Slashdot Mirror


The Words That Indicate Malicious Domain URLs

An anonymous reader writes: Researchers from AT&T have released research which improves the identification-rate of malicious URLs — such as those used for C&C servers or to distribute malware to redirected victims — by individuating words in the domain names. Though many of the words that Wei Wang and Kenneth Shirley were able to group as 'malign' are predictable, there is a strange recurrence of basketball-related words in the URL lexicon of malice, with 'bad' domains using names such as LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and Michael Jordan. By contrast 'golf' is least likely to be seen in a dangerous URL, along with state names, scenery and realty.

15 of 84 comments (clear)

  1. Clearly the solution is to ban basketball. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    'nuff said.

    1. Re:Clearly the solution is to ban basketball. by Holi · · Score: 2

      I could back that

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    2. Re:Clearly the solution is to ban basketball. by Anamelech · · Score: 2

      It's about time. I need those baskets back.

  2. just pandering to their target derpagraphic by Revek · · Score: 2

    Seriously, it seems they know how to entice the befuddled masses in to clicking on their garbage.

    1. Re:just pandering to their target derpagraphic by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously, it seems they know how to entice the befuddled masses in to clicking on their garbage.

      Most of the time when I've found a malicious website, it's been involved with searching for household items.

      Recently I caught some on a site regarding garage door openers.

      Then a few days ago when I was online looking for kitchen cabinet knobs.

      Not the sort of knob job people think about normally providing malware.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  3. Diminishing Returns by Thornburg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This kind of research is almost self-defeating.

    When you put out there a list of words that help flag a domain as "bad", you're just signaling to the malware makers to avoid those words.

    Then you can make a new list of words. And then they'll avoid those words.

    Eventually, the malware domains will be essentially indistinguishable from the real domains.

    That's lose-lose for everyone.

    Unfortunately, keeping the list secret does no good either. If it's truly secret, then no one can use it to fight malware. If it's only "secret" as in "not widely published", then the malware makers will still find it and use it.

    There is no right choice.

    1. Re:Diminishing Returns by ledow · · Score: 2

      Tip: Do not base any security or malware decision on what keywords are contained on a site / URL, what signatures exist (or don't) in a file or anything along similar lines.

      It pissed me off when people say "You can tell if you have virus X because it create file Y or registry entry Z". Yes, and it takes a microsecond to produce an identical virus that DOESN'T.

      Don't base your decision to visit a website on the keywords or URL. Base it on knowing that your browser will not ever execute any code from there without asking first, will not give out your personal information, and won't let you go to a previously unvisited site without warning you massively about entering your passwords etc. And certainly won't "just go" there by you viewing an email with that URL on it somewhere.

      Security by "good boy / naughty boy" lists is not security.

    2. Re:Diminishing Returns by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

      I'm totally onboard with this. We should start a KickStarter campaign to fund a team of heavily-armed anti-malware commandos. I would donate to that.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  4. Interesting, but doubt it's very effective by dskoll · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The paper is interesting, but I doubt it's very effective. An awful lot of the malicious URLs we seen in our filters are legitimate web sites that have been compromised and had malicious content inserted. We have thousands of malicious URLs containing "wp-content", just to give you an idea...

  5. Re:Porn not included on the list! Yes!!! by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Funny

    You know, if you weren't waiting to post these stupid comments on Slashdot, you'd have more time to fap.

  6. Re:Porn not included on the list! Yes!!! by disposable60 · · Score: 2

    Unless that's the thing that gets him/her going.

    --
    You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
  7. Did the include the following? by wbr1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    sourceforge.net
    cnet.com and download.com
    softpedia.com

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
  8. Re:LOL ... golf ... by freeze128 · · Score: 2

    What really SHOULD be evil is Gorf! Those Gorfians want to kill us all!

  9. Re:Porn not included on the list! Yes!!! by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

    So you only enjoy one of your two penises? That's only half the fun!

  10. Re:goat by gweihir · · Score: 2

    www.goat-simulator.com

    Unless you consider motivating people to wasting time to be malicious....

    Note: google(url:goat) gives you many more of these insidious "goat" pages, including one that seems to be "non-vet" medical emergency services for goats.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.