Paper detail

Towards Web Phishing Detection Limitations and Mitigation

Web phishing remains a serious cyber threat responsible for most data breaches. Machine Learning (ML)-based anti-phishing detectors are seen as an effective countermeasure, and are increasingly adopted by web-browsers and software products. However, with an average of 10K phishing links reported per hour to platforms such as PhishTank and VirusTotal (VT), the deficiencies of such ML-based solutions are laid bare. We first explore how phishing sites bypass ML-based detection with a deep dive into 13K phishing pages targeting major brands such as Facebook. Results show successful evasion is caused by: (1) use of benign services to obscure phishing URLs; (2) high similarity between the HTML structures of phishing and benign pages; (3) hiding the ultimate phishing content within Javascript and running such scripts only on the client; (4) looking beyond typical credentials and credit cards for new content such as IDs and documents; (5) hiding phishing content until after human interaction. We attribute the root cause to the dependency of ML-based models on the vertical feature space (webpage content). These solutions rely only on what phishers present within the page itself. Thus, we propose Anti-SubtlePhish, a more resilient model based on logistic regression. The key augmentation is the inclusion of a horizontal feature space, which examines correlation variables between the final render of suspicious pages against what trusted services have recorded (e.g., PageRank). To defeat (1) and (2), we correlate information between WHOIS, PageRank, and page analytics. To combat (3), (4) and (5), we correlate features after rendering the page. Experiments with 100K phishing/benign sites show promising accuracy (98.8%). We also obtained 100% accuracy against 0-day phishing pages that were manually crafted, comparing well to the 0% recorded by VT vendors over the first four days.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.

Towards Web Phishing Detection Limitations and Mitigation | BZPEER | BZPEER