The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
All your contacts are belong to us: automated identity theft attacks on social networks
Abstract
Social networking sites have been increasingly gaining popularity. Well-known sites such as Facebook have been reporting growth rates as high as 3% per week. Many social networking sites have millions of registered users who use these sites to share photographs, contact long-lost friends, establish new business contacts and to keep in touch. In this paper, we investigate how easy it would be for a potential attacker to launch automated crawling and identity theft attacks against a number of popular social networking sites in order to gain access to a large volume of personal user information. The first attack we present is the automated identity theft of existing user profiles and sending of friend requests to the contacts of the cloned victim. The hope, from the attacker's point of view, is that the contacted users simply trust and accept the friend request. By establishing a friendship relationship with the contacts of a victim, the attacker is able to access the sensitive personal information provided by them. In the second, more advanced attack we present, we show that it is effective and feasible to launch an automated, cross-site profile cloning attack. In this attack, we are able to automatically create a forged profile in a network where the victim is not registered yet and contact the victim's friends who are registered on both networks. Our experimental results with real users show that the automated attacks we present are effective and feasible in practice.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Douceur, J. R. (2002) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45748-8_24 · Cited by 4,419
Cited by
Detecting spammers on social networks
Stringhini, G., Kruegel, C., & Vigna, G. (2010) · Proceedings of the 26th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference · doi:10.1145/1920261.1920263 · Cited by 791
Advanced social engineering attacks
Krombholz, K., Hobel, H., Huber, M., & Weippl, E. (2015) · Journal of Information Security and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.jisa.2014.09.005 · Cited by 575
Connecting users across social media sites: a behavioral-modeling approach
Zafarani, R., & Liu, H. (2013) · Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining · doi:10.1145/2487575.2487648 · Cited by 408
Privacy wizards for social networking sites
Fang, L., & LeFevre, K. (2010) · Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1772690.1772727 · Cited by 398
An analysis of social network-based Sybil defenses
Viswanath, B., Post, A., Gummadi, K. P., & Mislove, A. (2010) · Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2010 conference · doi:10.1145/1851182.1851226 · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Bilge, L., Strufe, T., Balzarotti, D., & Kirda, E.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2009-04-20
- Pages
- 551-560
- OpenAlex
- W2120111750
- Cited by
- 545
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 116.52
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: All your contacts are belong to us: automated identity theft attacks on social networks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1526709.1526784
- The paper
- Bilge, L., Strufe, T., Balzarotti, D., & Kirda, E. (2009). All your contacts are belong to us: automated identity theft attacks on social networks. Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web. https://doi.org/10.1145/1526709.1526784
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.