4.7 Article

A Survey of Moving Target Defenses for Network Security

Journal

IEEE COMMUNICATIONS SURVEYS AND TUTORIALS
Volume 22, Issue 3, Pages 1909-1941

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/COMST.2020.2982955

Keywords

Security; Measurement; Tools; Cloud computing; Network function virtualization; Quality of service; Tutorials; Cyber security; network security; moving target defense; artificial intelligence; cyber deception; game theory; attack representation methods (ARMs); cyber kill chain (CKC); advanced persistent threats; software-defined networking (SDN); network function virtualization (NFV); qualitative metrics; quantitative metrics; risk analysis; QoS metrics

Funding

  1. Naval Research Laboratory [N00173-15-G017, N0017319-1-G002]
  2. Air Force Office of Scientific Research [FA9550-18-1-0067]
  3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NNX17AD06G]
  4. Office of Naval Research [N00014-16-1-2892, N00014-18-1-2442, N00014-18-12840]
  5. NSF U.S. [DGE-1723440, OAC-1642031, SaTC-1528099, 1723440]
  6. NSF China [61628201, 61571375]
  7. JP Morgan AI Research Faculty Award
  8. DARPA CHASE [W912CG-19-C-0003]
  9. IBM
  10. Taibah University through Saudi Arabian Cultural Mission
  11. Division Of Graduate Education
  12. Direct For Education and Human Resources [1723440] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Network defenses based on traditional tools, techniques, and procedures (TTP) fail to account for the attackers inherent advantage present due to the static nature of network services and configurations. To take away this asymmetric advantage, Moving Target Defense (MTD) continuously shifts the configuration of the underlying system, in turn reducing the success rate of cyberattacks. In this survey, we analyze the recent advancements made in the development of MTDs and highlight (1) how these defenses can be defined using common terminology, (2) can be made more effective with the use of artificial intelligence techniques for decision making, (3) be implemented in practice and (4) evaluated. We first define an MTD using a simple and yet general notation that captures the key aspects of such defenses. We then categorize these defenses into different sub-classes depending on what they move, when they move and how they move. In trying to answer the latter question, we showcase the use of domain knowledge and game-theoretic modeling can help the defender come up with effective and efficient movement strategies. Second, to understand the practicality of these defense methods, we discuss how various MTDs have been implemented and find that networking technologies such as Software Defined Networking and Network Function Virtualization act as key enablers for implementing these dynamic defenses. We then briefly highlight MTD test-beds and case-studies to aid readers who want to examine or deploy existing MTD techniques. Third, our survey categorizes proposed MTDs based on the qualitative and quantitative metrics they utilize to evaluate their effectiveness in terms of security and performance. We use well-defined metrics such as risk analysis and performance costs for qualitative evaluation and metrics based on Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability (CIA), attack representation, QoS impact, and targeted threat models for quantitative evaluation. Finally, we show that our categorization of MTDs is effective in identifying novel research areas and highlight directions for future research.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available