journal article·2026-01-07Open access

Phishing Website Impersonation: Comparative Analysis of Detection and Target Recognition Methods

Marcin Jarczewski, Piotr Białczak, Wojciech Mazurczyk

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 2

Abstract

With the rapid advancements in technology, there has been a noticeable increase in phishing attacks that exploit users by impersonating trusted entities. The primary attack vectors include fraudulent websites and carefully crafted emails. Early detection of such threats enables the more effective blocking of malicious sites and timely user warnings. One of the key elements in phishing detection is identifying the entity being impersonated. In this article, we conduct a comparative analysis of methods for detecting phishing websites that rely on website screenshots and recognizing their impersonation targets. The two main research objectives include binary phishing detection to identify malicious intent and multiclass classification of impersonated targets to enable specific incident response and brand protection. Three approaches are compared: two state-of-the-art methods, Phishpedia and VisualPhishNet, and a third, proposed in this work, which uses perceptual hash similarity as a baseline. To ensure consistent evaluation conditions, a dedicated framework was developed for the study and shared with the community via GitHub. The obtained results indicate that Phishpedia and the Baseline method were the most effective in terms of detection performance, outperforming VisualPhishNet. Specifically, the proposed Baseline method achieved an F1 score of 0.95 on the Phishpedia dataset for binary classification, while Phishpedia maintained a high Identification Rate (>0.9) across all tested datasets. In contrast, VisualPhishNet struggled with dataset variability, achieving an F1 score of only 0.17 on the same benchmark. Moreover, as our proposed Baseline method demonstrated superior stability and binary classification performance, it should be considered as a robust candidate for preliminary filtering in hybrid systems.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Spam and Phishing Detection · Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies · Authorship Attribution and Profiling

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

Affiliations

Institute of Computer Science, Warsaw University of Technology, Nowowiejska 15/19, 00-665 Warsaw, Poland

CERT Polska/NASK—National Research Institute, Kolska 12, 01-045 Warsaw, Poland

References (30)

