journal article·2024Open access

Phishing Attacks Detection Using Ensemble Machine Learning Algorithms

Nisreen Innab, Ahmed Abdelgader Fadol Osman, Mohammed Awad Mohammed Ataelfadiel, Marwan Abu-Zanona, Bassam Mohammad Elzaghmouri, Farah H. Zawaideh, Mouiad Fadeil Alawneh

Computers, Materials & Continua· Volume 80· Issue 1

Abstract

Phishing, an Internet fraud where individuals are deceived into revealing critical personal and account information, poses a significant risk to both consumers and web-based institutions. Data indicates a persistent rise in phishing attacks. Moreover, these fraudulent schemes are progressively becoming more intricate, thereby rendering them more challenging to identify. Hence, it is imperative to utilize sophisticated algorithms to address this issue. Machine learning is a highly effective approach for identifying and uncovering these harmful behaviors. Machine learning (ML) approaches can identify common characteristics in most phishing assaults. In this paper, we propose an ensemble approach and compare it with six machine learning techniques to determine the type of website and whether it is normal or not based on two phishing datasets. After that, we used the normalization technique on the dataset to transform the range of all the features into the same range. The findings of this paper for all algorithms are as follows in the first dataset based on accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score, respectively: Decision Tree (DT) (0.964, 0.961, 0.976, 0.968), Random Forest (RF) (0.970, 0.964, 0.984, 0.974), Gradient Boosting (GB) (0.960, 0.959, 0.971, 0.965), XGBoost (XGB) (0.973, 0.976, 0.976, 0.976), AdaBoost (0.934, 0.934, 0.950, 0.942), Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) (0.970, 0.971, 0.976, 0.974) and Voting (0.978, 0.975, 0.987, 0.981). So, the Voting classifier gave the best results. While in the second dataset, all the algorithms gave the same results in four evaluation metrics, which indicates that each of them can effectively accomplish the prediction process. Also, this approach outperformed the previous work in detecting phishing websites with high accuracy, a lower false negative rate, a shorter prediction time, and a lower false positive rate.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Spam and Phishing Detection · Network Security and Intrusion Detection · Advanced Malware Detection Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (33)

Show source-provided references
1. An overview of Internet of Things10.12928/telkomnika.v18i5.15911 ↗
2. An overview of Internet of Things (IoT): Architectural aspects, challenges, and protocols10.1002/cpe.4946 ↗
3. A comprehensive review study of cyber-attacks and cyber security; Emerging trends and recent developments10.1016/j.egyr.2021.08.126 ↗
4. Cyber terrorism cases and stock market valuation effects10.1108/ICS-09-2022-0147 ↗
5. Deep cybersecurity: A comprehensive overview from neural network and deep learning perspective10.1007/s42979-021-00535-6 ↗
6. Cybersecurity for industrial control systems: A survey10.1016/j.cose.2019.101677 ↗
7. Simulation for cybersecurity: State of the art and future directions10.1093/cybsec/tyab005 ↗
8. Machine learning in cybersecurity: A comprehensive survey
9. Performance comparison and current challenges of using machine learning techniques in cybersecurity10.3390/en13102509 ↗
10. Machine learning for cybersecurity in smart grids: A comprehensive review-based study on methods, solutions, and prospects10.1016/j.ijcip.2022.100547 ↗
11. A systematic review of defensive and offensive cybersecurity with machine learning10.3390/app10175811 ↗
12. URL phishing detection using machine learning techniques based on URLs lexical analysis
13. A comparison of machine learning techniques for phishing detection
14. Analyzing and predicting spear-phishing using machine learning methods10.35925/j.multi.2020.4.30 ↗
15. Feature selection for email phishing detection using machine learning
16. Machine learning methods for phishing attacks
17. V. Shahrivari, M. M. Darabi, and M. Izadi, “Phishing detection using machine learning techniques,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2009.11116, 2020.
18. Website phishing detection using machine learning techniques10.18576/jsap/130108 ↗
19. Phishing detection using random forest, SVM and neural network with backpropagation
20. Identification of phishing attack in websites using random forest-SVM hybrid model
21. DTOF-ANN: An artificial neural network phishing detection model based on decision tree and optimal features10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106505 ↗
22. Applying machine learning algorithms for detecting phishing websites: Applications of SVM, KNN, decision trees, and random forests
23. PDMLP: Phishing detection using multilayer perceptron
24. Efficient prediction of phishing websites using multilayer perceptron (MLP)
25. N. N. Naik, “Modelling enhanced phishing detection using XGBoost,” Doctoral dissertation, National College of Ireland, Dublin, 2021.
26. Machine-learning techniques for predicting phishing attacks in blockchain networks: A comparative study10.3390/a16080366 ↗
27. An improved anti-phishing model utilizing TF-IDF and AdaBoost10.1002/cpe.7287 ↗
28. F. Nthurima, A. Mutua, and W. S. Titus, “Detecting phishing emails using random forest and AdaBoost classifier model,” 2023. doi: 10.32591/coas.ojit.0602.03123n.10.32591/coas.ojit.0602.03123n ↗
29. Phishing detection using gradient boosting classifier10.1016/j.procs.2023.12.067 ↗
30. Performance evaluation in machine learning: The good, the bad, the ugly, and the way forward
31. MinMaxScaler binary PSO for feature selection
32. A weighted majority voting ensemble approach for classification
33. Ensemble learning techniques and its efficiency in machine learning: A survey