DDoS Attacks Trends Defense 2013-2015

DDoS Attacks Over the Last Three Years: Emerging Trends and Defensive Approaches

Info: Example Research Methodology
Published: 29th September 2025 in Example Research Methodology

Related Services

Our academic writing and marking services can help you

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This chapter aims to provide an overview of the research methodology employed for this dissertation, titled “A study of trends in DDoS Attacks and Mitigation Strategies in the last 3 years”. Because this study was predominantly a secondary data analysis, it is fundamentally a theoretical dissertation relying on existing literature. As such, the research methodology would involve choosing theoretical literature, discussing them and virtually analyzing them. Overall, the methodology involved a combination of theory and literature review and a comparative analysis of existing theories, in terms of the applicability of such theories. Research methodology can refer to the method in which a research study is being implemented, based on the ranges of philosophies that have been a basis for presenting the study. Researchers must be consistent based on epistemological principles [1]. Therefore, the study would yield a qualitative approach to secondary data analysis.

Research Paradigm and Design

A qualitative research paradigm was utilized to assess the trends of DDoS attacks and responses that were focused on the philosophical stance that included ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions. The ontological framework in this study aligned with the notion of multiple realities while epistemological premise relied on the construction of knowledge through a close study of literature [2]. The research design utilized for this study was an exploration pattern where secondary data was examined [3].

The main reason why qualitative design was utilized for this study involves the notion that qualitative studies are more likely to be creative rather than quantitative studies. As such, this study is based on the concept of epistemological interpretivism [4]. Additionally, qualitative design primarily is centered on understanding the phenomenon from an insider location, whereas quantitative design is more likely to examine the phenomenon from a broad number of instances of individuals through survey methods [5].

Narrative Review

In general, a systematic review is different from a standard narrative review in many ways. Narrative reviews generally tend to be descriptive and don’t do any real systematic research. Uman [6] described systematic review as a comprehensive and explicit approach and strategy for research in which the intent of the review is to minimize bias by identifying, synthesizing and evaluating all relevant research with respect to the topic of the current review. Often, there is also the aspect of meta-analysis, where statistical methods are used to generate data of evidence across many studies into a single estimate that is not accomplished through narrative review [7]. A narrative review might be organized through the following steps.

Review Procedure

First, it is necessary to determine a suitable topic and then review all the relevant literature related to that topic. Then, the studies that were summarized will be assessed for methodological quality using critical appraisal tools. After that, they will be combined, assessed, and interpreted [8]. The primary difference between a narrative review and a systematic review would be that a systematic review consists of a much stricter protocol to ensure that all relevant studies have been included in the review and that they have been appropriately analyzed [9]. However, for this study, we take on a narrative style because the focus of the study is to identify trends from the past three years in DDoS attacks instead of an analysis of the existing literature on the topic.

Search Strategy

The research entailed a thorough process to search existing literature with the major search platforms, including Google and Bing. The search primarily focused on existing literature in the form of reports, by major technology solution companies including Radware, Akamai, and Symantec, newspapers articles, technical reports etc. Because databases are all unique, the search pattern was gently changed for each database with keywords or the use of symbols such as ‘star’ to increase the search within the medium. The use of several combinations and permutations of words was also incorporated among the various databases.

Reports

The study was completed by conducting an analysis of reports pertaining to the topic “A study of trends in DDoS Attacks and Mitigation Strategies in the last 3 years”. The former reports that were considered in this secondary data analysis consisted entirely of reports that were focused on just a time frame of three years, specifically from 2013 – 2015. The intention was to analyze the latest trends for DDoS attacks and mitigation strategies that were utilized to reduce these attacks.

Inclusion Criteria

In any form of research and particularly secondary research it is very important to have establishment of inclusion criteria. Including inclusion criteria is important in defining the boundaries of the research DeCoster [10]. In conducting secondary analysis, research:

Included reports that were published during a specifically three years’ time-period, notably from 2013 – 2015.
Included reports published in English and specifically addressed reports dealing with DDoS attacks, mitigation strategies, detection, attribution, taxonomy, trends in DDoS attacks and mitigation strategies relating to the time-period stated.
Included reports that addressed DDoS attacks such as SSDP, TCP SYN Flooding, NTP Amplification, and DNS Amplification. Methodological and statistical quality and relevance were used to ensure validity, reliability, adequacy of evidence, and accuracy by incorporating information gained from the research reports [11].

