Socioscope: I know who you are, a robo, human caller or service number

Abstract Telephony technologies (mobile, VoIP, and fixed) have potentially improved the way we communicate in our daily life and have been widely adopted for business and personal communications. At the same time, scammers, criminals, and fraudsters have also find the telephony network an attractive and affordable medium to target end-users with the advertisement, marketing of legal and illegal products, and bombard them with the huge volume of unwanted calls. These calls would not only trick call recipients into disclosing their private information such as credit card numbers, PIN code which can be used for financial fraud but also causes a lot of displeasure because of continuous ringing. The fraudsters, political campaigners can also use telephony systems to spread malicious information (hate political or religious messages) in real-time through audio or text messages, which have serious political and social consequences if malicious callers are not mitigated in a quick time. In this context, the identification of malicious callers would not only minimize telephony fraud but would also bring peace to the lives of individuals. One way to classifies users as a spammer or legitimate is to get feedback from the call recipients about their recent interactions with the caller, but these systems not only bring inconvenience to callees but also require changes in the system design. The call detail records extensively log the activities of users and can be used to categorize them as the spammer and non-spammer. In this paper, we utilize the information from the call detailed records and proposed a spam detection framework for the telephone network that identifies malicious callers by utilizing the social behavioral features of users within the network. To this extent, we first model the behavior of the users as the directed social graph and then analyze different features of the social graph i.e. the Relationship Network and Call patterns of users towards their peers. We then used these features along with the decision tree to classify callers into three classes i.e. human, spammer and call center. We analyzed the call record data-set consisting of more than 2 million users. We have conducted a detailed evaluation of our framework which demonstrates its effectiveness by achieving acceptable detection accuracy and extremely low false-positive rate. The performance results show that the spammers and call center numbers not only have a large number of non-repetitive calls but also have a large number of short duration calls. Similarly, on the other hand, the legitimate callers have a good number of repetitive calls and most of them interacted for a relatively long duration.

[1]  Khaled Salah,et al.  Clustering VoIP caller for SPIT identification , 2016, Secur. Commun. Networks.

[2]  Neeraj Kumar,et al.  Decision Tree and SVM-Based Data Analytics for Theft Detection in Smart Grid , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[3]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines , 2011, TIST.

[4]  Chih-Hung Wu,et al.  Behavior-based spam detection using a hybrid method of rule-based techniques and neural networks , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[5]  Feng Hao,et al.  Authentic Caller: Self-Enforcing Authentication in a Next-Generation Network , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[6]  Hüseyin Uzunalioglu,et al.  Prediction of subscriber churn using social network analysis , 2013, Bell Labs Technical Journal.

[7]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  Mobile call graphs: beyond power-law and lognormal distributions , 2008, KDD.

[8]  Feng Hao,et al.  privy: Privacy Preserving Collaboration Across Multiple Service Providers to Combat Telecom Spams , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing.

[9]  Roberta Presta,et al.  An anomaly-based approach to the analysis of the social behavior of VoIP users , 2013, Comput. Networks.

[10]  Ram Dantu,et al.  Detecting Spam in VoIP Networks , 2005, SRUTI.

[11]  Bart Baesens,et al.  Social network analysis for customer churn prediction , 2014, Appl. Soft Comput..

[12]  Virgílio A. F. Almeida,et al.  Understanding video interactions in youtube , 2008, ACM Multimedia.

[13]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  Suspicious Behavior Detection: Current Trends and Future Directions , 2016, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[14]  Saverio Niccolini,et al.  Analyzing Telemarketer Behavior in Massive Telecom Data Records , 2011 .

[15]  Muhammad Ajmal Azad,et al.  Early identification of spammers through identity linking, social network and call features , 2017, J. Comput. Sci..

[16]  Kun-Qing Xie,et al.  An experimental study of large-scale mobile social network , 2009, WWW '09.

[17]  Muhammad Ajmal Azad,et al.  Caller-REP: Detecting unwanted calls with caller social strength , 2013, Comput. Secur..

[18]  Chao Yang,et al.  Empirical Evaluation and New Design for Fighting Evolving Twitter Spammers , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[19]  Danah Boyd,et al.  Detecting Spam in a Twitter Network , 2009, First Monday.

[20]  Mamoun Alazab,et al.  Profiling and classifying the behavior of malicious codes , 2015, J. Syst. Softw..

[21]  Roberto Perdisci,et al.  Towards Measuring the Role of Phone Numbers in Twitter-Advertised Spam , 2018, AsiaCCS.

[22]  Muhammad Ajmal Azad,et al.  Rapid detection of spammers through collaborative information sharing across multiple service providers , 2019, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[23]  M. E. J. Newman,et al.  Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law , 2005 .

[24]  Jun Hu,et al.  Detecting and characterizing social spam campaigns , 2010, IMC '10.

[25]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  Profiling Online Social Behaviors for Compromised Account Detection , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[26]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  Who is tweeting on Twitter: human, bot, or cyborg? , 2010, ACSAC '10.