Enhancing SCADA Security Using Generative Adversarial Network
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Related Works
2.1. Intrusion Detection Systems (IDSs)
- Host-Based IDS (HIDS): HIDS operates at the host level, monitoring processes, file integrity, and logs to detect unusual behavior or unauthorized access. Recent works by Martins et al. [22] and Bulle et al. [23] highlight the effectiveness of HIDS in mitigating internal threats in SCADA systems, with a focus on identifying anomalies in control servers. However, scalability and resource constraints are limitations often cited in these studies.
- Network-Based IDS (NIDS): NIDS detects intrusions by analyzing network traffic. NIDS is widely used to protect SCADA systems by monitoring protocols such as Modbus, DNP3, and IEC 60870-5-104. Works by Rakas et al. [21] and Aberto et al. [24] explore the use of machine learning techniques for detecting network-level attacks in SCADA systems, particularly emphasizing the protection of legacy protocols that may lack inherent security.
- Signature-Based IDS: Signature-based IDS detects intrusions based on known attack signatures. This approach has been extensively used due to its high accuracy in detecting previously known attacks. However, it struggles against zero-day attacks. Al-Asiri et al. [25] and Kwon et al. [26] and Yong et al. [27] explored signature-based methods tailored for SCADA networks, demonstrating the effectiveness of lightweight detection mechanisms but acknowledging limitations in adaptability.
- Anomaly-Based IDS: Anomaly-based IDS detects deviations from normal behavior and are well-suited for identifying unknown threats. Recent advances leveraging machine learning, such as generative adversarial networks (GANs), have proven effective in detecting sophisticated attacks in SCADA systems. Studies by Adiban et al. [28] and Park et al. [29] and Gunnam et al. [30] illustrate the use of GANs to model normal SCADA operations, improving detection rates for complex threats.
- Hybrid-Based IDS: Hybrid IDS combines multiple detection techniques to enhance accuracy and resilience. For instance, Araujo-Filho et al. [31] combined signature and anomaly detection, achieving higher detection rates and minimizing false positives. Similarly, Bennadi et al. [32] integrated Distributional Reinforcement Learning with GAN, offering a robust framework against sophisticated attacks. The proposed models performed better to the normal DRL in the standard metrics of accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score. The study [32] demonstrated that the GAN introduced in the training process of DRL with the aim of improving the detection of a specific class of data achieves the best results.
2.2. SCADA System Components
- Servers and Human–Machine Interface (HMI): The HMI provides an interface for operators to interact with the SCADA system. Security vulnerabilities in HMIs can lead to unauthorized control. Research by Abu-Jassar et al. [41], Yadav and Paul [42], and Qian et al. [43] demonstrated how attackers target HMI interfaces through social engineering and network vulnerabilities, highlighting the need for robust security practices.
- Communication Equipment: This equipment enables data exchange between different components of a SCADA system. Protocols such as DNP3 are often exploited, making communication channels a critical attack vector. Studies by Anwar et al. [44] and Aboulsamh et al. [45], and Chih-Yuan and Simin [46] explored the use of secure communication protocols and anomaly detection to protect SCADA communication links.
- Control Equipment (PLCs and RTUs): Control devices such as programmable logic controllers (PLCs) and remote terminal units (RTUs) are responsible for executing control commands. Attacks on these devices can disrupt operations. Alsabbagh and Langendörfer [47], and Yang et al. [48] and Ling et al. [49] examined the security challenges and provided defense mechanisms for mitigating threats to control devices.
2.3. NIDS for SCADA Systems
2.4. Imbalanced Data and Solving with SMOTE
2.5. Background to DNP3 Protocol
- Servers and Human–Machine Interface (HMI): SCADA systems typically have multiple servers for redundancy and reliability. The Human–Machine Interface (HMI) allows users to interact with the SCADA system. HMIs can be local (located within the plant) or remote (connected via the Internet). Cybersecurity threats to HMI interfaces pose significant risks, as attackers may attempt to manipulate operator views or inject malicious commands. IDS solutions can be deployed to monitor user interactions and detect unauthorized access attempts, thereby mitigating risks to HMI security.
