skip to main content
10.1145/2815675.2815699acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The Doppelgänger Bot Attack: Exploring Identity Impersonation in Online Social Networks

Published:28 October 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

People have long been aware of malicious users that impersonate celebrities or launch identity theft attacks in social networks. However, beyond anecdotal evidence, there have been no in-depth studies of impersonation attacks in today's social networks. One reason for the lack of studies in this space is the absence of datasets about impersonation attacks. To this end, we propose a technique to build extensive datasets of impersonation attacks in current social networks and we gather 16,572 cases of impersonation attacks in the Twitter social network. Our analysis reveals that most identity impersonation attacks are not targeting celebrities or identity theft. Instead, we uncover a new class of impersonation attacks that clone the profiles of ordinary people on Twitter to create real-looking fake identities and use them in malicious activities such as follower fraud. We refer to these as the doppelgänger bot attacks. Our findings show (i) that identity impersonation attacks are much broader than believed and can impact any user, not just celebrities and (ii) that attackers are evolving and create real-looking accounts that are harder to detect by current systems. We also propose and evaluate methods to automatically detect impersonation attacks sooner than they are being detected in today's Twitter social network.

References

  1. Bing Maps API. http://www.microsoft.com/maps/developers/web.aspx.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Get better results with less effort with Mechanical Turk Masters -- The Mechanical Turk blog. http://bit.ly/112GmQI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. F. Benevenuto, G. Magno, T. Rodrigues, and V. Almeida. Detecting spammers on Twitter. In CEAS'10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. P. Bhattacharya, M. B. Zafar, N. Ganguly, S. Ghosh, and K. P. Gummadi. Inferring user interests in the twitter social network. In RecSys '14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. L. Bilge, T. Strufe, D. Balzarotti, and E. Kirda. All your contacts are belong to us: Automated identity theft attacks on social networks. In WWW'09. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Q. Cao, M. Sirivianos, X. Yang, and T. Pregueiro. Aiding the detection of fake accounts in large scale social online services. In NSDI'12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. W. W. Cohen, P. Ravikumar, and S. E. Fienberg. A comparison of string distance metrics for name-matching tasks. In IJCAI'03.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. S. Corpus, 2015. http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/snowball/stopwords/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. O. Goga. Matching User Accounts Across Online Social Networks: Methods and Applications. PhD thesis, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. O. Goga, P. Loiseau, R. Sommer, R. Teixeira, and K. Gummadi. On the reliability of profile matching across large online social networks. In KDD, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. B.-Z. He, C.-M. Chen, Y.-P. Su, and H.-M. Sun. A defence scheme against identity theft attack based on multiple social networks. Expert Syst. Appl., 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Internetnews. Microsoft survey: Online 'reputation' counts, 2010. http://www.internetnews.com/webcontent/article.php/3861241/Microsoft+Survey+Online+Reputation+Counts.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. L. Jin, H. Takabi, and J. B. Joshi. Towards active detection of identity clone attacks on online social networks. In CODASPY '11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. A. M. Kakhki, C. Kliman-Silver, and A. Mislove. Iolaus: Securing online content rating systems. In WWW'13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. M. Y. Kharaji, F. S. Rizi, and M. Khayyambashi. A new approach for finding cloned profiles in online social networks. International Journal of Network Security, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Klout. Klout, 2014. http://klout.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. G. Kontaxis, I. Polakis, S. Ioannidis, and E. Markatos. Detecting social network profile cloning. In PERCOM'11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. D. G. Lowe. Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int. J. Comput. Vision, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Mediabistro. Was twitter right to suspend 'christopher walken'?, 2009. https://www.mediabistro.com/alltwitter/was-twitter-right-to-suspend-christopher-walken_b5021.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. A. Mislove, A. Post, K. P. Gummadi, and P. Druschel. Ostra: Leveraging trust to thwart unwanted communication. In NSDI'08. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. M. Mondal, B. Viswanath, A. Clement, P. Druschel, K. P. Gummadi, A. Mislove, and A. Post. Defending against large-scale crawls in online social networks. In CoNEXT'12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Nairobiwire. Sonko's facebook impersonator arrested, 2014. http://nairobiwire.com/2014/07/mike-sonko-arrested-swindling-public.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=mike-sonko-arrested-swindling-public.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. D. Perito, C. Castelluccia, M. Ali Kâafar, and P. Manils. How unique and traceable are usernames? In Proceedings of the 11th Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS), 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Phash. http://www.phash.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. A. Post, V. Shah, and A. Mislove. Bazaar: Strengthening user reputations in online marketplaces. In NSDI'11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Seattlepi. Racism and twitter impersonation prompt lawsuit for kirkland teen, 2010. http://www.seattlepi.com/local/sound/article/Racism-and-Twitter-impersonation-prompt-lawsuit-893555.php.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Social Intelligence Corp. http://www.socialintel.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Spokeo. http://www.spokeo.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. T. Stein, E. Chen, and K. Mangla. Facebook immune system. In SNS'11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Turnto23. Impersonator continuously creating fake facebook profiles of a well known bakersfield pastor. http://www.turnto23.com/news/local-news/impersonator-continuously-creating-fake-facebook-profiles-of-a-bakersfield-pastor.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Twitter. Explaining twitter's efforts to shut down spam. https://blog.twitter.com/2012/shutting-down-spammers, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Twitter. Twitter reporting impersonation accounts, 2014. https://support.twitter.com/articles/20170142-reporting-impersonation-accounts.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. B. Viswanath, M. A. Bashir, M. Crovella, S. Guha, K. Gummadi, B. Krishnamurthy, and A. Mislove. Towards detecting anomalous user behavior in online social networks. In USENIX Security'14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. B. Viswanath, M. A. Bashir, M. B. Zafar, L. Espin, K. P. Gummadi, and A. Mislove. Trulyfollowing: Discover twitter accounts with suspicious followers. http://trulyfollowing.app-ns.mpi-sws.org/, April 2012. Last accessed Sept 6, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. B. Viswanath, M. Mondal, A. Clement, P. Druschel, K. Gummadi, A. Mislove, and A. Post. Exploring the design space of social network-based sybil defenses. In COMSNETS'12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. B. Viswanath, A. Post, K. P. Gummadi, and A. Mislove. An analysis of social network-based sybil defenses. In SIGCOMM '10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. G. Wang, M. Mohanlal, C. Wilson, X. Wang, M. J. Metzger, H. Zheng, and B. Y. Zhao. Social turing tests: Crowdsourcing sybil detection. In NDSS'13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Wikibin. Employers using social networks for screening applicants, 2008. http://wikibin.org/articles/employers-using-social-networks-for-screening-applicants.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. H. Yu, M. Kaminsky, P. B. Gibbons, and A. Flaxman. Sybilguard: Defending against sybil attacks via social networks. In SIGCOMM '06. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. C. M. Zhang and V. Paxson. Detecting and analyzing automated activity on twitter. In PAM'11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The Doppelgänger Bot Attack: Exploring Identity Impersonation in Online Social Networks

    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
      IMC '15: Proceedings of the 2015 Internet Measurement Conference
      October 2015
      550 pages
      ISBN:9781450338486
      DOI:10.1145/2815675

      Copyright © 2015 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: 28 October 2015

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      IMC '15 Paper Acceptance Rate31of96submissions,32%Overall Acceptance Rate277of1,083submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader