You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
different features from official cicflowmeter and the above project #9
So i took a pcap file and i inserted it cicflowmeter (the gui based one) and this tool but i got 2 totally different flow values. Same feature names but different values for each feature. Do you know why? I want to build a read time NIDS but due to this issue i m stuck in my project. Any help would be appreciated
the original cicflowmeter the java gui app (https://github.com/ahlashkari/CICFlowMeter). When i upload packet capture to get in the flow format this python version and the original one gives me completely different flow values for each feature. The same features are prescent in both but the value of the features are very very different. Do you know the reason for this?
Original CICFlowMeter has the 'Fwd Header Length' field twice, which this python cicflowmeter does not. Additionally, python cicflow meter has two additional fields added after the destination port, specifically 'protocol' and 'timestamp'. After addressing these changes by ignoring the duplicate 'Fwd Header Length' field in the original CICFlowMeter, and ignoring the additional 'protocol' and 'timestamp' fields in the python cicflowmeter, they are consistent.
Activity
hieulw commentedon Aug 17, 2024
What tool do you refer to ? Can you show me the link ?
Eshen2002 commentedon Aug 19, 2024
the original cicflowmeter the java gui app (https://github.com/ahlashkari/CICFlowMeter). When i upload packet capture to get in the flow format this python version and the original one gives me completely different flow values for each feature. The same features are prescent in both but the value of the features are very very different. Do you know the reason for this?
smalih commentedon Jan 11, 2025
Original CICFlowMeter has the 'Fwd Header Length' field twice, which this python cicflowmeter does not. Additionally, python cicflow meter has two additional fields added after the destination port, specifically 'protocol' and 'timestamp'. After addressing these changes by ignoring the duplicate 'Fwd Header Length' field in the original CICFlowMeter, and ignoring the additional 'protocol' and 'timestamp' fields in the python cicflowmeter, they are consistent.