- Communication Equipment: DNP3 communication involves real-time data collection from the field by SCADA servers. To ensure secure and fast communication, trusted and redundant networks are often employed, typically using ring topologies for quick recovery. The network may be wireless (e.g., GSM, GPRS, HSDPA, Wi-Fi) or wired (e.g., copper, fiber). High-capacity core switches near servers and edge switches near data acquisition equipment facilitate data flow. Since communication links are a critical attack vector, intrusion detection systems are often used to inspect network traffic for abnormal behaviors and possible breaches in DNP3 protocol communications.
- Control Equipment: These devices, such as Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) and Remote Terminal Units (RTUs), execute control commands based on received data. For example, power analyzers, current transducers, and other sensors used in power plants fall under this category. Due to their critical role in process control, these devices are prime targets for attackers seeking to disrupt operations. Anomaly-based intrusion detection mechanisms can be utilized to detect unusual behaviors, which may indicate a breach or tampering attempt.
- Data Acquisition Equipment: The primary devices used for data acquisition are PLCs, with RTUs serving as a more flexible alternative. When combined with remote input/output devices, RTUs enhance SCADA’s flexibility and ease of deployment. Attacks targeting data acquisition systems can lead to inaccurate or manipulated data being sent to control units. Deploying IDS solutions tailored to detect data tampering in real-time can help maintain data integrity and ensure operational continuity.
3. Proposed IDS Based on GAN Model
3.1. DNP3 Protocol and Feature Extraction
3.1.1. DNP3 Protocol
- Denial-of-Service (DoS): Attack traffic was generated using hping3 to overwhelm port 20000 (DNP3 port) of the outstation node.
- Packet Injection/Modification: This attack was executed using a man-in-the-middle (MITM) technique via ARP spoofing. The attacker manipulated communication by blocking unsolicited responses and executing a cold restart function code.
3.1.2. Feature Extraction
- Duration: Time taken for a connection to be established and terminated.
- Source Bytes: Number of bytes sent from the source to the destination.
- Destination Bytes: Number of bytes sent from the destination to the source.
- Flag: Status of the connection (e.g., Normal or Error).
- Count: Number of connections to the same destination within a two-s window.
- Service Count: Number of connections to the same service within a two-s window.
- Same Service Rate: Proportion of connections to a specific service.
- Dst_host_count: Number of connections from hosts to the destination.
- Dst_host_srv_count: Count of different services connecting to the destination.
- Srv_Rate: Proportion of connections to a specific service.
- Port Rate: Proportion of connections using the same source port.
- Round Trip Time Delay (RTTD): Total time for a signal to travel and receive a response.
- Contains DNP3 Packets: Indicates whether DNP3 packets are present.
- DNP3 Payload Length: Length of DNP3 payload in a connection.
- Min DNP3 Payload Length: Minimum payload length in the connection.
- Cold Restart in DNP3 Packet: Boolean indicating the presence of a cold restart or disable unsolicited message command.
- Function Code Not Supported Count: Boolean indicating changes in function codes.
3.2. Proposed GAN Model for IDS
- GAN Architecture: The GAN model comprises two components: the Generator (G) and the Discriminator (D). The generator synthesizes realistic network traffic samples, while the discriminator distinguishes between real and synthetic samples. The adversarial training process aims to optimize the following objective function:Here, represents the distribution of real data, and denotes the noise distribution used to generate synthetic data, represents the expectation operator, representing the average over the data distribution, denotes the discriminator’s output for real data x. Lastly, the represent the discriminator’s output for generated data .
- Training and Detection Phases: During training, the discriminator learns to classify real and generated network traffic, while the generator improves its ability to produce realistic samples. The final discriminator acts as a binary classifier for intrusion detection. Figure 3 illustrates the architecture of the proposed GAN model.The generator and discriminator models use convolutional layers, activation functions (LeakyReLU, ReLU), and dropout for regularization.The algorithm outlines the structure of the discriminator network used in the GAN model. Each step corresponds to a layer in the discriminator network, including details about kernel size, activation functions, output sizes, padding, and dropout rates. The architecture is designed for binary classification (e.g., normal vs. attack) in a SCADA network IDS using DNP3 protocol traffic.The GAN model outputs two classes: Normal (0) and Attack (1). This classification is achieved by training the discriminator using labeled instances of network traffic, enabling it to differentiate between normal and malicious behaviors within SCADA networks.
Algorithm 1: GAN-Based Intrusion Detection System for SCADA using DNP3 Protocol |
4. Experience and Results
4.1. Network Training
4.2. Performance Metrics
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
ACGAN | Auxiliary Classifier Generative Adversarial Network |
AI | Artificial Intelligence |
AIDS | Anomaly-based Intrusion Detection System |
APT | Advanced Persistent Threat |
ARP | Address Resolution Protocol |
CNN | Convolution Neural Network |
DDoS | Distributed Denial-of-Service |
DL | Deep learning |
DNP3 | Distributed Network Protocol 3 |
DoS | Denial-of-Service |
DRL | Distributional Reinforcement Learning |
GAN | Generative Adversarial Network |
GPRS | General Packet Radio Service |
GSM | Global System for Mobile Communications |
HIDS | Host-based Intrusion Detection System |
HMI | Human–Machine Interface |
HSDPA | High-Speed Downlink Packet Access |
ICCP | Inter-control center communications |
IDS | Intrusion Detection System |
IoT | Internet-of-Things |
IVNs | In-Vehicle Networks |
MitM | Man-in-the-Middle |
NIDS | Network-based Intrusion Detection System |
RTU | Remote Terminal Unit |
SCADA | Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition |
TCP | Transmission Control Protocol |
UAV | Unmanned Aerial Vehicle |
Wi-Fi | Wireless Fidelity |
XAI | eXplainable AI |
Appendix A. Performance Metric Definitions
- Accuracywhere = True Positives, = True Negatives, = False Positives, and = False Negatives.
- PrecisionPrecision measures the proportion of positive identifications that are actually correct.
- Recall (Sensitivity)Recall measures the proportion of actual positives correctly identified.
- F1-ScoreThe F1-score balances Precision and Recall, and is particularly useful for imbalanced datasets.
- Area Under the Curve (AUC)AUC refers to the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, which plots the True Positive Rate (TPR) against the False Positive Rate (FPR) at various threshold settings. Higher AUC values indicate better discrimination between normal and attack classes.
References
- van Boven, L.S.; Kusters, R.W.; Tin, D.; van Osch, F.H.; De Cauwer, H.; Ketelings, L.; Rao, M.; Dameff, C.; Barten, D.G. Hacking Acute Care: A Qualitative Study on the Health Care Impacts of Ransomware Attacks Against Hospitals. Ann. Emerg. Med. 2024, 83, 46–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nhung-Nguyen, H.; Girdhar, M.; Kim, Y.H.; Hong, J. Machine-Learning-Based Anomaly Detection for GOOSE in Digital Substations. Energies 2024, 17, 3745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.M.; Hong, S. Keeping Host Sanity for Security of the SCADA Systems. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 62954–62968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.M.; Hong, S. Host-Oriented Approach to Cyber Security for the SCADA Systems. In Proceedings of the 2020 6th IEEE Congress on Information Science and Technology (CiSt), Agadir-Essaouira, Morocco, 5–12 June 2021; pp. 151–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodfellow, I.J.; Pouget-Abadie, J.; Mirza, M.; Xu, B.; Warde-Farley, D.; Ozair, S.; Courville, A.; Bengio, Y. Generative Adversarial Networks. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1406.2661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nhung Nguyen, H.; Kim, Y.H. GAN-Based Driver’s Head Motion Using Millimeter-Wave Radar Sensor. IEEE Access 2025, 13, 108359–108367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.; Park, K. GAN-based imbalanced data intrusion detection system. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2021, 25, 121–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piplai, A.; Chukkapalli, S.S.L.; Joshi, A. NAttack! Adversarial Attacks to bypass a GAN based classifier trained to detect Network intrusion. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 6th Intl Conference on Big Data Security on Cloud (BigDataSecurity), IEEE Intl Conference on High Performance and Smart Computing, (HPSC) and IEEE Intl Conference on Intelligent Data and Security (IDS), Baltimore, MD, USA, 25–27 May 2020; pp. 49–54. [Google Scholar]
- Liao, D.; Huang, S.; Tan, Y.; Bai, G. Network Intrusion Detection Method Based on GAN Model. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Computer Communication and Network Security (CCNS), Xi’an, China, 21–23 August 2020; pp. 153–156. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, J.P. Computer Security Threat Monitoring and Surveillance; Technical Report; James P. Anderson Company: Fort Washington, MD, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, H.; Lang, B. Machine Learning and Deep Learning Methods for Intrusion Detection Systems: A Survey. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chollet, F. Deep Learning with Python, 1st ed.; Manning Publications Co.: Shelter Island, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- LeCun, Y. Deep learning. Nature 2015, 521, 436–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nhung-Nguyen, H.; Youn, Y.W.; Kim, Y.H. A Deep Neural Network to Identify Vacuum Degrees in Vacuum Interrupter Based on Partial Discharge Diagnosis. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 95125–95131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, J.; Kim, Y.H.; Nhung-Nguyen, H.; Kwon, J.; Lee, H. Deep-Learning Based Fault Events Analysis in Power Systems. Energies 2022, 15, 5539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, H.N.; Lee, S.; Nguyen, T.T.; Kim, Y.H. One-shot learning-based driver’s head movement identification using a millimetre-wave radar sensor. IET Radar Sonar Navig. 2022, 16, 825–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Lu, Z. Cyber security in the Smart Grid: Survey and challenges. Comput. Netw. 2013, 57, 1344–1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vinayakumar, R.; Barathi Ganesh, H.B.; Poornachandran, P.; Anand Kumar, M.; Soman, K.P. Deep-Net: Deep Neural Network for Cyber Security Use Cases. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1812.03519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IEEE Std 1815-2012; IEEE Standard for Electric Power Systems Communications-Distributed Network Protocol (DNP3). IEEE Standards Association: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2012; pp. 1–821. [CrossRef]
- Dogaru, D.I.; Dumitrache, I. Cyber Security of Smart Grids in the Context of Big Data and Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 22nd International Conference on Control Systems and Computer Science (CSCS), Bucharest, Romania, 28–30 May 2019; pp. 61–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rakas, S.V.B.; Stojanović, M.D.; Marković-Petrović, J.D. A Review of Research Work on Network-Based SCADA Intrusion Detection Systems. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 93083–93108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martins, I.; Resende, J.S.; Sousa, P.R.; Silva, S.; Antunes, L.; Gama, J. Host-based IDS: A review and open issues of an anomaly detection system in IoT. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2022, 133, 95–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bulle, B.B.; Santin, A.O.; Viegas, E.K.; dos Santos, R.R. A Host-based Intrusion Detection Model Based on OS Diversity for SCADA. In Proceedings of the IECON 2020 The 46th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Singapore, 18–21 October 2020; pp. 691–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- da Conceição Aberto, H.; Dembele, J.M.; Diop, I.; Bah, A. Review of Intrusion Detection Systems for Supervisor Control and Data Acquisition: A Machine Learning Approach. In Communications in Computer and Information Science, Proceedings of the International Conference on Science, Engineering Management and Information Technology, Ankara, Turkey, 14–15 September 2023; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 28–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Asiri, M.; El-Alfy, E.S.M. On Using Physical Based Intrusion Detection in SCADA Systems. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2020, 170, 34–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwon, H.Y.; Kim, T.; Lee, M.K. Advanced Intrusion Detection Combining Signature-Based and Behavior-Based Detection Methods. Electronics 2022, 11, 867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Y.; McLaughlin, K.; Littler, T.; Sezer, S.; Wang, H. Rule-based intrusion detection system for SCADA networks. In Proceedings of the 2nd IET Renewable Power Generation Conference (RPG 2013), Beijing, China, 9–11 September 2013; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adiban, M.; Siniscalchi, S.M.; Salvi, G. A step-by-step training method for multi generator GANs with application to anomaly detection and cybersecurity. Neurocomputing 2023, 537, 296–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, C.H.; Jo, J.Y.; Kim, Y. Detecting Cyber Threats with Limited Dataset Using Generative Adversarial Network on SCADA System. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 13–15 December 2023; pp. 915–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunnam, S.R.; Vepuri, S.K.; Nallarasan, V. Detection of Real Time Malicious Intrusions Using GAN (Generative Adversarial Networks) in Cyber Physical System. In Proceedings of the 2024 5th International Conference for Emerging Technology (INCET), Belgaum, India, 24–26 May 2024; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freitas de Araujo-Filho, P.; Kaddoum, G.; Campelo, D.R.; Gondim Santos, A.; Macêdo, D.; Zanchettin, C. Intrusion Detection for Cyber–Physical Systems Using Generative Adversarial Networks in Fog Environment. IEEE Internet Things J. 2021, 8, 6247–6256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benaddi, H.; Jouhari, M.; Ibrahimi, K.; Ben Othman, J.; Amhoud, E.M. Anomaly Detection in Industrial IoT Using Distributional Reinforcement Learning and Generative Adversarial Networks. Sensors 2022, 22, 8085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yalçın, N.; Çakır, S.; Ünaldı, S. Attack Detection Using Artificial Intelligence Methods for SCADA Security. IEEE Internet Things J. 2024, 11, 39550–39559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.Y.; Bu, S.J.; Cho, S.B. Malware detection using deep transferred generative adversarial networks. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Proceedings of the Neural Information Processing: 24th International Conference, ICONIP 2017, Guangzhou, China, 14–18 November 2017; Proceedings, Part I 24; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 556–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seo, E.; Song, H.M.; Kim, H.K. GIDS: GAN based Intrusion Detection System for In-Vehicle Network. In Proceedings of the 2018 16th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST), Belfast, Ireland, 28–30 August 2018; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tabassum, A.; Erbad, A.; Lebda, W.; Mohamed, A.; Guizani, M. FEDGAN-IDS: Privacy-preserving IDS using GAN and Federated Learning. Comput. Commun. 2022, 192, 299–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; Cao, Y.; Liu, S.; Lai, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Ahmad, N. HDA-IDS: A Hybrid DoS Attacks Intrusion Detection System for IoT by using semi-supervised CL-GAN. Expert Syst. Appl. 2024, 238, 122198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoo, J.D.; Kim, H.; Kim, H.K. GUIDE: GAN-based UAV IDS Enhancement. Comput. Secur. 2024, 147, 104073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Li, T.; Zhang, R.; Wu, D.; Liu, Y.; Yang, Z. A GAN and Feature Selection-Based Oversampling Technique for Intrusion Detection. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2021, 2021, 9947059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, T.; Pak, W. Early Detection of Network Intrusions Using a GAN-Based One-Class Classifier. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 119357–119367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abu-Jassar, A.T.; Attar, H.; Yevsieiev, V.; Amer, A.; Demska, N.; Luhach, A.K.; Lyashenko, V. Electronic User Authentication Key for Access to HMI/SCADA via Unsecured Internet Networks. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2022, 2022, 5866922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yadav, G.; Paul, K. Architecture and security of SCADA systems: A review. Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. Prot. 2021, 34, 100433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qian, J.; Du, X.; Chen, B.; Qu, B.; Zeng, K.; Liu, J. Cyber-Physical Integrated Intrusion Detection Scheme in SCADA System of Process Manufacturing Industry. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 147471–147481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anwar, M.; Lundberg, L.; Borg, A. Improving anomaly detection in SCADA network communication with attribute extension. Energy Inform. 2022, 5, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aboulsamh, R.M.; Albugaey, M.T.; Alghamdi, D.O.; Abujaid, F.H.; Alsubaie, S.N.; Saqib, N.A. Secure Communication Protocols for SCADA Systems: Analysis and Comparisons of Different Secure Communication Protocols. In Proceedings of the 2024 Seventh International Women in Data Science Conference at Prince Sultan University (WiDS PSU), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 3–4 March 2024; pp. 209–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.Y.; Nadjm-Tehrani, S. Protocol study and anomaly detection for server-driven traffic in SCADA networks. Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. Prot. 2023, 42, 100612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alsabbagh, W.; Langendörfer, P. Security of Programmable Logic Controllers and Related Systems: Today and Tomorrow. IEEE Open J. Ind. Electron. Soc. 2023, 4, 659–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, K.; Wang, H.; Wang, H.; Sun, L. An effective intrusion-resilient mechanism for programmable logic controllers against data tampering attacks. Comput. Ind. 2022, 138, 103613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rencelj Ling, E.; Urrea Cabus, J.E.; Butun, I.; Lagerström, R.; Olegard, J. Securing Communication and Identifying Threats in RTUs: A Vulnerability Analysis. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security, Vienna, Austria, 23–26 August 2022; ARES ’22, pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cruz, T.; Rosa, L.; Proença, J.; Maglaras, L.; Aubigny, M.; Lev, L.; Jiang, J.; Simões, P. A Cybersecurity Detection Framework for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2016, 12, 2236–2246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Juma, M.; Alattar, F.; Touqan, B. Securing Big Data Integrity for Industrial IoT in Smart Manufacturing Based on the Trusted Consortium Blockchain (TCB). IoT 2023, 4, 27–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lupascu, C.; Lupascu, A.; Bica, I. DLT Based Authentication Framework for Industrial IoT Devices. Sensors 2020, 20, 2621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, B.S.; Ullah, I.; Al Shloul, T.; Khan, I.A.; Khan, I.; Ghadi, Y.Y.; Abdusalomov, A.; Nasimov, R.; Ouahada, K.; Hamam, H. ICS-IDS: Application of big data analysis in AI-based intrusion detection systems to identify cyberattacks in ICS networks. J. Supercomput. 2024, 80, 7876–7905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdullahi, M.; Alhussian, H.; Aziz, N.; Abdulkadir, S.J.; Alwadain, A.; Muazu, A.A.; Bala, A. Comparison and Investigation of AI-Based Approaches for Cyberattack Detection in Cyber-Physical Systems. IEEE Access 2024, 12, 31988–32004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, J.; Yang, H.; Lyu, M.R.; King, I.; Man-Cho So, A. Online Nonlinear AUC Maximization for Imbalanced Data Sets. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2018, 29, 882–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, Y.; Liu, R.; Ding, Z.; Du, X.; Chen, J.; Zhang, Y. A Parameter-Free Cleaning Method for SMOTE in Imbalanced Classification. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 23537–23548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balla, A.; Habaebi, M.H.; Elsheikh, E.A.A.; Islam, M.R.; Suliman, F.M. The Effect of Dataset Imbalance on the Performance of SCADA Intrusion Detection Systems. Sensors 2023, 23, 758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sams Aafiya Banu, S.; Gopika, B.; Esakki Rajan, E.; Ramkumar, M.; Mahalakshmi, M.; Emil Selvan, G. Smote variants for data balancing in intrusion detection system using machine learning. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Intelligence and Signal Processing; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 317–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdelmoumin, G.; Rawat, D.B.; Rahman, A. Studying Imbalanced Learning for Anomaly-Based Intelligent IDS for Mission-Critical Internet of Things. J. Cybersecur. Priv. 2023, 3, 706–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Louk, M.H.L.; Tama, B.A. Exploring Ensemble-Based Class Imbalance Learners for Intrusion Detection in Industrial Control Networks. Big Data Cogn. Comput. 2021, 5, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, I.A.; Pi, D.; Khan, Z.U.; Hussain, Y.; Nawaz, A. HML-IDS: A Hybrid-Multilevel Anomaly Prediction Approach for Intrusion Detection in SCADA Systems. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 89507–89521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajesh, L.; Satyanarayana, P. Evaluation of machine learning algorithms for detection of malicious traffic in scada network. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 2022, 17, 913–928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, B.; Han, G.; Sun, M.; Ye, S. A novel region adaptive SMOTE algorithm for intrusion detection on imbalanced problem. In Proceedings of the 2017 3rd IEEE International Conference on Computer and Communications (ICCC), Chengdu, China, 13–16 December 2017; pp. 1281–1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Liu, F. SMOTE-NCL: A re-sampling method with filter for network intrusion detection. In Proceedings of the 2016 2nd IEEE International Conference on Computer and Communications (ICCC), Chengdu, China, 14–17 October 2016; pp. 1157–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, I.; Basheri, M.; Iqbal, M.J.; Rahim, A. Performance Comparison of Support Vector Machine, Random Forest, and Extreme Learning Machine for Intrusion Detection. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 33789–33795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zarpelão, B.B.; Miani, R.S.; Kawakani, C.T.; de Alvarenga, S.C. A survey of intrusion detection in Internet of Things. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2017, 84, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohagheghi, S.; Stoupis, J.; Wang, Z. Communication protocols and networks for power systems-current status and future trends. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/PES Power Systems Conference and Exposition, Seattle, WA, USA, 15–18 March 2009; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mander, T.; Cheung, R.; Nabhani, F. Power System DNP3 Data Object Security Using Data Sets. Comput. Secur. 2010, 29, 487–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IEC 60870-6 TASE.2; Telecontrol Standard IEC 60870-6 TASE.2 Globally Adopted. Springer-Verlag Wien: Vienna, Austria, 1999.
- IEEE Std 1379-2000; IEEE Recommended Practice for Data Communications Between Remote Terminal Units and Intelligent Electronic Devices in a Substation. IEEE Standards Association: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2001; pp. 1–72. [CrossRef]
- IEEE Std 1815-2010; IEEE Standard for Electric Power Systems Communications—Distributed Network Protocol (DNP3). IEEE Standards Association: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2010; pp. 1–775. [CrossRef]
- Yin, X.C.; Liu, Z.G.; Nkenyereye, L.; Ndibanje, B. Toward an Applied Cyber Security Solution in IoT-Based Smart Grids: An Intrusion Detection System Approach. Sensors 2019, 19, 4952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linda, O.; Vollmer, T.; Manic, M. Neural Network based Intrusion Detection System for critical infrastructures. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, Atlanta, GA, USA, 14–19 June 2009; pp. 1827–1834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Altaha, M.; Lee, J.M.; Muhammad, A.; Hong, S. Network Intrusion Detection based on Deep Neural Networks for the SCADA system. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1585, 012038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
No. | Features |
---|---|
1 | Source Bytes |
2 | Destination Bytes |
3 | Flag |
4 | Service Count |
5 | Contains DNP3 Packets |
6 | DNP3 Payload Length |
7 | Min DNP3 Payload Length |
8 | Cold Restart in DNP3 Packet |
9 | Same Service Rate |
10 | Round Trip Time Delay |
11 | Destination Host Identical Source Port Rate |
12 | Function Code Not Supported Count |
Hyperparameter | Value |
---|---|
Latent dim | 128 |
Generator input | 100 |
Batch size | 64 |
The number of epochs | 300 |
Learning rate | 0.001 |
Optimizer | Adam |
Indicator | True Label | Model’s Prediction |
---|---|---|
TP | Attack | Attack |
FP | Normal | Attack |
TN | Normal | Normal |
FN | Attack | Normal |
Methods | Average Classification Accuracy | F1-Score |
---|---|---|
SVM | 97.7% | 97.6% |
FNN | 98.75% [74] | 98.12% |
RNN | 98.68% | 98.96% |
CNN | 98.68% | 97.69% |
LWGAN | 99.136% | 99.37% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nguyen, H.N.; Koo, J. Enhancing SCADA Security Using Generative Adversarial Network. J. Cybersecur. Priv. 2025, 5, 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcp5030073
Nguyen HN, Koo J. Enhancing SCADA Security Using Generative Adversarial Network. Journal of Cybersecurity and Privacy. 2025; 5(3):73. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcp5030073
Chicago/Turabian StyleNguyen, Hong Nhung, and Jakeoung Koo. 2025. "Enhancing SCADA Security Using Generative Adversarial Network" Journal of Cybersecurity and Privacy 5, no. 3: 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcp5030073
APA StyleNguyen, H. N., & Koo, J. (2025). Enhancing SCADA Security Using Generative Adversarial Network. Journal of Cybersecurity and Privacy, 5(3), 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcp5030073