skip to main content
10.1145/3038912.3052589acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

What's in a Name?: Understanding Profile Name Reuse on Twitter

Published:03 April 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Users on Twitter are commonly identified by their profile names. These names are used when directly addressing users on Twitter, are part of their profile page URLs, and can become a trademark for popular accounts, with people referring to celebrities by their real name and their profile name, interchangeably. Twitter, however, has chosen to not permanently link profile names to their corresponding user accounts. In fact, Twitter allows users to change their profile name, and afterwards makes the old profile names available for other users to take.

In this paper, we provide a large-scale study of the phenomenon of profile name reuse on Twitter. We show that this phenomenon is not uncommon, investigate the dynamics of profile name reuse, and characterize the accounts that are involved in it. We find that many of these accounts adopt abandoned profile names for questionable purposes, such as spreading malicious content, and using the profile name's popularity for search engine optimization. Finally, we show that this problem is not unique to Twitter (as other popular online social networks also release profile names) and argue that the risks involved with profile-name reuse outnumber the advantages provided by this feature.

References

  1. P. Agten, W. Joosen, F. Piessens, and N. Nikiforakis. Seven months' worth of mistakes: A longitudinal study of typosquatting abuse. In Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS), 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. A. Banerjee, D. Barman, M. Faloutsos, and L. Bhuyan. Cyber-fraud is one typo away. In IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM), 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. F. Benevenuto, G. Magno, T. Rodrigues, and V. Almeida. Detecting Spammers on Twitter. In Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (CEAS), 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Q. Cao, X. Yang, J. Yu, and C. Palow. Uncovering Large Groups of Active Malicious Accounts in Online Social Networks. In ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. M. Cha, H. Haddadi, F. Benvenuto, and K. Gummadi. Measuring User Influence in Twitter: The Million Follower Fallacy. In International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. E. De Cristofaro, A. Friedman, G. Jourjon, M. A. Kaafar, and M. Z. Shafiq. Paying for likes?: Understanding facebook like fraud using honeypots. In Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. B. Edelman. Large-scale registration of domains with typographical errors. Harvard University, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. M. Egele, G. Stringhini, C. Kruegel, and G. Vigna. COMPA: Detecting Compromised Accounts on Social Networks. In Proceedings of the Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, San Diego, CA, February 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. O. Goga, G. Venkatadri, and K. P. Gummadi. The doppelgänger bot attack: Exploring identity impersonation in online social networks. In Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. Grier, K. Thomas, V. Paxson, and M. Zhang. @spam: the underground on 140 characters or less. In ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. G. E. Hine, J. Onaolapo, E. De Cristofaro, N. Kourtellis, I. Leontiadis, R. Samaras, G. Stringhini, and J. Blackburn. A longitudinal measurement study of 4chan's politically incorrect forum and its effect on the web. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.03452, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. H.Kwak, C. Lee, H. Park, and S. Moon. What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? In World Wide Web Conference (WWW), 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. P. Jain and P. Kumaraguru. @i to @me: An anatomy of username changing behavior on twitter. Arxiv Preprint, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. M. T. Khan, X. Huo, Z. Li, and C. Kanich. Every second counts: Quantifying the negative externalities of cybercrime via typosquatting. 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. B. Krishnamurthy, P. Gill, and M. Aritt. A Few Chirps About Twitter. In USENIX Workshop on Online Social Networks, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. H. Kwak, H. Chun, and S. Moon. Fragile online relationship: a first look at unfollow dynamics in twitter. In SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. K. Lee, J. Caverlee, and S. Webb. Uncovering social spammers: social honeypots machine learning. In International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. S. Lee and J. Kim. WarningBird: Detecting Suspicious URLs in Twitter Stream. In Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS), 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. R. A. Malaga. Worst practices in search engine optimization. Communications of the ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. E. Mariconti, J. Onaolapo, S. S. Ahmad, N. Nikiforou, M. Egele, N. Nikiforakis, and G. Stringhini. Why Allowing Profile Name Reuse Is A Bad Idea. In European Workshop on System Security (EUROSEC), 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. T. Moore and B. Edelman. Measuring the perpetrators and funders of typosquatting. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. C. M. Rivers and B. L. Lewis. Ethical research standards in a world of big data. F1000Research, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. G. Stringhini, M. Egele, C. Kruegel, and G. Vigna. Poultry Markets: On the Underground Economy of Twitter Followers. In SIGCOMM Workshop on Online Social Networks, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. G. Stringhini, C. Kruegel, and G. Vigna. Detecting Spammers on Social Networks. In Annual Computer Security Applications Conference (ACSAC), 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. G. Stringhini, P. Mourlanne, G. Jacob, M. Egele, C. Kruegel, and G. Vigna. EvilCohort: Detecting Communities of Malicious Accounts on Online Services. In USENIX Security Symposium, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. G. Stringhini, G. Wang, M. Egele, C. Kruegel, G. Vigna, H. Zheng, and B. Y. Zhao. Follow the Green: Growth and Dynamics in Twitter Follower Markets. In ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. J. Szurdi, B. Kocso, G. Cseh, J. Spring, M. Felegyhazi, and C. Kanich. The long "taile" of typosquatting domain names. In USENIX Security Symposium, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. K. Thomas, C. Grier, J. Ma, V. Paxson, and D. Song. Design and Evaluation of a Real-Time URL Spam Filtering Service. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. K. Thomas, D. McCoy, C. Grier, A. Kolcz, and V. Paxson. Trafficking fraudulent accounts: The role of the underground market in twitter spam and abuse. In USENIX Security Symposium, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Y. Wang, D. Beck, J. Wang, C. V., and B. Daniels. Strider typo-patrol: discovery and analysis of systematic typo-squatting. In USENIX Workshop on Steps to Reducing Unwanted Traffic on the Internet (SRUTI), 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Y. Zhao, Y. Xie, F. Yu, Q. Ke, Y. Yu, Y. Chen, and E. Gillum. Botgraph: Large scale spamming botnet detection. In USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI), 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. What's in a Name?: Understanding Profile Name Reuse on Twitter

    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 Other conferences
      WWW '17: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web
      April 2017
      1678 pages
      ISBN:9781450349130

      Copyright © 2017 Copyright is held by the International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2).

      Publisher

      International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee

      Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland

      Publication History

      • Published: 3 April 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      WWW '17 Paper Acceptance Rate164of966submissions,17%Overall Acceptance Rate1,899of8,196submissions,23%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader