You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
In the last decade, the use of fast flux technique has become established as a common practice to organise botnets in Fast Flux Service Networks (FFSNs), which are platforms able to sustain illegal online services with very high availability. In this paper, we report on an effective fast flux detection algorithm based on the passive analysis of the Domain Name System (DNS) traffic of a corporate network. The proposed method is based on the near-real-time identification of different metrics that measure a wide range of fast flux key features; the metrics are combined via a simple but effective mathematical and data mining approach. The proposed solution has been evaluated in a one-month experiment over an enterprise network, with the injection of pcaps associated with different malware campaigns, that leverage FFSNs and cover a wide variety of attack scenarios. An in-depth analysis of a list of fast flux domains confirmed the reliability of the metrics used in the proposed algorithm and allowed for the identification of many IPs that turned out to be part of two notorious FFSNs, namely Dark Cloud and SandiFlux, to the description of which we therefore contribute. All the fast flux domains were detected with a very low false positive rate; a comparison of performance indicators with previous works show a remarkable improvement.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: DNS is widely abused by Internet criminals in order to provide reliable communication within malicious network infrastructure as well as flexible and resilient hosting of malicious content. This paper presents a novel detection method that can be used for identifying potentially compromised clients based on DNS traffic analysis. The proposed method identifies suspicious agile DNS mappings, i.e., mappings characterized by fast changing domain names or and IP addresses, often used by malicious services. The approach discovers clients that have queried domains contained within identified suspicious domain-to-IP mappings, thus assisting in pinpointing potentially compromised clients within the network. The proposed approach targets compromised clients in large-scale operational networks. We have evaluated the proposed approach using an extensive set of DNS traffic traces from different operational ISP networks. The evaluation illustrates a great potential of accurately identifying suspicious domain-to-IP mappings and potentially compromised clients. Furthermore, the achieved performance indicate that the novel detection approach is promising in view of the adoption in operational ISP networks. Finally, the proposed approach targets both Fast-flux and Domain-flux, thus having an advantage over existing detection methods that identify compromised clients.

[2]: We consider the analysis of network traffic data for identifying highly agile DNS patterns which are widely considered indicative for cybercrime. In contrast to related approaches, our methodology is capable of explicitly distinguishing between the individual, inherent agility of benign Internet services and criminal sites. Although some benign services use a large number of addresses, they are confined to a subset of IP addresses, due to operational requirements and contractual agreements with certain Content Distribution Networks. We discuss DNSMap, a system which analyzes observed DNS traffic, and continuously learns which FQDNs are hosted on which IP addresses. Any significant changes over time are mapped to bipartite graphs, which are then further pruned for cybercrime activity. Graph analysis enables the detection of transitive relations between FQDNs and IPs, and reveals clusters of malicious FQDNs and IP addresses hosting them. We developed a prototype system which is designed for realtime analysis, requires no costly classifier retraining, and no excessive whitelisting. We evaluate our system using large data sets from an ISP with several 100,000 customers, and demonstrate that even moderately agile criminal sites can be detected reliably and almost immediately.

[3]: In this paper, we present FluxBuster, a novel passive DNS traffic analysis system for detecting and tracking malicious flux networks. FluxBuster applies large-scale monitoring of DNS traffic traces generated by recursive DNS (RDNS) servers located in hundreds of different networks scattered across several different geographical locations. Unlike most previous work, our detection approach is not limited to the analysis of suspicious domain names extracted from spam emails or precompiled domain blacklists. Instead, FluxBuster is able to detect malicious flux service networks in-the-wild, i.e., as they are "accessed” by users who fall victim of malicious content, independently of how this malicious content was advertised. We performed a long-term evaluation of our system spanning a period of about five months. The experimental results show that FluxBuster is able to accurately detect malicious flux networks with a low false positive rate. Furthermore, we show that in many cases FluxBuster is able to detect malicious flux domains several days or even weeks before they appear in public domain blacklists.
Some FFSN detection methods based on passive DNS analysis have been proposed. Some of them analyse the DNS traffic of a whole Internet Service Provider (ISP), thus taking in input the DNS traffic generated by many different networks. [3] , in particular, performed a large-scale passive analysis of DNS traffic. They extract some relevant features from the DNS traffic and classified the domains via a C4.5 decision tree classifier. [2] and [1] proposed two other approaches to analyse the DNS traffic of an ISP. Both methods are based on a tool called DNSMap and classify the bipartite graphs formed by the collected fully qualified domain names and the associated IPs. The first method searches for generic malicious usage of DNS, while the latter focuses on FFSNs.