Next Article in Journal
Single-Stage CMOS Operational Transconductance Amplifiers (OTAs): A Design Tutorial
Previous Article in Journal
Factor Graph with Local Constraints: A Magnetic Field/Pedestrian Dead Reckoning Integrated Navigation Method Based on a Constrained Factor Graph
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Improved Resnet Model Based on Positive Traffic Flow for IoT Anomalous Traffic Detection

Electronics 2023, 12(18), 3830; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12183830
by Qingfeng Li 1,*, Yaqiu Liu 2, Tong Niu 2,* and Xiaoming Wang 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Electronics 2023, 12(18), 3830; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12183830
Submission received: 20 August 2023 / Revised: 7 September 2023 / Accepted: 8 September 2023 / Published: 10 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Computer Science & Engineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The presented paper is interesting, and the presented method has an exciting potential to improve the efficiency of IDS and IPS systems. On page 5, the PCAP format for recording network data is described. The PCAP format is not uniform and should be further specified. A citation of the standard used can be given: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/id/draft-gharris-opsawg-pcap-00.html. 

The data extraction described on page 5 does not consider the type and nature of the data - TCP(ACK) and UDP. How does your method deal with duplicate packets, out-of-order packets, or ACK packets in TCP flows? Is it necessary to filter them? What will be the effect of these packets on the accuracy of the analysis? Since you focus your method on IoT networking environments, you must account for increased error rates in wireless environments. Without answering these questions, I do not find your Section 3.1 complete.

The text contains several typos and formatting errors (rows: 42, 47, 54, 122, etc.).It usually is readable.

Table 2 contains chinas chars. Is it correct?

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. As shown in the attached content, we have revised and replied point by point to your proposed revisions. Regarding the English language expression, we have requested the help of MDPI's Professional Paper Rewriters to review and correct the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The Paper's combined approach is proved to work with excellent accuracy. Great work. 
  I wish you elaborate more on the introduction and cite more refs, as some statements left with no citations. However, overall you did great job. 

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. We may have missed some of the citations during the writing of our manuscript, we re-examine our introductory section and add the missing citations.

Reviewer 3 Report

Please find the attached file report.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Can be improved.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. As shown in the attached content, we have revised and replied point by point to your proposed revisions. Regarding the English language expression, we have requested the help of MDPI's Professional Paper Rewriters to review and correct the paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Please cite reference 41 according to the appropriate conventions.

Author Response

Thank you for the formatting citation issue, it has been fixed.

Back to TopTop