publication . Preprint . 2014

Emerging Phishing Trends and Effectiveness of the Anti-Phishing Landing Page

Gupta, Srishti; Kumaraguru, Ponnurangam;
Open Access English
  • Published: 14 Jun 2014
Each month, more attacks are launched with the aim of making web users believe that they are communicating with a trusted entity which compels them to share their personal, financial information. Phishing costs Internet users billions of dollars every year. Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) created an anti-phishing landing page supported by Anti-Phishing Working Group (APWG) with the aim to train users on how to prevent themselves from phishing attacks. It is used by financial institutions, phish site take down vendors, government organizations, and online merchants. When a potential victim clicks on a phishing link that has been taken down, he / s...
free text keywords: Computer Science - Computers and Society
Download from
40 references, page 1 of 3

[1] S. Afroz and R. Greenstadt. Phishzoo: An automated web phishing detection approach based on profiling and fuzzy matching. Technical report, Technical Report DU-CS-09-03, Drexel University, 2009.

[2] A. A. D. Al-Momani, T.-C. Wan, K. Al-Saedi, A. Altaher, S. Ramadass, A. Manasrah, L. B. Melhiml, and M. Anbar. An online model on evolving phishing e-mail detection and classification method. Journal of Applied Sciences, 11(18), 2011.

[3] D. S. Anderson, C. Fleizach, S. Savage, and G. M. Voelker. Spamscatter: Characterizing internet scam hosting infrastructure. PhD thesis, University of California, San Diego, 2007.

[4] APWG. Global phishing survey: Trends and domain name use in 2H2010. Technical report, GlobalPhishingSurvey 2H2010.pdf, 2010.

[5] APWG. Global phishing survey: Trends and domain name use in 2H2013. Technical report, GlobalPhishingSurvey 2H2013.pdf, 2013.

[6] A. Bergholz, J. H. Chang, G. Paaß, F. Reichartz, and S. Strobel. Improved phishing detection using model-based features. In CEAS, 2008.

[7] A. Blum, B. Wardman, T. Solorio, and G. Warner. Lexical feature based phishing url detection using online learning. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security, pages 54-60. ACM, 2010.

[8] M. Casado, T. Garfinkel, W. Cui, V. Paxson, and S. Savage. Opportunistic measurement: Extracting insight from spurious traffic. In Proc. 4th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (Hotnets-IV), 2005.

[9] S. Chhabra, A. Aggarwal, F. Benevenuto, and P. Kumaraguru. Phi. sh/$ ocial: the phishing landscape through short urls. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Collaboration, Electronic messaging, Anti-Abuse and Spam Conference, pages 92-101. ACM, 2011.

[10] N. Chou, R. Ledesma, Y. Teraguchi, and J. C. Mitchell. Client-side defense against web-based identity theft. In NDSS, 2004.

[11] R. Dhamija and J. D. Tygar. The battle against phishing: Dynamic security skins. In Proceedings of the 2005 symposium on Usable privacy and security, pages 77-88. ACM, 2005. [OpenAIRE]

[12] R. Dhamija, J. D. Tygar, and M. Hearst. Why phishing works. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems, pages 581-590. ACM, 2006. [OpenAIRE]

[13] J. S. Downs, M. B. Holbrook, and L. F. Cranor. Decision strategies and susceptibility to phishing. In Proceedings of the second symposium on Usable privacy and security, pages 79-90. ACM, 2006.

[14] S. Egelman, L. F. Cranor, and J. Hong. You've been warned: an empirical study of the effectiveness of web browser phishing warnings. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1065-1074. ACM, 2008. [OpenAIRE]

[15] I. Fette, N. Sadeh, and A. Tomasic. Learning to detect phishing emails. In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 649-656. ACM, 2007. [OpenAIRE]

40 references, page 1 of 3
Powered by OpenAIRE Research Graph
Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue