EXE-Bench: Ranking the Tradeoffs of AI-based Windows Malware Detectors for Real-World Usability

Due to the lack of systematic evaluations, we are not yet able to determine which AI-based Windows malware detector to deploy in production, since existing evaluations (i) differ in terms of data used for both training and testing; (ii) do not consider temporal analysis to showcase whether models withstand the passage of time; (iii) avoid security evaluations with adversarial attacks that could highlight their brittleness against content-injection attacks; and (iv) neglect the computational requirements for deployment, risking slow inference on endpoints. For these reasons, we develop EXE-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark of AI-based Windows malware detectors. EXE-Bench assesses performance, temporal and adversarial robustness, and computational overhead, aggregating them into a single score for direct and fair model comparison. Through EXE-Bench, we highlight how evaluations conducted only after deployment are suboptimal and unable to provide a complete picture of their performance. In particular, through our analysis, we remark how much domain knowledge instilled through feature engineering is still extremely useful in this domain, resisting both time and adversarial attacks, in stark contrast with most of the deep networks that only excel right after deployment.

Empirical Quantification of Spurious Correlations in Malware Detection

End-to-end deep learning exhibits unmatched performance for detecting malware, but such an achievement is reached by exploiting spurious correlations -- features with high relevance at inference time, but known to be useless through domain knowledge. While previous work highlighted that deep networks mainly focus on metadata, none investigated the phenomenon further, without quantifying their impact on the decision. In this work, we deepen our understanding of how spurious correlation affects deep learning for malware detection by highlighting how much models rely on empty spaces left by the compiler, which diminishes the relevance of the compiled code. Through our seminal analysis on a small-scale balanced dataset, we introduce a ranking of two end-to-end models to better understand which is more suitable to be put in production.

SLIFER: Investigating Performance and Robustness of Malware Detection Pipelines

As a result of decades of research, Windows malware detection is approached through a plethora of techniques. However, there is an ongoing mismatch between academia -- which pursues an optimal performances in terms of detection rate and low false alarms -- and the requirements of real-world scenarios. In particular, academia focuses on combining static and dynamic analysis within a single or ensemble of models, falling into several pitfalls like (i) firing dynamic analysis without considering the computational burden it requires; (ii) discarding impossible-to-analyse samples; and (iii) analysing robustness against adversarial attacks without considering that malware detectors are complemented with more non-machine-learning components. Thus, in this paper we propose SLIFER, a novel Windows malware detection pipeline sequentially leveraging both static and dynamic analysis, interrupting computations as soon as one module triggers an alarm, requiring dynamic analysis only when needed. Contrary to the state of the art, we investigate how to deal with samples resistance to analysis, showing how much they impact performances, concluding that it is better to flag them as legitimate to not drastically increase false alarms. Lastly, we perform a robustness evaluation of SLIFER leveraging content-injections attacks, and we show that, counter-intuitively, attacks are blocked more by YARA rules than dynamic analysis due to byte artifacts created while optimizing the adversarial strategy.