skip to main content
10.1145/2046707.2046761acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesccsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Fashion crimes: trending-term exploitation on the web

Published:17 October 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

Online service providers are engaged in constant conflict with miscreants who try to siphon a portion of legitimate traffic to make illicit profits. We study the abuse of "trending" search terms, in which miscreants place links to malware-distributing or ad-filled web sites in web search and Twitter results, by collecting and analyzing measurements over nine months from multiple sources. We devise heuristics to identify ad-filled sites, report on the prevalence of malware and ad-filled sites in trending-term search results, and measure the success in blocking such content. We uncover collusion across offending domains using network analysis, and use regression analysis to conclude that both malware and ad-filled sites thrive on less popular, and less profitable trending terms. We build an economic model informed by our measurements and conclude that ad-filled sites and malware distribution may be economic substitutes. Finally, because our measurement interval spans February 2011, when Google announced changes to its ranking algorithm to root out low-quality sites, we can assess the impact of search-engine intervention on the profits miscreants can achieve.

References

  1. Google Web Search API. BiBTeXhttps://code.google.com/apis/websearch/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. M. Abu Rajab, L. Ballard, P. Mavrommatis, N. Provos, and X. Zhao. The nocebo effect on the web: an analysis of fake anti-virus distribution. In Proc. USENIX LEET'10, San Jose, CA, April 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. AdBlock. Adblock easy list. BiBTeXhttps://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/easylist.t xt.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Adify. Adify vertical gauge shows steady growth in seven of eleven critical verticals. BiBTeXhttp://www.smartbrief.com/news/aaaa/industryMW-detail.jsp?id=732F69A7--9192--4E05-A261--52C068021634. Last accessed May 5, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. N. Christin, S. Egelman, T. Vidas, and J. Grossklags. It's all about the Benjamins: Incentivizing users to ignore security advice. In Proc. Financial Crypto.'11, St. Lucia, Feb. 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. N. Christin, S. Yanagihara, and K. Kamataki. Dissecting one click frauds. In Proc. ACM CCS'10, pages 15--26, Chicago, IL, Oct. 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. G. Cooper and E. Herskovits. A Bayesian method for the induction of probabilistic networks from data. Machine Learning, 9(4):309--347, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. M. Cova, C. Leita, O. Thonnard, A. Keromytis, and M. Dacier. An analysis of rogue AV campaigns. In Proc. RAID 2010, Ottawa, ON, Canada, September 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Franklin, V. Paxson, A. Perrig, and S. Savage. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of internet miscreants. In Proc. ACM CCS'07, pages 375--388, Alexandria, VA, October 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. Grier, K. Thomas, V. Paxson, and M. Zhang. @spam: The underground in 140 characters or less. In Proc. ACM CCS'10, pages 27--37, Chicago, IL, October 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Z. Gyöngyi and H. Garcia-Mollina. Link spam alliances. In Proc. VLDB'05, pages 517--528, Trondheim, Norway, Aug. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Experian Hitwise. Experian hitwise reports bing-powered share of searches reaches 30 percent in march 2011, April 2011. BiBTeXhttp://www.hitwise.com/us/press-center/press-releases/experian-hitwise-reports-bing-powered-share-of-s/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Google Inc. Google insights for search. BiBTeXhttp://www.google.com/insights/search/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Google Inc. Google traffic estimator. BiBTeXhttps://adwords.google.com/select/TrafficEstimatorSandbox.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Google Inc. Google trends. BiBTeXhttp://www.google.com/trends/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. T. Joachims, L. Granka, B. Pang, H. Hembrooke, and G. Gay. Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback. In Proc. ACM SIGIR'05, pages 154--161, Salvador, Brazil, Aug. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. J. John, F. Yu, Y. Xie, M. Abadi, and A. Krishnamurthy. deSEO: Combating search-result poisoning. In Proc. USENIX Security'11, San Francisco, CA, August 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. C. Kanich, C. Kreibich, K. Levchenko, B. Enright, G. Voelker, V. Paxson, and S. Savage. Spamalytics: An empirical analysis of spam marketing conversion. In Proc. ACM CCS'08, pages 3--14, Alexandria, VA, Oct. 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. R. Kohavi. A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection. In Proc. IJCAI'95, pages 1137--1145, Montreal, QC, Canada, Aug. 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. N. Leontiadis, T. Moore, and N. Christin. Measuring and analyzing search-redirection attacks in the illicit online prescription drug trade. In Proc. USENIX Security'11, San Francisco, CA, August 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. J. Leskovec, L. Backstrom, and R. Kleinberg. Meme-tracking and the dynamics of the news cycle. In Proc. ACM KDD'09, Paris, France, June 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. K. Levchenko, N. Chachra, B. Enright, M. Felegyhazi, C. Grier, T. Halvorson, C. Kanich, C. Kreibich, H. Liu, D. McCoy, A. Pitsillidis, N. Weaver, V. Paxson, G. Voelker, and S. Savage. Click trajectories: End-to-end analysis of the spam value chain. In Proc. IEEE Symp. Security & Privacy, pages 431--446, Oakland, CA, May 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Microsoft. Microsoft, yahoo! change search landscape. BiBTeXhttp://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2009/jul09/07--29release.mspx.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. N. Mohan. The AdSense revenue share, May 2010. BiBTeXhttp://adsense.blogspot.com/2010/05/adsense-revenue-share.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. T. Moore and R. Clayton. Examining the impact of website take-down on phishing. In Proc. APWG eCrime'07, Pittsburgh, PA, October 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. T. Moore and R. Clayton. Evil searching: Compromise and recompromise of internet hosts for phishing. In Proc. Financial Crypto'09, pages 256--272, Barbados, Feb. 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. T. Moore, R. Clayton, and H. Stern. Temporal correlations between spam and phishing websites. In Proc. USENIX LEET'09, Boston, MA, April 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. T. Moore and B. Edelman. Measuring the perpetrators and funders of typosquatting. In Proc. Financial Crypto.'10, pages 175--191, Tenerife, Spain, Jan. 2010. \balancecolumns Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. J. Pearl. Bayesian Networks: A Model of Self-Activated Memory for Evidential Reasoning. In Proc. 7th Conf. of the Cognitive Science Society, pages 329--334, Irvine, CA, Aug. 1985.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. N. Provos, P. Mavrommatis, M. Abu Rajab, and F. Monrose. All your iFrames point to us. In Proc. USENIX Security'08, San Jose, CA, August 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. N. Provos, D. McNamee, P. Mavrommatis, K. Wang, and N. Modadugu. The ghost in the browser: Analysis of web-based malware. In Proc. USENIX HotBots'07, Cambridge, MA, April 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. B. Schwarz. Google adwords click through rates: 2% is average but double digits is great, January 2010. BiBTeXhttp://www.seroundtable.com/archives/021514.html. Last accessed May 3, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. D. Segal. A bully finds a pulpit on the web. New York Times, November 2010. Article appeared in print on November 28, 2010, on page BU1 of the New York edition. Available online at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/business/28borker.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. D. Segal. The dirty little secrets of search. New York Times, February 2011. Article appeared in print on February 13, 2011, on page BU1 of the New York edition. Available online at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/business/13search.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. A. Singha. Finding more high-quality sites in search, February 2011. BiBTeXhttp://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/finding-more-high-quality-sites-in.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. B. Stone-Gross, R. Abman, R. Kemmerer, C. Kruegel, D. Steigerwald, and G. Vigna. The underground economy of fake antivirus software. In Proc. (online) WEIS 2011, Fairfax, VA, June 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Twitter. Twitter developers trends resources. BiBTeXhttp://dev.twitter.com/doc/get/trends/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo buzzlog. BiBTeXhttp://buzzlog.yahoo.com/overall/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo site explorer. BiBTeXhttp://siteexplorer.search.yahoo.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Fashion crimes: trending-term exploitation on the web

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CCS '11: Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Computer and communications security
      October 2011
      742 pages
      ISBN:9781450309486
      DOI:10.1145/2046707

      Copyright © 2011 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 17 October 2011

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CCS '11 Paper Acceptance Rate60of429submissions,14%Overall Acceptance Rate1,261of6,999submissions,18%

      Upcoming Conference

      CCS '24
      ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security
      October 14 - 18, 2024
      Salt Lake City , UT , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader