Paper detail

Influences of Human Demographics, Brand Familiarity and Security Backgrounds on Homograph Recognition

Homograph attack is a way that attackers deceive victims about which website domain name they are communicating with by exploiting the fact that many characters look alike. The attack becomes serious and is raising broad attention when recently many brand domains have been attacked such as Apple Inc., Adobe Inc., Lloyds Bank, etc. We first design a survey of human demographics, brand familiarity, and security backgrounds and apply it to 2,067 participants. We build a regression model to study which factors affect participants' ability in recognizing homograph domains. We find that for different levels of visual similarity, the participants exhibit different abilities. 13.95% of participants can recognize non-homographs while 16.60% of participants can recognize homographs whose the visual similarity with the target brand domains is under 99.9%; but when the similarity increases to 99.9%, the number of participants who can recognize homographs significantly drops down to only 0.19%; and for the homographs with 100% of visual similarity, there is no way for the participants to recognize. We also find that female participants tend to recognize homographs better the male but male participants tend to able to recognize non-homographs better than females. Security knowledge is a significant factor affecting both homographs and non-homographs; surprisingly, people who have strong security knowledge tend to be able to recognize homographs but not non-homographs. Furthermore, people who work or are educated in computer science or computer engineering do not appear as a factor affecting the ability in recognizing homographs; however, interestingly, right after they are explained about the homograph attack, people who work or are educated in computer science or computer engineering are the ones who can capture the situation the most quickly.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.