Exclusion Criteria

A list of exclusion criteria is necessary here to throw out reports based on specific requirements. Exclusion criteria would eliminate any reports that were not useful or relevant furthering the study. However, the actual exclusion criteria may differ from study to study [12]. The exclusion criteria in the current study were as follows:

Excluding reports that included languages other than English.
Excluding reports that did not meet the date range of 2013 – 2015.
Excluding reports on previous studies that fell within the date range but did not address the specific issue.
Excluding articles that were partial and only had abstracts available.

Selection of Reports

The present study used a variety of articles with research on the topic through systematic reviews. Appropriate reports were searched for using methodological filters. Comprehensive searches were conducted of the large electronic databases to identify and locate reports that were applicable to this research study. Initially, reports were selected based on their titles corresponding to the topic of the study, then more reports were selected using specified keyword searches.

Keywords

Specific keywords were used to find relevant articles. These keywords pertained to DDoS attacks, DoS attacks, trends in DDoS / DoS attacks, types of DDoS attacks, DDoS flooding, SSDP attack, NTP amplification, DDoS mitigation strategies and so forth. All studies that related to DDoS attacks and mitigation strategies were considered.

Assessment of Methodological Quality and Risk of Bias

Evaluating methodological quality in secondary reports of research is an important process that can greatly improve the potential for authentic outcomes [13]. The potential for bias exists when the research examines only one part of the report, instead of considering all the relevant factors.

Data Extraction

An independent review was performed regarding citations and reports selected for the research. Independent review also re-evaluated the reports, and the quality of the selected reports was also verified. Individual reports were thus reviewed to ascertain quality and corroborate the need to include it in the research. If there were opposing opinions of the findings between two authors, a report developed by a third author was useful to engage in a critical appraisal of the reports, as it supported quality of the report and served as justification for inclusion in the research.

Conclusion

The focus of this chapter was on summarizing the research methods that were used to conduct the research. The research employed a qualitative methodology which was an exploratory design to obtain the findings of the study by navigating secondary data obtained from various source.

Reference

[1] J. T. Tennis, “Epistemology, Theory, and Methodology in Knowledge Organization: Toward a Classification, Metatheory, and Research Framework,” Knowl. Organ., vol. 35, no. 2/3, pp. 102–112, 2008.

[2] M. R. Dangal, “Zooming on the Qualitative Paradigm in Management and Development Research: An Experience During PhDThesis Writing,” Adm. Mangement Rev., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 1–23, 2012.

[3] J. W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2013.

[4] M. R. Harwell, “Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods: Pursuing ideas as the keystone of exemplary inquir,” in The Sage handbook for research in education: Pursuing ideas as the keystone of exemplary inquir, 2nd ed., C. Conrad and R. C. Serlin, Eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2011.

[5] J. Rhodes, “On Methods: What’s the difference between qualitative and quantitative approaches?,” The chronicle of Evidence Based Mentoring, Oct-2014.

[6] L. S. Uman, “Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses,” J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 57–59, 2011.

[7] M. Petticrew and H. Roberts, Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. USA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

[8] J. Higgins and D. Altman, “Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies,” in Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1, J. P. Higgins and S. Green, Eds. united kingdom: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.

[9] Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, CRD’s guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2009.

[10] J. DeCoster, “Meta-Analysis Notes,” in The Handbook of Research Synthesis, Cooper and Hedges, Eds. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2004, pp. 1–49.

[11] G. Peersman, “Overview: Data Collection and Analysis Methods in Impact Evaluation,” Methodol. Briefs Impact Eval., no. 10, p. 21, 2014.

[12] Optimed Research, “Understanding Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria,” 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.optimedresearch.com/understanding-inclusion-and-exclusion-criteria. [Accessed: 09-Mar-2016].

[13] A. Jarde, J.-M. Losilla, J. Vives, and M. F. Rodrigo, “Q-Coh: A tool to screen the methodological quality of cohort studies in systematic reviews and meta-analyses,” Int. J. Clin. Heal. Psychol., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 138–146, May 2013.

Not sure how to write your research methodology?

At PhD Assistance we offer support at every stage: from paradigm selection and study design, to establishing inclusion/exclusion criteria and methodological integrity.

Allow our experts to help you develop an excellent and methodologically sound methodology chapter for your dissertation.

Cite this work

APA

MLA 9

MLA 7

Harvard

Vancouver

Wikipedia

OSCOLA

APA