Systems and methods for evaluating infection risks based on profiled user behaviors

1. A computer-implemented method for evaluating infection risks based on profiled user behaviors, at least a portion of the method being performed by a computing device comprising at least one hardware processor, the method comprising:

collecting, by the computing device comprising the at least one hardware processor, a plurality of user-behavior profiles that comprises at least one of:

a plurality of labeled profiles that comprises at least one of:

a plurality of infected profiles, wherein each of the plurality of infected profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated infected computing system that is known to have encountered malware; or

a plurality of clean profiles, wherein each of the plurality of clean profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated clean computing system that is known to be free of malware; or

a plurality of unlabeled profiles, wherein each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated computing system that is not known to have encountered malware and not known to be free of malware;

training, using features and labels of the plurality of user-behavior profiles, a decision tree to distinguish infected profiles from clean profiles by:

determining, at each internal node in the decision tree, whether there are any infected profiles, clean profiles, or unlabeled profiles at the internal node; and

selecting, from a plurality of splitting rules based on whether there are any infected profiles, clean profiles, or unlabeled profiles at the internal node, a suitable splitting rule to apply at the internal node; and

using the decision tree to predict at least one of:

a likelihood that a computing system of a user will become infected based at least in part on a profile of user behaviors of the user; or

a likelihood that a user behavior in the plurality of user-behavior profiles will result in a computing-system infection.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising assigning, before training the decision tree, a pseudo label to each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles by labeling a first group of the plurality of unlabeled profiles as infected profiles and a second group of the plurality of unlabeled profiles as clean profiles.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein assigning the pseudo label to each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles comprises:

calculating a similarity between the unlabeled profile and at least one labeled profile in the plurality of labeled profiles;

calculating a soft risk score for the unlabeled profile based at least in part on the similarity and a risk score of the labeled profile;

labeling the unlabeled profile as either an infected profile or a clean profile based at least in part on the soft risk score.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 3 , wherein training the decision tree comprises using the soft risk score as a weighting factor of the pseudo label of the unlabeled profile.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein assigning the pseudo label to each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles comprises:

mapping each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles to a feature space;

splitting the feature space into a first region and a second region along a lowest-density region of the feature space;

labeling unlabeled profiles in the first region as infected profiles;

labeling unlabeled profiles in the second region as clean profiles.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein:

assigning the pseudo label to each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles comprises using the decision tree to reassign pseudo labels to the plurality of unlabeled profiles;

training the decision tree comprises retraining, after reassigning pseudo labels, the decision tree until the pseudo labels of the plurality of unlabeled profiles converge.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of splitting rules comprises a splitting rule that best:

minimizes a classification error of any labeled profiles at an internal node; and

splits a feature space to which any unlabeled profiles at the internal node are mapped along a low-density region of the feature space.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of splitting rules comprises a splitting rule that maximizes mutual information.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of splitting rules comprises a splitting rule that splits user-behavior profiles at an internal node into two subsets in a way that maximizes a divergence between the two subsets.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein using the decision tree comprises using the decision tree to predict the likelihood that the computing system of the user will become infected.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein using the decision tree comprises using the decision tree to predict the likelihood that the user behavior will result in a computing-system infection.

12. A system for evaluating infection risks based on profiled user behaviors, the system comprising:

a hardware processor;

a collecting module, with instructions stored in memory and executed by the hardware processor, that collects a plurality of user-behavior profiles that comprises at least one of:

a plurality of labeled profiles that comprises at least one of:

a plurality of infected profiles, wherein each of the plurality of infected profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated infected computing system that is known to have encountered malware; or

a plurality of clean profiles, wherein each of the plurality of clean profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated clean computing system that is known to be free of malware; or

a plurality of unlabeled profiles, wherein each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated computing system that is not known to have encountered malware and not known to be free of malware;

a training module, with instructions stored in memory and executed by the hardware processor, that trains, using features and labels of the plurality of user-behavior profiles, a decision tree to distinguish infected profiles from clean profiles by:

determining, at each internal node in the decision tree, whether there are any infected profiles, clean profiles, or unlabeled profiles at the internal node; and

selecting, from a plurality of splitting rules based on whether there are any infected profiles, clean profiles, or unlabeled profiles at the internal node, a suitable splitting rule to apply at the internal node; and

a risk-evaluating module, with instructions stored in memory and executed by the hardware processor, that uses the decision tree to predict at least one of:

a likelihood that a computing system of a user will become infected based at least in part on a profile of user behaviors of the user; or

a likelihood that a user behavior in the plurality of user-behavior profiles will result in a computing-system infection.

13. The system of claim 12 , further comprising a labeling module, with instructions stored in memory and executed by the hardware processor, that assigns, before the decision tree is trained, a pseudo label to each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles by labeling a first group of the plurality of unlabeled profiles as infected profiles and a second group of the plurality of unlabeled profiles as clean profiles.

14. The system of claim 13 , wherein the labeling module assigns the pseudo label to each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles by:

calculating a similarity between the unlabeled profile and at least one labeled profile in the plurality of labeled profiles;

calculating a soft risk score for the unlabeled profile based at least in part on the similarity and a risk score of the labeled profile;

labeling the unlabeled profile as either an infected profile or a clean profile based at least in part on the soft risk score.

15. The system of claim 13 , wherein the labeling module assigns the pseudo label to each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles by:

mapping each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles to a feature space;

splitting the feature space into a first region and a second region along a lowest-density region of the feature space;

labeling unlabeled profiles in the first region as infected profiles;

labeling unlabeled profiles in the second region as clean profiles.

16. The system of claim 13 , wherein:

the labeling module assigns the pseudo label to each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles by using the decision tree to assign pseudo labels to the plurality of unlabeled profiles;

the training module trains the decision tree by retraining the decision tree until the pseudo labels of the plurality of unlabeled profiles converge.

17. The system of claim 12 , wherein the risk-evaluating module uses the decision tree by using the decision tree to predict the likelihood that the computing system of the user will become infected.

18. The system of claim 12 , wherein the risk-evaluating module uses the decision tree by using the decision tree to predict the likelihood that the user behavior will result in a computing-system infection.

19. A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising one or more computer-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one hardware processor of a computing device, cause the computing device to:

collect a plurality of user-behavior profiles that comprises at least one of:

a plurality of labeled profiles that comprises at least one of:

a plurality of infected profiles, wherein each of the plurality of infected profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated infected computing system that is known to have encountered malware; or

a plurality of clean profiles, wherein each of the plurality of clean profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated clean computing system that is known to be free of malware; or

a plurality of unlabeled profiles, wherein each of the plurality of unlabeled profiles comprises a profile of user behaviors that occurred at an associated computing system that is not known to have encountered malware and not known to be free of malware;

train, using features and labels of the plurality of user-behavior profiles, a decision tree to distinguish infected profiles from clean profiles by:

determining, at each internal node in the decision tree, whether there are any infected profiles, clean profiles, or unlabeled profiles at the internal node; and

selecting, from a plurality of splitting rules based on whether there are any infected profiles, clean profiles, or unlabeled profiles at the internal node, a suitable splitting rule to apply at the internal node; and

use the decision tree to predict at least one of:

a likelihood that a computing system of a user will become infected based at least in part on a profile of user behaviors of the user; or

a likelihood that a user behavior in the plurality of user-behavior profiles will result in a computing-system infection.