Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2808797.2808873acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Hackers Topology Matter Geography: Mapping the Dynamics of Repeated System Trespassing Events Networks

Published: 25 August 2015 Publication History

Abstract

this study focuses on the spatial context of hacking to networks of Honey-pots. We investigate the relationship between topological positions and geographic positions of victimized computers and system trespassers. We've deployed research Honeypots on the computer networks of two academic institutions, collected information on successful brute force attacks (BFA) and system trespassing events (sessions), and used Social Network Analysis (SNA) techniques, to depict and understand the correlation between spatial attributes (IP addresses) and hacking networks' topology. We mapped and explored hacking patterns and found that geography might set the behavior of the attackers as well as the topology of hacking networks. The contribution of this study stems from the fact that there are no prior studies of geographical influences on the topology of hacking networks and from the unique usage of SNA to investigate hacking activities. Looking ahead, our study can assist policymakers in forming effective policies in the field of cybercrime.

References

[1]
Barak, A., & Suler, J., (2008). Reflections on the Psychology and Social Science of Cyberspace. In: Barak, A., (Ed.). (2008). Psychological aspects of cyberspace: Theory, research, applications. NY: Cambridge University Press. 1-12.
[2]
Barzilai-Nahon, K., & Neumann, S. (2005, January). Bounded in cyberspace: An empirical model of self-regulation in virtual communities. In System Sciences, 2005. HICSS'05. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 192b-192b). IEEE.
[3]
Baum, J. A. C., Shipilov, A. V., & Rowley, T. J., (2003). Where do small worlds come from?. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(4), 697.
[4]
Berger-Wolf, T. Y., and Saia, J., (2006). A framework for analysis of dynamic social networks. Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD, 523--528.
[5]
Berthier, R., & Cukier, M., (2009). An evaluation of connection characteristics for separating network attacks. International Journal of Security and Networks, 4(1), 110--124.
[6]
Bossler, A.M., and Holt T.J., (2009). On-line activities, guardianship, and malware infection: An examination of routine activities theory. International Journal of Cyber Criminology 3, 400--420.
[7]
Braga, A., Papachristos, A., & Hureau D., (2012), Hot spots policing effects on crime. Campbell Systematic Reviews 2012:8, 1--97.
[8]
Braha, D., & Bar-Yam, Y., (2006). From centrality to temporary fame: Dynamic centrality in complex networks. Complexity, 12(2), 59--63.
[9]
Burt, R. S., (1995). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
[10]
Cairncross, F., (2001). The death of distance: How the communications revolution is changing our lives. Boston MA: Harvard Business Press.
[11]
Cross, R., Borgatti, S. P., & Parker, A., (2001). Beyond answers: Dimensions of the advice network. Social Networks, 23(3), 215--235.
[12]
Dodge, M., & Zook, M., (2009). Internet Based Measurement. In: Kitchin, R., and Thrift, N., (Eds). The International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Oxford: Elsevier.
[13]
Faloutsos, M., Faloutsos, P., & Faloutsos, C. (1999, August). On power-law relationships of the internet topology. In ACM SIGCOMM computer communication review (Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 251--262). ACM.
[14]
Furnell, S., (2002). Cybercrime: Vandalizing the Information Society. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
[15]
Gibson, W., (1984). Neuromancer. London: Harper Collins, Goldsmith, J., and Wu, T., (2006). Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of A Borderless World. Oxford University Press.
[16]
Graham M. (2013). Ethereal Alternate Dimensions of Cyberspace or Grounded Augmented Realities. The Geographical Journal, 179 (2), 177--182.
[17]
Grabosky P. (2014). The Evolution of Cybercrime, 2004-2014. RegNet Working Paper 58, Regulatory Institutions Network.
[18]
Granovetter, M. S., (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360.
[19]
Hill, S. A., & Braha, D., (2010). Dynamic model of time-dependent complex networks. Physical Review E, 82(4), 046105.
[20]
Holme, P., Edling, C. R., & Liljeros, F., (2004). Structure and time evolution of an internet dating community. Social Networks, 26(2), 155--174.
[21]
Johnson, D. R., & Post, D., (1996). Law and borders: The rise of law in cyberspace. Stanford Law Review, 1367--1402.
[22]
Keith, M., Shao, B., & Steinbart, P. J., (2007). The usability of passphrases for authentication: An empirical field study. International journal of human-computer studies, 65(1), 17--28.
[23]
Kleinberg, J. (2006, August). Social networks, incentives, and search. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval (pp. 210--211). ACM.
[24]
Kossinets, G., & Watts, D. J. (2006). Empirical analysis of an evolving social network. Science, 311(5757), 88--90.
[25]
Lengyel B., Attila V., Ságvári, B. Jakobi Á., & Kertéész, J., (2014) Geographies of an online social network". arxiv.org/pdf/1503.07757
[26]
Leskovec, J., & Horvitz, E., (2014). Geospatial Structure of a Planetary-Scale Social Network. Computational Social Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 1(3), 156--163.
[27]
Liben-Nowell, D., Novak, J., Kumar, R., Raghavan, P., & Tomkins, A., (2005). Geographic routing in social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(33), 11623--11628.
[28]
Lickel, B., Rutchick, A. M., Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, S. J., (2006). Intuitive theories of group types and relational principles. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(1), 28--39.
[29]
Maimon, D., Alper, M., Sobesto, B., & Cukier, M., (2014). Restrictive deterrent effects of a warning banner in an attacked computer system. Criminology, 52(1), 33--59.
[30]
Morgan, D. L., Neal, M. B., & Carder, P., (1997). The stability of core and peripheral networks over time** 1. Social Networks, 19(1), 9--25.
[31]
Morgan, K., (2004). The exaggerated death of geography: learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems. Journal of economic geography, 4(1), 3--21.
[32]
Murnion S. & Healy, R.G., (1998). Modeling Distance Decay Effects in Web Server Information Flows. Geographical Analysis 30: 285-302.
[33]
Onnela, J. P., Arbesman, S., González, M. C., Barabási, A. L., & Christakis, N. A. (2011). Geographic constraints on social network groups. PLoS one, 6(4), e16939.
[34]
Rantala, R., (2005). Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report: Cybercrime against Businesses, 2005. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
[35]
Rechavi, A., & Rafaeli, S., (2014). Active players in a network tell the story: Parsimony in modeling huge networks. First Monday, 19(8).
[36]
Salles-Loustau, G., Berthier, R., Collange, E., Sobesto, B., & Cukier, M., (2011). Characterizing attackers and attacks: An empirical study. In Dependable Computing (PRDC), 2011 IEEE 17th Pacific Rim International Symposium on IEEE. 174 -- 183.
[37]
SANS Institute. (2007). SANS Top-20 2007 Security Risks (2007 Annual Update). Available at: http://www.sans.org/top20/2007/
[38]
Scellato, S., Mascolo, C., Musolesi, M., & Latora, V., (2010). Distance matters: geo-social metrics for online social networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Online social networks. 8-8.
[39]
Spitzner, L. (2003). The honeynet project: Trapping the hackers. IEEE Security & Privacy, 1(2), 15--23.
[40]
Takhteyev, Y., Gruzd, A., & Wellman, B. (2012). Geography of Twitter networks. Social networks, 34(1), 73--81.
[41]
Tranos, E., & Nijkamp, P., (2013). The Death of Distance Revisited: Cyber-Place, Physical and Relational Proximities. Journal of Regional Science, 53(5), 855--873.
[42]
Thelwall, M., (2002). Evidence for the Existence of Geographic Trends in University Web Site Interlinking. Journal of Documentation 58: 563-574.
[43]
Viswanath, B., Mislove, A., Cha, M., & Gummadi, K. P., (2009). On the evolution of user interaction in facebook. Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Workshop on Online Social Networks, 37--42.
[44]
Watts, D. J., (1999). Networks, dynamics, and the small-world phenomenon 1. American Journal of Sociology, 105(2), 493--527.
[45]
Watts, D. J., (2004). The "new" science of networks. Annual review of sociology. 30: 243-270.
[46]
Weisburd, D. L., Groff, E. R., & Yang, S. M., (2012). The criminology of place: Street segments and our understanding of the crime problem. Oxford University Press.
  1. Hackers Topology Matter Geography: Mapping the Dynamics of Repeated System Trespassing Events Networks

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ASONAM '15: Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining 2015
    August 2015
    835 pages
    ISBN:9781450338547
    DOI:10.1145/2808797
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 25 August 2015

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Cybersecurity
    2. Cyberspace Policies
    3. Hacking
    4. Hot-spots
    5. SNA
    6. Topology

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    ASONAM '15
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 116 of 549 submissions, 21%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 147
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)7
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 30 Aug 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media