How to Cite This Article
Abstract
Continuous threat monitoring of cloud-based systems is critical for recognizing potential cyber attacks; identifying unusual behavior; and safeguarding confidential data from dynamic, evolving cloud-based systems. However, ongoing gathering and analysis of security related telemetry can require significant amounts of computing power and energy, especially in larger-scale systems with large volumes of logging; network-event; authentication; and system-metrics data. This study presents a dynamic sampling methodology to provide both energy savings and adequate threat detection. The dynamic sampling framework adjusts the monitoring rate based on workload level; previous threat history; system sensitivity; and current indicators of possible threats. When the risk level is lower, the framework decreases the sampling rate to eliminate unnecessary data processing, storage, and computation. When anomalies occur or when the risk level increases, the monitoring system increases the sampling rate to enhance visibility and enable quick identification of incidents. Risk-based decision making, feedback-driven adaptation, and energy-aware resource allocation are used in the development of the framework to balance security with operational efficiency. Simulations of cloud workloads and representative security event data sets could be used to evaluate the dynamic sampling framework by measuring energy consumption; detection accuracy; false-positive rates; response times; and monitoring overhead. This research establishes a theoretical basis for sustainable cloud security monitoring and provides guidance on implementation issues such as sampling fairness; gaps in visibility; and resistance to adversarial manipulation.
Keywords
Cloud security, adaptive sampling, energy efficiency, threat monitoring, cloud computing, anomaly detection, security telemetry, sustainable computing, resource optimization, cybersecurity.
- [1] Ahmad, I., Namal, S., Ylianttila, M. and Gurtov, A. (2016) ‘Security in software defined networks: A survey’, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 18(1), pp. 231–250.
- [2] Alpcan, T. and Başar, T. (2010) Network Security: A Decision and Game-Theoretic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- [3] Armbrust, M. et al. (2010) ‘A view of cloud computing’, Communications of the ACM, 53(4), pp. 50–58.
- [4] Buczak, A.L. and Guven, E. (2016) ‘A survey of data mining and machine learning methods for cyber security intrusion detection’, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 18(2), pp. 1153–1176.
- [5] Buyya, R., Yeo, C.S., Venugopal, S., Broberg, J. and Brandic, I. (2009) ‘Cloud computing and emerging IT platforms: Vision, hype, and reality for delivering computing as the 5th utility’, Future Generation Computer Systems, 25(6), pp. 599–616.
- [6] Chandola, V., Banerjee, A. and Kumar, V. (2009) ‘Anomaly detection: A survey’, ACM Computing Surveys, 41(3), Article 15.
- [7] Cisco Systems (2020) Cisco Annual Internet Report (2018–2023) White Paper. San Jose, CA: Cisco Systems.
- [8] Dastjerdi, A.V. and Buyya, R. (2016) ‘Fog computing: Helping the Internet of Things realize its potential’, Computer, 49(8), pp. 112–116.
- [9] Demertzis, K., Iliadis, L. and Spartalis, S. (2017) ‘A spiking one-class anomaly detection framework for cyber-security on industrial contr',ol systems’, Computers & Security, 74, pp. 269–284.
- [10] Dinh, T.N., Li, X. and Thai, M.T. (2014) ‘Network clustering and community detection’, ACM Computing Surveys, 45(4), Article 54.
- [11] Elahi, M., Khorasani, M. and Bakhshi, A. (2013) ‘Energy-efficient cloud computing: A review of techniques and approaches’, International Journal of Computer Applications, 82(11), pp. 1–7.
- [12] Fadlullah, Z.M., Tang, F., Mao, B., Kato, N., Akashi, O., Inoue, T. and Mizutani, K. (2017) ‘State-of-the-art deep learning: Evolving machine intelligence toward tomorrow’s intelligent network traffic control systems’, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 19(4), pp. 2432–2455.
- [13] García-Teodoro, P., Díaz-Verdejo, J., Maciá-Fernández, G. and Vázquez, E. (2009) ‘Anomaly-based network intrusion detection: Techniques, systems and challenges’, Computers & Security, 28(1–2), pp. 18–28.
- [14] Gonzalez, N., Miers, C., Redígolo, F., Simplicio, M., Carvalho, T., Näslund, M. and Pourzandi, M. (2012) ‘A quantitative analysis of current security concerns and solutions for cloud computing’, Journal of Cloud Computing: Advances, Systems and Applications, 1, Article 11.
- [15] Han, J., Kamber, M. and Pei, J. (2012) Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques. 3rd edn. Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.
- [16] Harchol-Balter, M. (2013) Performance Modeling and Design of Computer Systems: Queueing Theory in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- [17] Iqbal, S., Gupta, M. and Kumar, P. (2014) ‘Energy efficiency in cloud computing: A review’, International Journal of Computer Applications, 94(2), pp. 1–6.
- [18] Jain, R. (1991) The Art of Computer Systems Performance Analysis: Techniques for Experimental Design, Measurement, Simulation, and Modeling. New York: Wiley.
- [19] Kent, K. and Souppaya, M. (2006) Guide to Computer Security Log Management. NIST Special Publication 800-92. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
- [20] Krügel, C., Toth, T. and Kirda, E. (2002) ‘Service specific anomaly detection for network intrusion detection’, in Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. New York: ACM, pp. 201–208.
- [21] Mell, P. and Grance, T. (2011) The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing. NIST Special Publication 800-145. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
- [22] Mell, P. and Grance, T. (2011) Guidelines on Security and Privacy in Public Cloud Computing. NIST Special Publication 800-144. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
- [23] Mishra, P., Pilli, E.S., Varadharajan, V. and Tupakula, U. (2017) ‘Intrusion detection techniques in cloud environment: A survey’, Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 77, pp. 18–47.
- [24] NIST (2012) Computer Security Incident Handling Guide. NIST Special Publication 800-61 Revision 2. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
- [25] Patcha, A. and Park, J.-M. (2007) ‘An overview of anomaly detection techniques: Existing solutions and latest technological trends’, Computer Networks, 51(12), pp. 3448–3470.
- [26] Ristenpart, T., Tromer, E., Shacham, H. and Savage, S. (2009) ‘Hey, you, get off of my cloud: Exploring information leakage in third-party compute clouds’, in Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security. New York: ACM, pp. 199–212.
- [27] Sommer, R. and Paxson, V. (2010) ‘Outside the closed world: On using machine learning for network intrusion detection’, in Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE, pp. 305–316.
- [28] Subashini, S. and Kavitha, V. (2011) ‘A survey on security issues in service delivery models of cloud computing’, Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 34(1), pp. 1–11.
- [29] Varghese, B. and Buyya, R. (2018) ‘Next generation cloud computing: New trends and research directions’, Future Generation Computer Systems, 79, pp. 849–861.
- [30] Zissis, D. and Lekkas, D. (2012) ‘Addressing cloud computing security issues’, Future Generation Computer Systems, 28(3), pp. 583–592.