access, better FPR, increased detection
accuracy, and improved throughput. Nevertheless,
the attack response was not performed based on the
severity of the attack. Markov Model was developed
in [20] that offers better attack performance,
improved detection strategy, and increased packet
service rate, but the computational cost is higher than
some traditional techniques. In addition, ESFCM
TABLE 1 REVIEW ON CONVENTIONAL ATTACK DETECTION MODEL IN IOT: FEATURES AND CHALLENGES
Author Adopted
[citation] Scheme
Zubair et al. [28] ADE-based Higher accuracy, Better precision
Authorized licensed use limited to: BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on December 13,2021 at 12:32:34 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
method was used in [21], which provides better
performance, lower detection time, and improved
accuracy rate; nevertheless, the ELM applied in the
adapted method provided low performance based on
the random assignment of input bias and weights.
Also, Multivariable linear regression model was
employed in [22] that provides higher detection
accuracy, increased malicious nodes, and reduced
error rates. However, the exact malicious node
present in various attack types was not identified.
Likewise, the DBN model was presented in [23] that
efficiently better accuracy, improved recall,
maximum precision, better detection rate, and higher
F1-score. However, need to focus more on several
IDS datasets and different types of attacks against the
IoT devices. In addition, SGSD method was
deployed in [24] that ensure a better delivery rate,
longer network lifetime, and faster detection of
attacks. Nevertheless, it needs to optimize the
resource usage in IDSs. GRBFNN method was
deployed in [25] that provide better efficiency,
improved reliability, and safety; however, an
adjustment in mean, standard deviation, and the
weighting vectors of Gaussian functions was not
considered. RaNN model was presented in [26] that
offer lower processing time, higher accuracy,
improved precision, recall, and F1 score; but, the
real-time experiments were not conducted in the
proposed model. These limitations have to be taken
in account for enhancing the attack detection model
in IoT.
III. CONCLUSION
The requirements for securing IoT devices have
emerge as complicated due to various technologies,
from wireless transmission to mobile and cloud
architectures and physical devices want to be secured
and blended with different technology. The
advancement in machine learning and deep learning
has allowed for the development of different powerful
techniques that can be utilized to upgrade Internet of
Things security. Finally, an extensive list of features
and challenges to the use of machine learning and
deep learning in effectively securing Internet of
Things frameworks are presented. Novel attack
detection approach can be achieved by using the
concept of Deep learning. The process involves two
phases, namely, feature extraction and classification.
The initial phase is the feature extraction, in which the
features are extracted from the given input data by the
renowned principal component analysis (PCA).
Subsequently, the extracted features are subjected to
the classification phase, where the deep belief network
(DBN) model is used. The DBN model classifies the
presence of presented. Novel attack detection
approach can be achieved by using the concept of
Deep learning.
Features Challenges
Various classes of mining techniques are
628
 2021 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICPSC) | 13 – 14 May 2021 | Coimbatore

