AVID-2023-V014
Vulnerability from avid – Published: 2023-03-31 – Updated: 2023-03-31 ATLAS Case StudySummary
Cloud storage and computations have become popular platforms for deploying ML malware detectors.
In such cases, the features for models are built on users' systems and then sent to cybersecurity company servers.
The Kaspersky ML research team explored this gray-box scenario and showed that feature knowledge is enough for an adversarial attack on ML models.
They attacked one of Kaspersky's antimalware ML models without white-box access to it and successfully evaded detection for most of the adversarially modified malware files.
Risk domain
Security
SEP view
S0403: Adversarial Example
Lifecycle
L06: Deployment
Organisations
Kaspersky's Antimalware ML Model (deployer)
Affected artifacts
1 artifact
| Artifact | Type |
|---|---|
| Kaspersky's Antimalware ML Model | System |
References
2 references
| URL | Label |
|---|---|
| https://atlas.mitre.org/studies/AML.CS0014 | Confusing Antimalware Neural Networks |
| https://securelist.com/how-to-confuse-antimalware… | Article, "How to confuse antimalware neural networks. Adversarial attacks and protection" |
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…