Show source-provided references
1. Haan, K. (2025, December 05). Top Website Statistics Today. Available online: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/software/website-statistics/.
2. ENISA—European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (2025). ENISA Threat Landscape 2025, ENISA. Available online: https://www.enisa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2025-12/ENISA%20Threat%20Landscape%202025_v1.1.pdf.
3. Anti-Phishing Working Group (APWG) (2025, November 20). Phishing Activity Trends Report. 2nd Quarter 2025. Available online: https://docs.apwg.org/reports/apwg_trends_report_q2_2025.pdf.
4. Phishing detection: A literature survey10.1109/SURV.2013.032213.00009 ↗
5. Phishing or not phishing? A survey on the detection of phishing websites10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3247135 ↗
6. A survey of phishing email filtering techniques10.1109/SURV.2013.030713.00020 ↗
7. Pereira, A.I., Mendes, A., Fernandes, F.P., Pacheco, M.F., Coelho, J.P., and Lima, J. (2024). PhishVision: A Deep Learning Based Visual Brand Impersonation Detector for Identifying Phishing Attacks. Optimization, Learning Algorithms and Applications, Proceedings of the Third International Conference, Ponta Delgada, Portugal, 27–29 September 2023, Springer.
8. Manulis, M. (2026). A Study of Effectiveness of Brand Domain Identification Features for Phishing Detection in 2025. Applied Cryptography and Network Security Workshops, Proceedings of the ACNS 2025 Satellite Workshops: AIHWS, AIoTS, QSHC, SCI, PrivCrypt, SPIQE, SiMLA, and CIMSS 2025, Munich, Germany, 23–26 June 2025, Springer.10.1007/978-3-032-01806-9 ↗
9. LogoSENSE: A companion HOG based logo detection scheme for phishing web page and E-mail brand recognition10.1016/j.cose.2020.101855 ↗
10. Ren, K., Qiang, W., Wu, Y., Zhou, Y., Zou, D., and Jin, H. (2023, January 17–21). An Empirical Study on the Effects of Obfuscation on Static Machine Learning-Based Malicious JavaScript Detectors. Proceedings of the ISSTA 2023: 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, Seattle WA USA.10.1145/3597926.3598146 ↗
11. Abdelnabi, S., Krombholz, K., and Fritz, M. (2020, January 9–13). VisualPhishNet: Zero-Day Phishing Website Detection by Visual Similarity. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), Virtual.10.1145/3372297.3417233 ↗
12. Liu, R., Lin, Y., Yang, X., Ng, S.H., Divakaran, D.M., and Dong, J.S. (2022, January 10–12). Inferring Phishing Intention via Webpage Appearance and Dynamics: A Deep Vision Based Approach. Proceedings of the 31st USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 22), Boston, MA, USA.
13. Lin, Y., Liu, R., Divakaran, D.M., Ng, J.Y., Chan, Q.Z., Lu, Y., Si, Y., Zhang, F., and Dong, J.S. (2021, January 11–13). Phishpedia: A Hybrid Deep Learning Based Approach to Visually Identify Phishing Webpages. Proceedings of the 30th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 21), Virtual.
14. Detecting Phishing Web Pages with Visual Similarity Assessment Based on Earth Mover’s Distance (EMD)10.1109/TDSC.2006.50 ↗
15. Afroz, S., and Greenstadt, R. (2011, January 18–21). PhishZoo: Detecting Phishing Websites by Looking at Them. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Semantic Computing, Palo Alto, CA, USA.10.1109/ICSC.2011.52 ↗
16. Seifert, C., Stokes, J.W., Colcernian, C., Platt, J.C., and Lu, L. (2013, January 26–31). Robust scareware image detection. Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1109/ICASSP.2013.6638192 ↗
17. Feature selection in intrusion detection systems: A new hybrid fusion of Bat algorithm and Residue Number System
18. Phishing Target Identification Based on Neural Networks Using Category Features and Images10.1155/2022/5653270 ↗
19. Bhurtel, M., Siwakoti, Y.R., and Rawat, D.B. (2022, January 2–5). Phishing Attack Detection with ML-Based Siamese Empowered ORB Logo Recognition and IP Mapper. Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2022—IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), New York, NY, USA.10.1109/INFOCOMWKSHPS54753.2022.9798203 ↗
20. van den Hout, T., Wabeke, T., Moura, G.C.M., and Hesselman, C. (2022). LogoMotive: Detecting Logos on Websites to Identify Online Scams—A TLD Case Study. Passive and Active Measurement, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-98785-5_1 ↗
21. Zeng, V., Zhou, X., Baki, S., and Verma, R.M. (2020, January 9–13). PhishBench 2.0: A Versatile and Extendable Benchmarking Framework for Phishing. Proceedings of the CCS ’20: 2020 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Virtual.10.1145/3372297.3420017 ↗
22. Towards benchmark datasets for machine learning based website phishing detection: An experimental study10.1016/j.engappai.2021.104347 ↗
23. Dalton, T., Gowda, H., Rao, G., Pargi, S., Khodabakhshi, A.H., Rombs, J., Jou, S., and Marwah, M. (2025). PhreshPhish: A Real-World, High-Quality, Large-Scale Phishing Website Dataset and Benchmark. arXiv.
24. Ji, F., Lee, K., Koo, H., You, W., Choo, E., Kim, H., and Kim, D. (2025, January 13–15). Evaluating the effectiveness and robustness of visual similarity-based phishing detection models. Proceedings of the SEC ’25: 34th USENIX Conference on Security Symposium, Seattle, WA, USA.
25. Zauner, C. (2025, December 15). Implementation and Benchmarking of Perceptual Image Hash Functions. Available online: http://phash.org/docs/pubs/thesis_zauner.pdf.
26. Ramírez, S. (2025, December 15). FastAPI. Available online: https://github.com/fastapi/fastapi.
27. Colvin, S. (2025, August 14). Pydantic. Data Validation Using Python Type Hints, Version v2.11.7. Available online: https://docs.pydantic.dev/latest/.
28. Brown, A., and Wilson, G. (2012). SQLAlchemy. The Architecture of Open Source Applications Volume II: Structure, Scale, and a Few More Fearless Hacks, Lulu.com.
29. (2025, December 15). TorchVision Maintainers and Contributors. TorchVision: PyTorch’s Computer Vision Library. Available online: https://github.com/pytorch/vision.
30. Douze, M., Guzhva, A., Deng, C., Johnson, J., Szilvasy, G., Mazaré, P.E., Lomeli, M., Hosseini, L., and Jégou, H. (2025). The Faiss Library. arXiv.10.1109/TBDATA.2025.3618474 ↗