DoS attack Higher Recall value not considered for improving detection
detection performance
scheme
Faster detection rate, Better The symbolic attributes were not processed
Rathore et al. [12] ESFCM method performance by ELM.
lower detection time, Better accuracy
Better accuracy, High precision Other unknown issues in RF were not
Hasan et al. [13] ANN
Better recall, Improved F1-Score considered .
Improved attack detection accuracy Attack prevention from insider attacks was
Khan et al. [14] NN Minimizing false positives not considered.
Reduced computational overhead
DCONST Reduced false alarm rate, Better The optimization by using machine
Zuchao et al. [15] method detection rate Improved accuracy and learning methods need to be explored
stability
Reduced false-alarm-rate, Better Dynamic algorithms for selecting the
Yisroel et al. [16] EMM method efficiency appropriate value of α were not
Sufficient training period considered.
Improved accuracy rate, Better The probe in other ML models are not
LEDEM detection-response time, Increased inserted
Ravi et al. [17]
Method throughput The precision of attack detection were not
improved.
Effective response time,Better The unsupervised DL models and
Samy et al. [18] LSTM detection accuracy, Improved reinforcement learning are not evaluated
detection rate with different datasets.
Reduced unauthorised access, Better The attack response was not performed
FPR based on the severity of the attack.
Sudhakaran et al. [19] SVM method
Increased detection accuracy,
Improved throughput.
Better attack performance, Improved The computational cost is higher than some
Hossain et al. [20] Markov Model detection strategy, Increased packet traditional techniques.
service rate.
Better performance, Lower detection The ELM applied in the adapted method
time provided low performance based on the
Shailendra et al. [21] ESFCM method
Improved accuracy rate random assignment of input bias and
weights.
Multivariable Higher detection accuracy, Increased The exact malicious node present in
linear malicious nodes, Reduced error rates various attack types was not identified.
Liang et al. [22]
regression
model
Better accuracy, Improved recall Several IDS datasets and different types of
Maximum precision, Better detection attacks against the IoT devices were not
Manimurugan et al. [23] DBN Model
rate considered.
Higher F1-score
Better delivery rate, Longer network Need to optimize the resource usage in
Raoof et al. [24] SGSD method lifetime IDSs.
Faster detection of attacks
Improved efficiency, Improved Adjustment in mean, standard deviation,
GRBFNN
Farivar et al. [25] reliability and safety and weighting vectors of Gaussian
method
functions was not considered.
Lower processing time , Higher Real-time experiments were not conducted
accuracy in the proposed model.
Latif et al. [26] RaNN model
Improved precision, recall, and F1
score
weights in DBN will be optimally tuned by a new
Whale with Distance based Update (W-DU) algorithm.
The process involves two phases, namely, feature A bi-level flow based anomalous activity identification
extraction and classification. The initial phase is the system in IoT. Initially, the flow based features get
feature extraction, in which the features are extracted extracted along with the statistical features like mean,
from the given input data by the renowned principal median, variance, correlation, and correntropy.
component analysis (PCA). Subsequently, the Subsequently, Bi-level classification is carried out. In
extracted features are subjected to the classification level 1, the presence of attack is detected and the level
phase, where the deep belief network (DBN) model is 2 classification classifies the type of attack. A decision
used. The DBN model classifies the presence of tree is used for detecting the attacks by checking
attacks like denial of service (DoS), probe, R2L, and whether the network traffic is anomalous traffic or
U2R. In order to make the performance more normal traffic. In level 2, an Optimized Neural
excellent, strategy to a new concept termed network (NN) is used for categorizing the attacks in
“Optimization Concept.” Here, the hidden neuron of IoT with the knowledge of flow features and statistical
DBN is optimally selected by a new algorithm termed features. To make the detection and classification more
novel mutation rate-based lion algorithm (NMR- accurate, the weight of NN will be optimally tuned by
LA),selects the hidden neuron of DBN, which is used a new Combined Whale Sea Lion Algorithm (CWSA)
to improve the accuracy rate of classification process that hybridizes the concepts of both SLnO and WOA.
that might be more precise or accurate in detecting the
attack. if the presence of attacker is detected by Deep REFERENCES
belief network, the control is given to the BAIT [1] Syed Rizvi, RJ Orr, Austin Cox, Prithvee Ashokkumar,
process, which removes the corresponding attacker Mohammad R. Rizvi, "Identifying the attack surface for IoT
node. To ensure the precise detection process, the network" Internet of Things, vol. 9, Art.no. 100162, March

629

Authorized licensed use limited to: BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on December 13,2021 at 12:32:34 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2021 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICPSC) | 13 – 14 May 2021 | Coimbatore

