Discovery, Retrieval, and Analysis of the 'Star Wars' Botnet in Twitter

ABSTRACT

It is known that many Twitter users are bots, which are accounts controlled and sometimes created by computers. Twitter bots can send spam tweets, manipulate public opinion and be used for online fraud. Here we report the discovery, retrieval, and analysis of the 'Star Wars' botnet in Twitter, which consists of more than 350,000 bots tweeting random quotations exclusively from Star Wars novels. The botnet contains a single type of bot, showing exactly the same properties throughout the botnet. It is unusually large, many times larger than other available datasets. It provides a valuable source of ground truth for research on Twitter bots. We analysed and revealed rich details on how the botnet was designed and created. As of this writing, the Star Wars bots are still alive in Twitter. They have survived since their creation in 2013, despite the increasing efforts in recent years to detect and remove Twitter bots. We also reflect on the 'unconventional' way in which we discovered the Star Wars bots, and discuss the current problems and future challenges of Twitter bot detection.

References

1. "About Twitter, Inc. | About." https://about.twitter.com/company
2. Fake traffic means real paydays | observer. http://observer.com/2014/01/fake-traffic-means-real-paydays/
3. H. Kwak, C. Lee, H. Park, and S. Moon, "What is Twitter, a social network or a news media?" in Proc. of the 19th ACM International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW '10, pp. 591--600, 2010. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1772690.1772751
4. M. Cha, H. Haddadi, F. Benevenuto, and K. P. Gummadi, "Measuring user influence in twitter: The million follower fallacy," in Proc. of 4th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), vol. 14, 2010, p. 8. http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM10/paper/download/1538/1826
5. V. Lampos, T. D. Bie, and N. Cristianini, "Flu Detector - Tracking Epidemics on Twitter," in Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, J. L. Balcázar, F. Bonchi, A. Gionis, and M. Sebag, Eds. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Sep. 2010, no. 6323, pp. 599--602. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-15939-8_42
6. A. Tumasjan, T. O. Sprenger, P. G. Sandner, and I. M. Welpe, "Predicting Elections with Twitter: What 140 Characters Reveal about Political Sentiment," in Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, May 2010, http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM10/paper/view/1441
7. T. Sakaki, M. Okazaki, and Y. Matsuo, "Earthquake shakes Twitter users: real-time event detection by social sensors," in Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web, ser. WWW '10. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2010, pp. 851--860. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1772690.1772777
8. "ASONAM 2015 Bot Detection Tutorial." http://www.public.asu.edu/~fmorstat/bottutorial/
9. Y. Boshmaf, I. Muslukhov, K. Beznosov, and M. Ripeanu, "The Socialbot Network: When Bots Socialize for Fame and Money," in Proceedings of the 27th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, ser. ACSAC '11. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2011, pp. 93--102. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2076732.2076746
10. C. Grier, K. Thomas, V. Paxson, and M. Zhang, "@spam: the underground on 140 characters or less," in Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, ser. CCS '10. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2010, pp. 27--37. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1866307.1866311
11. N. Abokhodair, D. Yoo, and D. W. McDonald, "Dissecting a Social Botnet: Growth, Content and Influence in Twitter," in Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, ser. CSCW '15. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2015, pp. 839--851. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2675133.2675208
12. M. Forelle, P. Howard, A. Monroy-Hernández, and S. Savage, "Political bots and the manipulation of public opinion in venezuela." http://arxiv.org/abs/1507.07109
13. J. Ratkiewicz, M. Conover, M. Meiss, B. Gon\ccalves, S. Patil, A. Flammini, and F. Menczer, "Truthy: mapping the spread of astroturf in microblog streams," in Proceedings of the 20th international conference companion on World wide web, ser. WWW '11. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2011, pp. 249--252. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1963192.1963301
14. C. Yang, R. Harkreader, J. Zhang, S. Shin, and G. Gu, "Analyzing spammers' social networks for fun and profit: a case study of cyber criminal ecosystem on twitter," in Proceedings of the 21st international conference on World Wide Web, ser. WWW '12. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2012, pp. 71--80. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2187836.2187847
15. J. Messias, L. Schmidt, R. Oliveira, and F. Benevenuto, "You followed my bot! Transforming robots into influential users in Twitter," First Monday, vol. 18, no. 7, Jun. 2013. http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4217
