Researchers urge anti-phishing companies to share data

Posted by   Virus Bulletin on   Oct 16, 2008

Estimate over $300 million lost annually because data is not shared.

Researchers have revealed malicious websites are often active for longer than they ought to be due to a lack of communication and cooperation between security vendors.

Researchers at the University of Cambridge have looked into data sharing among companies that are hired by banks to take down phishing websites. Their study shows that knowledge of malicious URLs is generally not shared, causing these websites to be active much longer than they should be and, ultimately, causing the banks to lose millions through phishing.

Alongside the rise of phishing scams over the past few years has arisen a new industry of companies that are hired by banks to take down phishing sites. These companies get their feed of possible malicious URLs from various sources, including spam traps and customers' feedback, but they only take action when a scam targets the bank/organization that has hired them.

Although these companies are generally successful in taking down malicious sites, for instance by ensuring that the corresponding domain name is suspended from the DNS by the registrar, this leaves a large amount of valuable data unused and unshared.

The researchers found many examples where a take-down company discovered a phishing URL attacking one of its customers days after a competitor had already discovered the URL - but had not taken action.

The researchers estimate that losses of US $326 million per year could be avoided if take-down companies would simply share their data. Not surprisingly, they urge these companies to take action and follow the example of the anti-malware industry, where sample-sharing has been common practice since the early 1990s.

The paper, of which a draft version is available from the researchers' Light Blue Touchpaper blog here, was presented this week at the eCrime Researchers Summit in Atlanta, Georgia.

Posted on 16 October 2008 by Virus Bulletin

twitter.png
fb.png
linkedin.png
googleplus.png
reddit.png

 

Latest posts:

WannaCry shows we need to understand why organizations don't patch

Perhaps the question we should be asking about WannaCry is not "why do so many organizations allow unpatched machines to exist on their networks?" but "why doesn't patching work reasonably well most of the time?"

Modern security software is not necessarily powerless against threats like WannaCry

The WannaCry ransomware has affected many organisations around the world, making it probably the worst and most damaging of its kind. But modern security is not necessarily powerless against such threats.

Throwback Thursday: CARO: A personal view

This week sees the 11th International CARO Workshop taking place in Krakow, Poland – a prestigious annual meeting of anti-malware and security experts. As a founding member of CARO, Fridrik Skulason was well placed, in August 1994, to shed some light…

VB2016 paper: Uncovering the secrets of malvertising

Malicious advertising, a.k.a. malvertising, has evolved tremendously over the past few years to take a central place in some of today’s largest web-based attacks. It is by far the tool of choice for attackers to reach the masses but also to target…

Throwback Thursday: Tools of the DDoS Trade

As DDoS attacks become costlier to fix and continue to increase in both number and diversity, we turn back the clock to 2000, when Aleksander Czarnowski took a look at the DDoS tools of the day.