Attack detection is usually approached as a classification problem. However, standard classification tools often perform poorly because an adaptive attacker can shape his attacks in response to the algorithm. This has led to the recent interest in developing methods for adversarial classification, but to the best of our knowledge, there have been very few prior studies that take into account the attacker's tradeoff between adapting to the classifier being used against him with his desire to maintain the efficacy of his attack. Including this effect is key to derive solutions that perform well in practice. In this investigation we model the interaction as a game between a defender who chooses a classifier to distinguish between attacks and normal behavior based on a set of observed features and an attacker who chooses his attack features (class 1 data). Normal behavior (class 0 data) is random and exogenous. The attacker's objective balances the benefit from attacks and the cost of being detected while the defender's objective balances the benefit of a correct attack detection and the cost of false alarm. We provide an efficient algorithm to compute all Nash equilibria and a compact characterization of the possible forms of a Nash equilibrium that reveals intuitive messages on how to perform classification in the presence of an attacker. We also explore qualitatively and quantitatively the impact of the non-attacker and underlying parameters on the equilibrium strategies.
The games mentioned above are nonzero-sum games. A number of other nonzero-sum games have been discussed in the literature under the term security games'', see @cite_7 ; but they share the restriction of @cite_16 that the payoff is the sum of the payoffs on each targets, which does not model the problem of adversarial classification well. Let us finally mention that many applications of nonzero-sum games consider Stackelberg equilibria in which the defender chooses first its mixed action @cite_7 @cite_50 . In our model, we consider a simultaneous move game and find the Nash equilibria. We find that our nonzero-sum game is strategically equivalent to a zero-sum game, and thus we can analyze our nonzero-sum game using a zero-sum game.
@cite_50 @cite_16 @cite_7
2294444471 2126879264 2548493877 186410217
The security game is a basic model for resource allocation in adversarial environments. Here there are two players, a defender and an attacker. The defender wants to allocate her limited resources to defend critical targets and the attacker seeks his most favorable target to attack. In the past decade, there has been a surge of research interest in analyzing and solving security games that are motivated by applications from various domains. Remarkably, these models and their game-theoretic solutions have led to real-world deployments in use by major security agencies like the LAX airport, the US Coast Guard and Federal Air Marshal Service, as well as non-governmental organizations. Among all these research and applications, equilibrium computation serves as a foundation. This paper examines security games from a theoretical perspective and provides a unified view of various security game models. In particular, each security game can be characterized by a set system E which consists of the defender's pure strategies; The defender's best response problem can be viewed as a combinatorial optimization problem over E. Our framework captures most of the basic security game models in the literature, including all the deployed systems; The set system E arising from various domains encodes standard combinatorial problems like bipartite matching, maximum coverage, min-cost flow, packing problems, etc. Our main result shows that equilibrium computation in security games is essentially a combinatorial problem. In particular, we prove that, for any set system @math , the following problems can be reduced to each other in polynomial time: (0) combinatorial optimization over E; (1) computing the minimax equilibrium for zero-sum security games over E; (2) computing the strong Stackelberg equilibrium for security games over E; (3) computing the best or worst (for the defender) Nash equilibrium for security games over E. Therefore, the hardness [polynomial solvability] of any of these problems implies the hardness [polynomial solvability] of all the others. Here, by "games over E" we mean the class of security games with arbitrary payoff structures, but a fixed set E of defender pure strategies. This shows that the complexity of a security game is essentially determined by the set system E. We view drawing these connections as an important conceptual contribution of this paper. There has been significant recent interest in game-theoretic approaches to security, with much of the recent research focused on utilizing the leader-follower Stackelberg game model. Among the major applications are the ARMOR program deployed at LAX Airport and the IRIS program in use by the US Federal Air Marshals (FAMS). The foundational assumption for using Stackelberg games is that security forces (leaders), acting first, commit to a randomized strategy; while their adversaries (followers) choose their best response after surveillance of this randomized strategy. Yet, in many situations, a leader may face uncertainty about the follower's surveillance capability. Previous work fails to address how a leader should compute her strategy given such uncertainty. We provide five contributions in the context of a general class of security games. First, we show that the Nash equilibria in security games are interchangeable, thus alleviating the equilibrium selection problem. Second, under a natural restriction on security games, any Stackelberg strategy is also a Nash equilibrium strategy; and furthermore, the solution is unique in a class of security games of which ARMOR is a key exemplar. Third, when faced with a follower that can attack multiple targets, many of these properties no longer hold. Fourth, we show experimentally that in most (but not all) games where the restriction does not hold, the Stackelberg strategy is still a Nash equilibrium strategy, but this is no longer true when the attacker can attack multiple targets. Finally, as a possible direction for future research, we propose an extensive-form game model that makes the defender's uncertainty about the attacker's ability to observe explicit. We consider in this chapter a class of two-player nonzero-sum stochastic games with incomplete information, which is inspired by recent applications of game theory in network security. We develop fully distributed reinforcement learning algorithms, which require for each player a minimal amount of information regarding the other player. At each time, each player can be in an active mode or in a sleep mode. If †This material is based upon work supported in part by the U.S. Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) under grant number AFOSR MURI FA9550-09-1-0249. D R A F T October 2, 2011, 1:59am D R A F T 2 HYBRID LEARNING IN STOCHASTIC GAMES AND ITS APPLICATION IN NETWORK SECURITY a player is in an active mode, she updates her strategy and estimates of unknown quantities using a specific pure or hybrid learning pattern. The players’ intelligence and rationality are captured by the weighted linear combination of different learning patterns. We use stochastic approximation techniques to show that, under appropriate conditions, the pure or hybrid learning schemes with random updates can be studied using their deterministic ordinary differential equation (ODE) counterparts. Convergence to state-independent equilibria is analyzed for special classes of games, namely, games with two actions, and potential games. Results are applied to network security games between an intruder and an administrator, where the noncooperative behaviors are well characterized by the features of distributed hybrid learning. Algorithms for finding game-theoretic solutions are now used in several real-world security applications. This work has generally assumed a Stackelberg model where the defender commits to a mixed strategy first. In general two-player normal-form games, Stackelberg strategies are easier to compute than Nash equilibria, though it has recently been shown that in many security games, Stackelberg strategies are also Nash strategies for the defender. However, the work on security games so far assumes that the attacker attacks only a single target. In this paper, we generalize to the case where the attacker attacks multiple targets simultaneously. Here, Stackelberg and Nash strategies for the defender can be truly different. We provide a polynomial-time algorithm for finding a Nash equilibrium. The algorithm gradually increases the number of defender resources and maintains an equilibrium throughout this process. Moreover, we prove that Nash equilibria in security games with multiple attackers satisfy the interchange property, which resolves the problem of equilibrium selection in such games. On the other hand, we show that Stackelberg strategies are actually NP-hard to compute in this context. Finally, we provide experimental results.