16. C. A. Freitas, F. Benevenuto, S. Ghosh, and A. Veloso, "Reverse Engineering Socialbot Infiltration Strategies in Twitter," arXiv:1405.4927 [physics], May 2014, arXiv: 1405.4927. http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.4927
17. S.-J. L. Gratton, Follow me! creating a personal brand with twitter, 1st ed. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley Pub., Inc, 2012.
18. J. Leskovec and C. Faloutsos, "Sampling from Large Graphs," in Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, ser. KDD '06. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2006, pp. 631--636. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1150402.1150479
19. F. Morstatter, H. Dani, J. Sampson, and H. Liu, "Can One Tamper with the Sample API?: Toward Neutralizing Bias from Spam and Bot Content," in Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web, Montréal, Québec, Canada, 2016, pp. 81--82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2872518.2889372
20. K. Thomas, C. Grier, D. Song, and V. Paxson, "Suspended accounts in retrospect: an analysis of twitter spam," in Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement conference, ser. IMC '11. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2011, pp. 243--258. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2068816.2068840
21. V. S. Subrahmanian, A. Azaria, S. Durst, V. Kagan, A. Galstyan, K. Lerman, L. Zhu, E. Ferrara, A. Flammini, F. Menczer, A. Stevens, A. Dekhtyar, S. Gao, T. Hogg, F. Kooti, Y. Liu, O. Varol, P. Shiralkar, V. Vydiswaran, Q. Mei, and T. Hwang, "The DARPA Twitter Bot Challenge," arXiv:1601.05140 [physics], Jan. 2016, arXiv: 1601.05140. http://arxiv.org/abs/1601.05140
22. 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," 2013, pp. 195--210. https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity13/technical-sessions/paper/thomas
23. A. H. Wang, "Detecting Spam Bots in Online Social Networking Sites: A Machine Learning Approach," in Data and Applications Security and Privacy XXIV, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, S. Foresti and S. Jajodia, Eds. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Jun. 2010, no. 6166, pp. 335--342, dOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-13739-6_25. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-13739-6_25
24. R. Zafarani and H. Liu, "10 Bits of Surprise: Detecting Malicious Users with Minimum Information," in Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, ser. CIKM '15. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2015, pp. 423--431. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2806416.2806535
25. S. Lee and J. Kim, "Early Filtering of Ephemeral Malicious Accounts on Twitter," Comput. Commun., vol. 54, no. C, pp. 48--57, Dec. 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2014.08.006
26. A. Abisheva, V. R. K. Garimella, D. Garcia, and I. Weber, "Who Watches (and Shares) What on Youtube? And when?: Using Twitter to Understand Youtube Viewership," in Proceedings of the 7th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, ser. WSDM '14. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2014, pp. 593--602. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2556195.2566588
27. K. Ellis, M. Goldszmidt, G. Lanckriet, N. Mishra, and O. Reingold, "Equality and Social Mobility in Twitter Discussion Groups," in Proceedings of the Ninth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, ser. WSDM '16. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2016, pp. 523--532. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2835776.2835814
28. B. Krishnamurthy, P. Gill, and M. Arlitt, "A few chirps about twitter," in Proceedings of the first workshop on Online social networks, ser. WOSN '08. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2008, pp. 19--24. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1397735.1397741
29. D. Stutzbach, R. Rejaie, N. Duffield, S. Sen, and W. Willinger, "On Unbiased Sampling for Unstructured Peer-to-Peer Networks," IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 377--390, Apr. 2009.
30. A. Rajadesingan, R. Zafarani, and H. Liu, "Sarcasm Detection on Twitter: A Behavioral Modeling Approach," in Proceedings of the Eighth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, ser. WSDM '15. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2015, pp. 97--106. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2684822.2685316
31. T. Wang, Y. Chen, Z. Zhang, P. Sun, B. Deng, and X. Li, "Unbiased Sampling in Directed Social Graph," in Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2010 Conference, ser. SIGCOMM '10. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2010, pp. 401--402. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1851182.1851231
32. M. Gabielkov and A. Legout, "The Complete Picture of the Twitter Social Graph," Dec. 2012 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00752934
33. C. C. Robusto, "The Cosine-Haversine Formula," The American Mathematical Monthly, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 38--40, 1957. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2309088

• Human-centered computing

  • Human computer interaction (HCI)

    • Interaction paradigms

• Information systems

  • Information systems applications