Robustness Analysis of Machine Learning Models for IoT Intrusion Detection Under Data Poisoning Attacks
Organizations: Department of Telecommunication, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), Kumasi, Ghana
Abstract
Ensuring the reliability of machine learning-based intrusion detection systems remains a critical challenge in Internet of Things (IoT) environments, particularly as data poisoning attacks increasingly threaten the integrity of model training pipelines. This study evaluates the susceptibility of four widely used classifiers, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting Machine, Logistic Regression, and Deep Neural Network models, against multiple poisoning strategies using three real-world IoT datasets. Results show that while ensemble-based models exhibit comparatively stable performance, Logistic Regression and Deep Neural Networks suffer degradation of up to 40% under label manipulation and outlier-based attacks. Such disruptions significantly distort decision boundaries, reduce detection fidelity, and undermine deployment readiness. The findings highlight the need for adversarially robust training, continuous anomaly monitoring, and feature-level validation within operational Network Intrusion Detection Systems. The study also emphasizes the importance of integrating resilience testing into regulatory and compliance frameworks for AI-driven IoT security. Overall, this work provides an empirical foundation for developing more resilient intrusion detection pipelines and informs future research on adaptive, attack-aware models capable of maintaining reliability under adversarial IoT conditions.
Figures & tables
| Reference | Main Contribution | IoT Dataset | Intrusion Det. | Poisoning | Defense / Robustness | ML Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ 13 ] | Multi-step IoT cyberattack dataset enabling realistic model benchmarking. | ✓ | ✓ | × | × | ✓ |
| [ 1 ] | First gradient-based poisoning attack on SVMs; cornerstone for adversarial ML. | × | ✓ | ✓ | × | ✓ |
| [ 33 ] | Evaluation of ML intrusion detection for IoT networks; strong LSTM performance. | ✓ | ✓ | × | × | ✓ |
| [ 26 ] | Survey of IoT IDS frameworks focusing on datasets and ML limitations. | ✓ | ✓ | × | × | ✓ |
| [ 20 ] | Poisoning defense for IoT ML using controlled adversarial sampling. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| [ 3 ] | Robustness evaluation of ML models under poisoning in IoT environments. | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Category | Feature Impersonation | Synthetic Outliers | Outlier Injection | Label Flipping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manipulation Method | Alters selected feature values so malicious samples imitate benign traffic patterns | Introduces fabricated, statistically abnormal samples into the dataset | Injects extreme or noisy values to distort the feature distribution | Reassigns ground-truth labels to incorrect classes |
| Impact on Data | Blurs the separation between benign and malicious behavior | Shifts dataset distributions and increases variance | Creates instability and irregularity in feature space | Corrupts supervision and weakens class separability |
| Objective | Evade identification by mimicking normal behavior | Decrease prediction reliability and robustness | Trigger misclassification through noise-driven confusion | Manipulate learned boundaries and degrade detection accuracy |
| Detection Difficulty | High — subtle feature-level manipulation | Moderate — detectable with distribution checks | High — outliers may be masked within variability | Low–moderate — requires careful validation of labels |
| Dataset | Total Instances | Total Variables | Missing Values | Numeric Columns | Categorical Columns | Target Variable | Outliers Detected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIOT2023 | 1,048,575 | 47 | None | 46 | 1 | label | None |
| Edge-IIoTset | 2,219,201 | 63 | None | 59 | 4 | Attack_label | None |
| N-BaIoT | 1,018,298 | 116 | None | 116 | 1 | type | None |