The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CANTINA+: A Feature-Rich Machine Learning Framework for Detecting Phishing Web Sites
Abstract
Phishing is a plague in cyberspace. Typically, phish detection methods either use human-verified URL blacklists or exploit Web page features via machine learning techniques. However, the former is frail in terms of new phish, and the latter suffers from the scarcity of effective features and the high false positive rate (FP). To alleviate those problems, we propose a layered anti-phishing solution that aims at (1) exploiting the expressiveness of a rich set of features with machine learning to achieve a high true positive rate (TP) on novel phish, and (2) limiting the FP to a low level via filtering algorithms. Specifically, we proposed CANTINA+, the most comprehensive feature-based approach in the literature including eight novel features, which exploits the HTML Document Object Model (DOM), search engines and third party services with machine learning techniques to detect phish. Moreover, we designed two filters to help reduce FP and achieve runtime speedup. The first is a near-duplicate phish detector that uses hashing to catch highly similar phish. The second is a login form filter, which directly classifies Web pages with no identified login form as legitimate. We extensively evaluated CANTINA+ with two methods on a diverse spectrum of corpora with 8118 phish and 4883 legitimate Web pages. In the randomized evaluation, CANTINA+ achieved over 92% TP on unique testing phish and over 99% TP on near-duplicate testing phish, and about 0.4% FP with 10% training phish. In the time-based evaluation, CANTINA+ also achieved over 92% TP on unique testing phish, over 99% TP on near-duplicate testing phish, and about 1.4% FP under 20% training phish with a two-week sliding window. Capable of achieving 0.4% FP and over 92% TP, our CANTINA+ has been demonstrated to be a competitive anti-phishing solution.
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
Cost-sensitive learning by cost-proportionate example weighting
Zadrozny, B., Langford, J., & Abe, N. (2004) · Third IEEE International Conference on Data Mining · doi:10.1109/icdm.2003.1250950 · Cited by 680
Cited by
Chiew, K. L., Tan, C. L., Wong, K., Yong, K. S. C., & Tiong, W. K. (2019) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2019.01.064 · Cited by 348
A Taxonomy of Attacks and a Survey of Defence Mechanisms for Semantic Social Engineering Attacks
Heartfield, R., & Loukas, G. (2016) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/2835375 · Cited by 202
A survey of phishing attack techniques, defence mechanisms and open research challenges
Jain, A. K., & Gupta, B. B. (2022) · Enterprise Information Systems · doi:10.1080/17517575.2021.1896786 · Cited by 192
(2012) · doi:10.1109/ecrime.2012.6489521 · Cited by 148
Chen, Y., Zahedi, F. M., Abbasi, A., & Dobolyi, D. (2021) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2020.103394 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- Xiang, G., Hong, J., Rose, C. P., & Cranor, L.
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Information and System Security
- Published
- 2011-09
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1-28
- ISSN
- 1094-9224 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7406
- OpenAlex
- W1990188874
- Cited by
- 495
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 61.96
- Type
- journal article
- 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: CANTINA+: A Feature-Rich Machine Learning Framework for Detecting Phishing Web Sites. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/2019599.2019606
- The paper
- Xiang, G., Hong, J., Rose, C. P., & Cranor, L. (2011). CANTINA+: A Feature-Rich Machine Learning Framework for Detecting Phishing Web Sites. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security. https://doi.org/10.1145/2019599.2019606
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.