Volume : 3, Issue : 3, SEP 2019


Ramu Kancherla, D. Murali


Twitter is one of the most popular micro blogging services, which is generally used to share news and updates through short messages restricted to 280 characters. However, its open nature and large user base are frequently exploited by automated spammers, content polluters, and other ill-intended users to commit various cybercrimes, such as cyber bullying, trolling, rumor dissemination, and stalking.


The novelty of the proposed approach lies in the characterization of users based on their interactions with their followers given that a user can evade features that are related to his/her own activities, but evading those based on the followers is difficult. Nineteen different features, including six newly defined features and two redefined features, are identified for learning three classifiers, namely, random forest, decision tree, and Bayesian network, on a real dataset that comprises benign users and spammers.


website, new designs, high, security, new technology.

Article : Download PDF

Cite This Article

Article No : 7

Number of Downloads : 3


  1. Tsikerdekis, “Identity deception prevention using common contribution network data,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Security, vol. 12, no. 1,pp. 188–199, Jan. 2017.
  2. Anwar and M. Abulaish, “Ranking radically influential Web forum users,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Security, vol. 10, no. 6,pp. 1289–1298, Jun. 2015.
  3. Boshmaf, I. Muslukhov, K. Beznosov, and M. Ripeanu, “Design and analysis of social botnet,” Comput. Netw., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 556–578,2013.
  4. Fletcher, “A brief history of spam,” TIME, Nov. 2, 2009.[Online]. Available:http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1933796,00.html
  5. Boshmaf, M. Ripeanu, K. Beznosov, and E. Santos-Neto, “Thwarting fake OSN accounts by predicting their victims,” in Proc. AISec, Denver,CO, USA, 2015, pp. 81–89.
  6. A. Amleshwaram, N. Reddy, S. Yadav, G. Gu, andC. Yang, “CATS: Characterizing automation of Twitter spammers,” in Proc. COMSNETS, Bengaluru, India, Jan. 2013, pp. 1–10.
  7. Lee, J. C. Lee, and S. Webb, “Uncovering social spammers: Socialhoneypots + machine learning,” in Proc. SIGIR, Geneva, Switzerland,Jul. 2010, pp. 435–442.
  8. Stringhini, C. Kruegel, and G. Vigna, “Detecting spammers on socialnetworks,” in Proc. ACSAC, Austin, TX, USA, 2010, pp. 1–9.
  9. Yu, M. Kaminsky, P. B. Gibbons, and A. D. Flaxman, “SybilGuard:Defending against sybil attacks via social networks,” IEEE/ACM Trans.Netw., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 576–589, Jun. 2008.
  10. Gao, J. Hu, C. Wilson, Z. Li, Y. Chen, and B. Y. Zhao, “Detectingand characterizing social spam campaigns,” in Proc. IMC, Melbourne,VIC, Australia, 2001, pp. 35–47.
  11. Wei, F. Xu, C. C. Tan, and Q. Li “Sybildefender: Defend against sybil attacks in large social networks,” in Proc. INFOCOM, Orlando, FL, USA, Mar. 2012, pp. 1951–1959.
  12. Yang, R. C. Harkreader, and G. Gu, “Die free or live hard? Empirical evaluation and new design for fighting evolving Twitter spammers,” in Proc. RAID, Menlo Park, CA, USA, 2011, pp. 318–337.