USENIX Security2024Top-tier venue
True Attacks, Attack Attempts, or Benign Triggers? An Empirical Measurement of Network Alerts in a Security Operations Center
Limin Yang, Zhi Chen, Chenkai Wang, Zhenning Zhang, Sushruth Booma, Phuong Cao, Constantin Adam, Alexander Withers, Zbigniew Kalbarczyk, Ravishankar K. Iyer, Gang Wang
Abstract
Security Operations Centers (SOCs) face the key challenge of handling excessive security alerts. While existing works have studied this problem qualitatively via user studies, there is still a lack of quantitative understanding of the impact of excessive alerts and their effectiveness and limitations in capturing true attacks. In this paper, we fill the gap by working with a real-world SOC and collecting and analyzing their network alert logs over 4 years (115 million alerts, from 2018 to 2022). To further understand how alerts are associated with true attacks, we also obtain the ground truth of 227 successful attacks in the past 20 years (11 during the overlapping period). Through analysis, we observe that SOC analysts are facing excessive alerts (24K-134K per day), but only a small percentage of the alerts (0.01%) are associated with true attacks. While the majority of true attacks can be detected within the same day, the post-attack investigation takes much longer time (53 days on average). Furthermore, we observe a significant portion of the alerts are related to "attack attempts" (attacks that did not lead to true compromises, 27%), and "benign triggers" (correctly matched security events but had business-justified explanations, 49%). Empirically, we show there are opportunities to use rare/abnormal alert patterns to help isolate signals related to true attacks. Given that enterprise SOCs rarely disclose internal data, this paper helps contextualize SOCs' pain points and refine existing problem definitions.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 8f6b3793-17c7-4d16-abf9-04dfccc073faCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on17
- Kitsune: An Ensemble of Autoencoders for Online Network Intrusion DetectionYisroel Mirsky, Tomer Doitshman, Yuval Elovici, Asaf ShabtaiNDSS 2018 · 945 citations
- Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code ContributionsHammond Pearce, Baleegh Ahmad, Benjamin Tan, Brendan Dolan-Gavitt et al.S&P 2022 · 725 citations
- NoDoze: Combatting Threat Alert Fatigue with Automated Provenance TriageWajih Ul Hassan, Shengjian Guo, Ding Li, Zhengzhang Chen et al.NDSS 2019 · 411 citations
- Tactical Provenance Analysis for Endpoint Detection and Response SystemsWajih Ul Hassan, Adam Bates, Daniel MarinoS&P 2020 · 317 citations
- POIROT: Aligning Attack Behavior with Kernel Audit Records for Cyber Threat HuntingSadegh M. Milajerdi, Birhanu Eshete, Rigel Gjomemo, V. N. VenkatakrishnanCCS 2019 · 313 citations
Related papers
- 99% False Positives: A Qualitative Study of SOC Analysts' Perspectives on Security AlarmsBushra A. AlAhmadi, Louise Axon, Ivan MartinovicUSENIX Security 2022
- Detecting Credential Spearphishing in Enterprise SettingsGrant Ho, Aashish Sharma, Mobin Javed, Vern Paxson et al.USENIX Security 2017 · 94 citations
- Alert Alchemy: SOC Workflows and Decisions in the Management of NIDS RulesMathew Vermeer, Natalia Kadenko, Michel van Eeten, Carlos Gañán et al.CCS 2023 · 16 citations
- Indicator of Benignity: An Industry View of False Positive in Malicious Domain Detection and its MitigationDaiping Liu, Danyu Sun, Zhenhua Chen, Shu Wang et al.NDSS 2026
- Matched and Mismatched SOCs: A Qualitative Study on Security Operations Center IssuesFaris Bugra Kokulu, Ananta Soneji, Tiffany Bao, Yan Shoshitaishvili et al.CCS 2019 · 134 citations
