4.7 Review

The rise of malware: Bibliometric analysis of malware study

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnca.2016.08.022

关键词

Malware; Bibliometric analysis; Malware analysis; Intrusion detection system; Mobile malware

资金

  1. Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation [01-01-03-SF0914]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Malicious software (malware) is a computer program designed to create harmful and undesirable effects. It considered as one of the many dangerous threats for Internet users. Rootkit, botnet, worm, spyware and Trojan horse are the most common types of malware. Most malware studies aim to investigate novel approaches of preventing, detecting and responding to malware threats. However, despite the many articles published to support the research activities, there is still no trace of any bibliometric report that demonstrates the research trends. This paper aims to fill in that gap by presenting a comprehensive evaluation of malware research practices. It begins by looking at a pool of over 4000 articles that are published between 2005 and 2015 in the ISI Web of Science database. Using bibliometric analysis, this paper discusses the research activities done in both North America, Asia and other continents. This paper performed a detailed analysis by looking at the number of articles published, citations, research area, keywords, institutions, terms, and authors. A summary of the research activities continues by listing the terms into a classification of malware detection system which underlines the important area of malware research. From the analysis, it was concluded that there are several significant impacts of research activities in Asia, in comparison to other continents. In particular, this paper discusses the number of papers published by Asian countries such as China, Korea, India, Singapore and Malaysia in relation to the Middle East and North America. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据