Unveiling the Power of Naive Bayes in Phishing Detection

By: KUKUTLA TEJONATH REDDY, International Center for AI and Cyber Security Research and Innovations (CCRI), Asia University, Taiwan, tejonath45@gmail.com

Abstract:

As phishing attacks become a greater threat to cybersecurity, the need for more advanced detection techniques becomes paramount. This article examines the application of the Naive Bayes algorithm in the context of phishing detection. Naive Bayes, a probabilistic classification algorithm, proves to be a powerful tool for analysing content in email web pages to determine the likelihood of phishing attempts. The effectiveness of the algorithm depends on its ability to consume large amounts of data efficiently, adapt to evolving threats, and deliver realistic -time detection capabilities. It goes into detail of the industry, emphasizing its feature selection process, probability estimation, and robustness of the training model. By using intelligence analysis and probability estimation, Naive Bayes adds robust security, helping individuals and organizations in the ongoing battle against phishing attacks.

Introduction:

Phishing attacks have become increasingly sophisticated, posing significant risks to individuals and organizations [1]. As cybercriminals use a variety of tactics to defraud users, the need for strong detection methods is more important than ever. One such effective method is the use of Naive Bayes, a probabilistic algorithm that is proving to be a powerful tool in phishing detection [2].

Understanding Naive Bayes:

Naive Bayes is a classification algorithm based on Bayes’ theorem, which calculates the probability of a hypothesis given the observed evidence [3]. For phishing detection, Naive Bayes works by analysing the elements or elements of the email web page to determine the likelihood of a phishing attempt [4].

Feature Selection:

The success of Naive Bayes in phishing detection depends on selecting appropriate features that identify phishing email websites. Common features include the sender’s email address, URL structure, content analysis, and the presence of suspicious links or attachments. Considering these factors, Naive Bayes can effectively identify phishing schemes and distinguish them from legitimate connections.

Probability Calculation:

Naive Bayes assigns a probability to each feature based on historical data. The algorithm assumes that the objects are independent, although in reality this may not be true – hence the term “naïve”. Despite its simplicity, Nev Bayes tends to work surprisingly well in practice. Bayes’ theorem is then used to calculate the probabilities together to calculate the overall probability that an email or web page is a phishing attempt.

Training the model:

To train Naive Bayes models for phishing detection, a data set with labelled models and appropriate phishing models is required. The algorithm learns from these observations and adjusts its parameters to make predictions more accurate. Regularly updating the training dataset helps keep the model current with evolving phishing techniques.

Real-time detection:

Once trained, the Naive Bayes model can be used in real-time scenarios to detect phishing. When presented with an email or web page, the model analyses the content and estimates the likelihood of it being a phishing attempt. If the probability exceeds a preset threshold, the system flags the object as suspicious.

Advantages of Naive Bayes in Phishing Detection:

Simplicity and Speed: Naive Bayes is statistically efficient and can process large data sets quickly, making it suitable for real-time detection.

Adaptability: The model can easily be updated with new data, allowing it to adapt to changing phishing techniques.

Effectiveness with Limited Data: Naive Bayes can perform well even with limited training data, making it useful for organizations with limited resources.

Conclusion:

In the ongoing battle against phishing attacks, Nev Bayes stands out as a reliable and effective analytical tool. Leveraging the power of probability and intelligent feature analysis, this algorithm adds a new layer of defence, helping individuals and organizations stay one step ahead of cyber threats as phishing techniques continue to evolve and naive base in ongoing efforts to protect us digital land It’s a precious friend.

References:

1. Viaene, S., Derrig, R. A., & Dedene, G. (2004). A case study of applying boosting Naive Bayes to claim fraud diagnosis. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 16(5), 612-620.
2. Ahmed, F., & Abulaish, M. (2013). A generic statistical approach for spam detection in online social networks. Computer Communications, 36(10-11), 1120-1129.
3. Viaene, S., Derrig, R., & Dedene, G. (2002, September). Boosting naive Bayes for claim fraud diagnosis. In International Conference on Data Warehousing and Knowledge Discovery (pp. 202-211). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
4. Hadi, W. E., Al-Radaideh, Q. A., & Alhawari, S. (2018). Integrating associative rule-based classification with Naïve Bayes for text classification. Applied Soft Computing, 69, 344-356.
5. Vijayasekaran, G., & Rosi, S. (2018). Spam and email detection in big data platform using naives bayesian classifier. International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, 7(4), 53-58.
6. Zareapoor, M., & Shamsolmoali, P. (2015). Application of credit card fraud detection: Based on bagging ensemble classifier. Procedia computer science, 48(2015), 679-685.
7. Poonia, V., Goyal, M. K., Gupta, B. B., Gupta, A. K., Jha, S., & Das, J. (2021). Drought occurrence in different river basins of India and blockchain technology based framework for disaster management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 312, 127737.
8. Gupta, B. B., & Sheng, Q. Z. (Eds.). (2019). Machine learning for computer and cyber security: principle, algorithms, and practices. CRC Press.
9. Singh, A., & Gupta, B. B. (2022). Distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks and defense mechanisms in various web-enabled computing platforms: issues, challenges, and future research directions. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), 18(1), 1-43.
10. Almomani, A., Alauthman, M., Shatnawi, M. T., Alweshah, M., Alrosan, A., Alomoush, W., & Gupta, B. B. (2022). Phishing website detection with semantic features based on machine learning classifiers: a comparative study. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), 18(1), 1-24.

Cite As

REDDY K.T (2023) Unveiling the Power of Naive Bayes in Phishing Detection, Insights2Techinfo, pp.1

646300cookie-checkUnveiling the Power of Naive Bayes in Phishing Detectionyes