2020. Computational Mechanics, Power System and Control,

Vol.2,No.2, pp.10-20,2019.
[2] M. Roopak, G. Y. Tian and J. Chambers, "Multi-objective-based
feature selection for DDoS attack detection in IoT networks," IET [20] M. Hossain and J. Xie, "Third Eye: Context-Aware Detection
Networks, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 120-127, 5 2020, doi: 10.1049/iet- for Hidden Terminal Emulation Attacks in Cognitive Radio-
net.2018.5206. Enabled IoT Networks," IEEE Transactions on Cognitive
Communications and Networking, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 214-228,
[3] Q. Shafi, A. Basit, S. Qaisar, A. Koay and I. Welch, "Fog- March 2020, doi: 10.1109/TCCN.2020.2968324.
Assisted SDN Controlled Framework for Enduring Anomaly
Detection in an IoT Network," IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 73713- [21] Shailendra Rathore, Jong Hyuk Park, "Semi-supervised
73723, 2018, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2884293 learning based distributed attack detection framework for IoT",
Applied Soft Computing, vol. 72, pp. 79-89,Nov 2018.
[4] Kashif Naseer Qureshi, Shahid Saeed Rana, Awais Ahmed,
Gwanggil Jeon, "A Novel and Secure Attacks Detection [22] Liang Liu, Zuchao Ma, Weizhi Meng, "Detection of multiple-
Framework for Smart Cities Industrial Internet of Things" mix-attack malicious nodes using perceptron-based trust in IoT
Sustainable Cities and SocietyIn press, journal pre-proofAvailable networks", Future Generation Computer Systems, vol. 101, pp.
online, Art.no. 102343,20 June 2020. 865-879,Dec 2019
[5] Meenigi Ramesh Babu,et.al,”Optimal DBN-based distributed [23] S. Manimurugan, S. Al-Mutairi, M. M. Aborokbah, N.
attack detection model for internet of Things”,International Chilamkurti, S. Ganesan and R. Patan, "Effective Attack
Journal of Communication Systems, Vol 33,issue 17,2020 Detection in Internet of Medical Things Smart Environment
doi:10.1002/dac.4595 Using a Deep Belief Neural Network," IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp.
77396-77404, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2986013
[6] Pallavi Kaliyar, Wafa Ben Jaballah, Mauro Conti, Chhagan Lal,
"LiDL: Localization with early detection of sybil and wormhole [24] A. Raoof, A. Matrawy and C. Lung, "Routing Attacks and
attacks in IoT Networks" Computers & Security, vol. 94, Art.no. Mitigation Methods for RPL-Based Internet of Things," IEEE
101849, July 2020. Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1582-
1606, Secondquarter 2019, doi:
[7] Y. Liu, M. Ma, X. Liu, N. N. Xiong, A. Liu and Y. Zhu, "Design 10.1109/COMST.2018.2885894
and Analysis of Probing Route to Defense Sink-Hole Attacks for
Internet of Things Security," IEEE Transactions on Network [25] F. Farivar, M. S. Haghighi, A. Jolfaei and M. Alazab,
Science and Engineering, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 356-372, 1 Jan.-March "Artificial Intelligence for Detection, Estimation, and
2020, doi: 10.1109/TNSE.2018.2881152. Compensation of Malicious Attacks in Nonlinear Cyber-
Physical Systems and Industrial IoT," IEEE Transactions on
[8] A. Tandon, T. J. Lim and U. Tefek, "Sentinel based malicious Industrial Informatics, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 2716-2725, April
relay detection in wireless IoT networks," Journal of 2020, doi: 10.1109/TII.2019.2956474.
Communications and Networks, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 458-468, Oct.
2019, doi: 10.1109/JCN.2019.000049. [26] S. Latif, Z. Zou, Z. Idrees and J. Ahmad, "A Novel Attack
Detection Scheme for the Industrial Internet of Things Using a
[9] Y. Mohana Roopa et.al,” Convolutional Neural Network-based Lightweight Random Neural Network," IEEE Access, vol. 8,
Automatic Extraction and Fine Generation.” Proceedings of the pp. 89337-89350, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2994079
2nd International Conference on Inventive Research in
Computing Applications, ICIRCA 2020, 2020, pp. 230–234, [27] Zubair A. Baig, Surasak Sanguanpong, Syed Naeem Firdous,
9182844. Van Nhan Vo, Chakchai So-In, "Averaged dependence
estimators for DoS attack detection in IoT networks" Future
[10] I. Hafeez, M. Antikainen, A. Y. Ding and S. Tarkoma, "IoT- Generation Computer Systems, vol. 102, pp. 198-209,Jan 2020.
KEEPER: Detecting Malicious IoT Network Activity Using
Online Traffic Analysis at the Edge," IEEE Transactions on
Network and Service Management, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 45-59,
March 2020, doi: 10.1109/TNSM.2020.2966951.
[11] Zuchao Ma, Liang Liu, Weizhi Meng, "Towards multiple-mix-
attack detection via consensus-based trust management in IoT
networks" Computers & Security, vol. 96, Art.no. 101898, Sep
2020
[12] Shailendra Rathore, Jong Hyuk Park, "Semi-supervised learning
based distributed attack detection framework for IoT" Applied
Soft Computing,vol. 72, pp. 79-89, Nov 2018
[13] Mahmudul Hasan, Md. Milon Islam, Md Ishrak Islam Zarif, M.
M. A. Hashem, "Attack and anomaly detection in IoT sensors in
IoT sites using machine learning approaches" Internet of Things,
vol. 7, Art.no. 100059, Sep 2019.
[14] A. Y. Khan, R. Latif, S. Latif, S. Tahir, G. Batool and T. Saba,
"Malicious Insider Attack Detection in IoTs Using Data
Analytics," IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 11743-11753, 2020, doi:
10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2959047.
[15] Yisroel Mirsky, Tomer Golomb, Yuval Elovici, "Lightweight
collaborative anomaly detection for the IoT using blockchain"
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, vol. 145, pp. 75-
97, Nov 2020.
[16] Syed Rizvi, RJ Orr, Austin Cox, Prithvee Ashokkumar,
Mohammad R. Rizvi, "Identifying the attack surface for IoT
network" Internet of Things, vol. 9, Art.no. 100162, March 2020
[17] N. Ravi and S. M. Shalinie, "Learning-Driven Detection and
Mitigation of DDoS Attack in IoT via SDN-Cloud Architecture,"
IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 3559-3570,
April 2020, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2020.2973176.
[18] A. Tandon, T. J. Lim and U. Tefek, "Sentinel based malicious
relay detection in wireless IoT networks," Journal of
Communications and Networks, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 458-468, Oct.
2019, doi: 10.1109/JCN.2019.000049.
[19] V.Tejaswini and Dr.D.Susitra, "Hybrid PSO-WOA for Solving
ORPD Problem under Unbalanced Conditions", Journal of

630

Authorized licensed use limited to: BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE. Downloaded on December 13,2021 at 12:32:34 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.