The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Your botnet is my botnet: analysis of a botnet takeover
Abstract
Botnets, networks of malware-infected machines that are controlled by an adversary, are the root cause of a large number of security problems on the Internet. A particularly sophisticated and insidious type of bot is Torpig, a malware program that is designed to harvest sensitive information (such as bank account and credit card data) from its victims. In this paper, we report on our efforts to take control of the Torpig botnet and study its operations for a period of ten days. During this time, we observed more than 180 thousand infections and recorded almost 70 GB of data that the bots collected. While botnets have been "hijacked" and studied previously, the Torpig botnet exhibits certain properties that make the analysis of the data particularly interesting. First, it is possible (with reasonable accuracy) to identify unique bot infections and relate that number to the more than 1.2 million IP addresses that contacted our command and control server. Second, the Torpig botnet is large, targets a variety of applications, and gathers a rich and diverse set of data from the infected victims. This data provides a new understanding of the type and amount of personal information that is stolen by botnets.
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
Cited by
A survey on automated dynamic malware-analysis techniques and tools
Egele, M., Scholte, T., Kirda, E., & Kruegel, C. (2012) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/2089125.2089126 · Cited by 871
Self-citationThe Science of Guessing: Analyzing an Anonymized Corpus of 70 Million Passwords
Bonneau, J. (2012) · 2012 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy · doi:10.1109/sp.2012.49 · Cited by 687
Detecting Automation of Twitter Accounts: Are You a Human, Bot, or Cyborg?
Chu, Z., Gianvecchio, S., Wang, H., & Jajodia, S. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2012.75 · Cited by 634
Detecting algorithmically generated malicious domain names
Yadav, S., Reddy, A. K. K., Reddy, A. L. N., & Ranjan, S. (2010) · Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement · doi:10.1145/1879141.1879148 · Cited by 355
Securing internet of medical things systems: limitations, issues and recommendations
Yaacoub, J.-P. A., Noura, M., Noura, H. N., Salman, O., Yaacoub, E., Couturier, R., & Chehab, A. (2020) · Future Generation Computer Systems · doi:10.1016/j.future.2019.12.028 · Cited by 308
Metadata
- Authors
- Stone-Gross, B., Cova, M., Cavallaro, L., Gilbert, B., Szydlowski, M., Kemmerer, R., Kruegel, C., & Vigna, G.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 16th ACM conference on Computer and communications security
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2009-11-09
- Pages
- 635-647
- ISSN
- 1543-7221 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2100307718
- Cited by
- 577
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 43.58
- 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: Your botnet is my botnet: analysis of a botnet takeover. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1653662.1653738
- The paper
- Stone-Gross, B., Cova, M., Cavallaro, L., Gilbert, B., Szydlowski, M., Kemmerer, R., Kruegel, C., & Vigna, G. (2009). Your botnet is my botnet: analysis of a botnet takeover. Proceedings of the 16th ACM conference on Computer and communications security. https://doi.org/10.1145/1653662.1653738
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.