From Tweets to Threats: A Survey of Cybersecurity Threat Detection Challenges, AI-Based Solutions and Potential Opportunities in X
Source abstract
Abstract
The pervasive use of social media platforms, such as X (formerly Twitter), has become a part of our daily lives, simultaneously increasing the threat of cyber attacks. To address this risk, numerous studies have explored methods to detect and predict cyber attacks by analyzing X data. This study specifically examines the application of AI techniques for predicting potential cyber threats on X. DeepNN consistently outperforms competing methods in terms of overall and average figure of merit. While character-level feature extraction methods are abundant, we contend that a semantic focus is more beneficial for this stage of the process. The findings indicate that current studies often lack comprehensive evaluations of critical aspects such as prediction scope, types of cybersecurity threats, feature extraction techniques, algorithm complexity, information summarization levels, scalability over time, and performance measurements. This review primarily focuses on identifying AI methods used to detect cyber threats on X and investigates existing gaps and trends in this area. Notably, over the past few years, limited review articles have been published on detecting cyber threats on X, especially those concentrating on recent journal articles rather than conference papers.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Network Security and Intrusion Detection · Advanced Malware Detection Techniques · Information and Cyber Security
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Business Intelligence Department, School of Business, Al-Zaytoonah University of Jordan, Amman 11733, Jordan
School of Business, University of Southern Queensland (UniSQ), Springfield, QLD 4300, Australia
School of Computing, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai 603203, India
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. Cybersecurity challenges in the age of AI: Theoretical approaches and practical solutions10.51594/csitrj.v5i3.930 ↗
2. Statista (2023, November 10). Worldwide Cybersecurity Spending 2017–2028, Statista. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/991304/worldwide-cybersecurity-spending/.
3. New survey reveals $2 trillion market opportunity for cybersecurity technology and service providers
4. Kaur, G., Bonde, U., Pise, K.L., Yewale, S., Agrawal, P., Shobhane, P., Maheshwari, S., Pinjarkar, L., and Gangarde, R. (2024). Social Media in the Digital Age: A Comprehensive Review of Impacts, Challenges and Cybercrime. Eng. Proc., 62.10.3390/engproc2024062006 ↗
5. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x ↗
6. The threats of social networking: Old wine in new bottles?10.1016/j.istr.2011.09.008 ↗
7. Zigomitros, A., Papageorgiou, A., and Patsakis, C. (2012, January 25–27). Social network content management through watermarking. Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 11th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications, Liverpool, UK.10.1109/TrustCom.2012.264 ↗
8. Stokes, K., and Carlsson, N. (2013, January 10–12). A peer-to-peer agent community for digital oblivion in online social networks. Proceedings of the 2013 Eleventh Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust, Tarragona, Spain.10.1109/PST.2013.6596043 ↗
9. Twitter spammer detection using data stream clustering10.1016/j.ins.2013.11.016 ↗
10. Novel authentication procedures for preventing unauthorized access in social networks10.1007/s12083-016-0426-7 ↗
11. Ghazinour, K., Matwin, S., and Sokolova, M. (2016). YOURPRIVACYPROTECTOR, A recommender system for privacy settings in social networks. arXiv.
12. A survey on technical threat intelligence in the age of sophisticated cyber attacks10.1016/j.cose.2017.09.001 ↗
13. De Souza, G.A., and Da Costa-Abreu, M. (2020, January 19–24). Automatic offensive language detection from Twitter data using machine learning and feature selection of metadata. Proceedings of the 2020 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), Glasgow, UK.10.1109/IJCNN48605.2020.9207652 ↗
14. Fang, Y., Gao, J., Liu, Z., and Huang, C. (2020). Detecting Cyber Threat Event from Twitter Using IDCNN and BiLSTM. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10175922 ↗
15. Cyber Security Threats and Vulnerabilities: A Systematic Mapping Study10.1007/s13369-019-04319-2 ↗
16. Dionísio, N., Alves, F., Ferreira, P.M., and Bessani, A. (2020, January 19–24). Towards end-to-end cyberthreat detection from Twitter using multi-task learning. Proceedings of the 2020 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), Glasgow, UK.10.1109/IJCNN48605.2020.9207159 ↗
17. Cyber Threat Intelligence: A Product Without a Process?10.1080/08850607.2020.1780062 ↗
18. Social network security: Issues, challenges, threats, and solutions10.1016/j.ins.2017.08.063 ↗
19. “All the better to see you with, my dear”: Facial recognition and privacy in online social networks10.1109/MSP.2013.22 ↗
20. Cooped: Co-owned personal data management10.1016/j.cose.2014.06.003 ↗
21. Viejo, A., Castella-Roca, J., and Rufián, G. (2013, January 28–29). Preserving the user’s privacy in social networking sites. Proceedings of the International Conference on Trust, Privacy and Security in Digital Business, Prague, Czech Republic.10.1007/978-3-642-40343-9_6 ↗
22. Georeferencing Flickr resources based on textual meta-data10.1016/j.ins.2013.02.045 ↗
23. Warningbird: A near real-time detection system for suspicious urls in twitter stream10.1109/TDSC.2013.3 ↗
24. A generic statistical approach for spam detection in online social networks10.1016/j.comcom.2013.04.004 ↗
25. A survey on cloud computing security: Issues, threats, and solutions10.1016/j.jnca.2016.09.002 ↗
26. Privacy policies for shared content in social network sites10.1007/s00778-010-0193-7 ↗
27. Video streaming over P2P networks: Challenges and opportunities10.1016/j.image.2012.02.004 ↗
28. Social media and steganography: Use, risks and current status10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3125128 ↗
29. Alsodi, O., Zhou, X., Gururajan, R., and Shrestha, A. (2021, January 29–31). A Survey on Detection of cybersecurity threats on Twitter using deep learning. Proceedings of the 2021 8th International Conference on Behavioral and Social Computing (BESC), Doha, Qatar.10.1109/BESC53957.2021.9635406 ↗
30. Social media security and trustworthiness: Overview and new direction10.1016/j.future.2016.10.007 ↗
31. A three-way decision making approach to malware analysis using probabilistic rough sets10.1016/j.ins.2016.09.037 ↗
32. Faghani, M.R., and Saidi, H. (2009, January 13–14). Malware propagation in online social networks. Proceedings of the 2009 4th International Conference on Malicious and Unwanted Software (MALWARE), Montreal, QC, Canada.10.1109/MALWARE.2009.5403023 ↗
33. Towards a semi-automatic classifier of malware through tweets for early warning threat detection10.36253/jlis.it-591 ↗
34. PSD: Practical Sybil detection schemes using stickiness and persistence in online recommender systems10.1016/j.ins.2014.05.016 ↗
35. Faghani, M.R., and Nguyen, U.T. (2014, January 13–15). A study of clickjacking worm propagation in online social networks. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 15th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IEEE IRI 2014), Redwood City, CA, USA.10.1109/IRI.2014.7051873 ↗
36. Advanced social engineering attacks
37. Shah, A., Varshney, S., and Mehrotra, M. (2024). Threats on online social network platforms: Classification, detection, and prevention techniques. Multimed. Tools Appl., 1–33.10.1007/s11042-024-19724-5 ↗
38. Social and psychological effects of the internet use10.5455/aim.2016.24.66-69 ↗
39. Cyberbullying and the law: A review of psychological and legal challenges10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.012 ↗
40. Cyberstalking in a large sample of social network users: Prevalence, characteristics, and impact upon victims10.1089/cyber.2012.0231 ↗
41. Munk, T. (2022). The Rise of Politically Motivated Cyber Attacks: Actors, Attacks and Cybersecurity, Routledge.10.4324/9781003126676 ↗
42. Who spies on whom? Unravelling the puzzle of state-sponsored cyber economic espionage10.1177/00223433231214417 ↗
43. Skills expectations in cybersecurity: Semantic network analysis of job advertisements
44. Dawson, M.E. (2021). Cyber Warfare: Threats and Opportunities, Universidade Fernando Pessoa. Postdoctoral report.
45. Gadekar, C., and Rakshit, P.P. (2020, January 21–23). Study to Perform Opinion Mining on Motivation Factors Generating Cyber Crime by Twitter Analytics. Proceedings of the International Conference on Innovative Computing & Communications (ICICC), New Delhi, India.10.2139/ssrn.3576430 ↗
46. Social Opportunity Structures in Hacktivism: Exploring Online and Offline Social Ties and the Role of Offender Convergence Settings in Hacktivist Networks
47. Manakitsa, N., Maraslidis, G.S., Moysis, L., and Fragulis, G.F. (2024). A review of machine learning and deep learning for object detection, semantic segmentation, and human action recognition in machine and robotic vision. Technologies, 12.10.3390/technologies12020015 ↗
48. Lughbi, H., Mars, M., and Almotairi, K. (2024). A Novel NLP-Driven Dashboard for Interactive CyberAttacks Tweet Classification and Visualization. Information, 15.10.3390/info15030137 ↗
49. A systematic review of literature on credit card cyber fraud detection using machine and deep learning10.7717/peerj-cs.1278 ↗
50. Machine learning techniques for anomaly detection: An overview
51. Study on artificial intelligence: The state of the art and future prospects
52. Deep learning10.1038/nature14539 ↗
53. Machine learning overview
54. Supervised machine learning: A review of classification techniques
55. A survey of deep learning: Platforms, applications and emerging research trends10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2830661 ↗
56. The rise of social bots10.1145/2818717 ↗
57. Varol, O., Ferrara, E., Davis, C., Menczer, F., and Flammini, A. (2017, January 15–18). Online human-bot interactions: Detection, estimation, and characterization. Proceedings of the Eleventh International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Montreal, QC, Canada.10.1609/icwsm.v11i1.14871 ↗
58. Lee, K., Eoff, B., and Caverlee, J. (2011, January 17–21). Seven months with the devils: A long-term study of content polluters on twitter. Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Barcelona, Spain.
59. Kantepe, M., and Ganiz, M.C. (2017, January 5–8). Preprocessing framework for Twitter bot detection. Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Computer Science and Engineering (UBMK), Antalya, Turkey.10.1109/UBMK.2017.8093483 ↗
60. The DARPA Twitter bot challenge10.1109/MC.2016.183 ↗
61. David, I., Siordia, O.S., and Moctezuma, D. (2016, January 9–11). Features combination for the detection of malicious Twitter accounts. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Autumn Meeting on Power, Electronics and Computing (ROPEC), Ixtapa, Mexico.10.1109/ROPEC.2016.7830626 ↗
62. Khaled, S., El-Tazi, N., and Mokhtar, H.M. (2018, January 10–13). Detecting fake accounts on social media. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), Seattle, WA, USA.10.1109/BigData.2018.8621913 ↗
63. Empirical evaluation and new design for fighting evolving twitter spammers10.1109/TIFS.2013.2267732 ↗
64. Velayutham, T., and Tiwari, P.K. (2017, January 15–16). Bot identification: Helping analysts for right data in twitter. Proceedings of the 2017 3rd International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication & Automation (ICACCA) (Fall), Dehradun, India.10.1109/ICACCAF.2017.8344722 ↗
65. Amleshwaram, A.A., Reddy, N., Yadav, S., Gu, G., and Yang, C. (2013, January 7–10). Cats: Characterizing automation of twitter spammers. Proceedings of the 2013 Fifth International Conference on Communication Systems and Networks (COMSNETS), Bangalore, India.10.1109/COMSNETS.2013.6465541 ↗
66. Combating the evasion mechanisms of social bots10.1016/j.cose.2016.01.007 ↗
67. Teljstedt, C., Rosell, M., and Johansson, F. (2015, January 21–22). A semi-automatic approach for labeling large amounts of automated and non-automated social media user accounts. Proceedings of the 2015 Second European Network Intelligence Conference, Karlskrona, Sweden.10.1109/ENIC.2015.31 ↗
68. Gilani, Z., Kochmar, E., and Crowcroft, J. (August, January 31). Classification of twitter accounts into automated agents and human users. Proceedings of the ASONAM ‘17: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining 2017, Sydney, Australia.10.1145/3110025.3110091 ↗
69. Daouadi, K.E., Rebaï, R.Z., and Amous, I. (2019, January 24–27). Bot detection on online social networks using deep forest. Proceedings of the Artificial Intelligence Methods in Intelligent Algorithms: Proceedings of 8th Computer Science Online Conference 2019, Zlin, Czech Republic.10.1007/978-3-030-19810-7_30 ↗
70. Yang, W., Dong, G., Wang, W., Shen, G., Gong, L., Yu, M., Lv, J., and Hu, Y. (2014, January 16–19). Detecting bots in follower markets. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference, BIC-TA 2014, Wuhan, China.
71. Chu, Z., Gianvecchio, S., Wang, H., and Jajodia, S. (2010, January 6–10). Who is tweeting on Twitter: Human, bot, or cyborg?. Proceedings of the ACSAC ‘10: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, Austin, TX, USA.10.1145/1920261.1920265 ↗
72. Detecting automation of twitter accounts: Are you a human, bot, or cyborg?10.1109/TDSC.2012.75 ↗
73. Gurajala, S., White, J.S., Hudson, B., and Matthews, J.N. (2015, January 27–29). Fake Twitter accounts: Profile characteristics obtained using an activity-based pattern detection approach. Proceedings of the SMSociety ‘15: Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Social Media & Society, Toronto, ON, Canada.10.1145/2789187.2789206 ↗
74. Caruccio, L., Desiato, D., and Polese, G. (2018, January 10–13). Fake account identification in social networks. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), Seattle, WA, USA.10.1109/BigData.2018.8622011 ↗
75. Distributed and scalable Sybil identification based on nearest neighbour approximation using big data analysis techniques10.1007/s10586-018-2314-9 ↗
76. Cai, C., Li, L., and Zeng, D. (2017, January 6–10). Detecting social bots by jointly modeling deep behavior and content information. Proceedings of the CIKM ‘17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Singapore.10.1145/3132847.3133050 ↗
77. Deep neural networks for bot detection10.1016/j.ins.2018.08.019 ↗
78. Genomic variation in 3010 diverse accessions of Asian cultivated rice10.1038/s41586-018-0063-9 ↗
79. Ping, H., and Qin, S. (2018, January 8–11). A social bots detection model based on deep learning algorithm. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 18th International Conference on Communication Technology (ICCT), Chongqing, China.10.1109/ICCT.2018.8600029 ↗
80. Morstatter, F., Wu, L., Nazer, T.H., Carley, K.M., and Liu, H. (2016, January 18–21). A new approach to bot detection: Striking the balance between precision and recall. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1109/ASONAM.2016.7752287 ↗
81. Account classification in online social networks with LBCA and wavelets10.1016/j.ins.2015.10.039 ↗
82. Detection of human, legitimate bot, and malicious bot in online social networks based on wavelets10.1145/3183506 ↗
83. Bara, I.-A., Fung, C.J., and Dinh, T. (2015, January 11–15). Enhancing Twitter spam accounts discovery using cross-account pattern mining. Proceedings of the 2015 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM), Ottawa, ON, Canada.10.1109/INM.2015.7140327 ↗
84. Gupta, A., Budania, H., Singh, P., and Singh, P.K. (2017, January 5–7). Facebook based choice filtering. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 7th International Advance Computing Conference (IACC), Hyderabad, India.10.1109/IACC.2017.0179 ↗
85. Twitterati identification system10.1016/j.procs.2015.03.076 ↗
86. Dickerson, J.P., Kagan, V., and Subrahmanian, V. (2014, January 17–20). Using sentiment to detect bots on twitter: Are humans more opinionated than bots?. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM 2014), Beijing, China.10.1109/ASONAM.2014.6921650 ↗
87. Contrast pattern-based classification for bot detection on twitter10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2904220 ↗
88. Andriotis, P., and Takasu, A. (2018, January 11–13). Emotional bots: Content-based spammer detection on social media. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Workshop on Information Forensics and Security (WIFS), Hong Kong, China.10.1109/WIFS.2018.8630760 ↗
89. Its all in a name: Detecting and labeling bots by their name10.1007/s10588-018-09290-1 ↗
90. Zhang, C., Zhang, G., and Sun, S. (2009, January 14–17). A mixed unsupervised clustering-based intrusion detection model. Proceedings of the 2009 Third International Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computing, Guilin, China.10.1109/WGEC.2009.72 ↗
91. Debot: Twitter Bot Detection via Warped Correlation
92. DNA-inspired online behavioral modeling and its application to spambot detection10.1109/MIS.2016.29 ↗
93. Social fingerprinting: Detection of spambot groups through DNA-inspired behavioral modeling
94. Minnich, A., Chavoshi, N., Koutra, D., and Mueen, A. (August, January 31). BotWalk: Efficient adaptive exploration of Twitter bot networks. Proceedings of the ASONAM ‘17: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining 2017, Sydney, Australia.10.1145/3110025.3110163 ↗
95. Chew, P.A. (2018, January 10–13). Searching for unknown unknowns: Unsupervised bot detection to defeat an adaptive adversary. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference, SBP-BRiMS 2018, Washington, DC, USA.
96. Chen, Z., Tanash, R.S., Stoll, R., and Subramanian, D. (2017, January 13–15). Hunting malicious bots on twitter: An unsupervised approach. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference, SocInfo 2017, Oxford, UK.
97. The NORAD lncRNA assembles a topoisomerase complex critical for genome stability10.1038/s41586-018-0453-z ↗
98. Abu-El-Rub, N., and Mueen, A. (2019, January 13–17). Botcamp: Bot-driven interactions in social campaigns. Proceedings of the WWW ‘19: The World Wide Web Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/3308558.3313420 ↗
99. Introduction to semi-supervised learning
100. Semi-supervised learning (Chapelle, O. et al., eds.; 2006) [book reviews]10.1109/TNN.2009.2015974 ↗