Skip to main content

Weaponized Crowdsourcing: An Emerging Threat and Potential Countermeasures

  • Chapter
Transparency in Social Media

Part of the book series: Computational Social Sciences ((CSS))

Abstract

The crowdsourcing movement has spawned a host of successful efforts that organize large numbers of globally-distributed participants to tackle a range of tasks, including crisis mapping (e.g., Ushahidi), translation (e.g., Duolingo), and protein folding (e.g., Foldit). Alongside these specialized systems, we have seen the rise of general-purpose crowdsourcing marketplaces like Amazon Mechanical Turk and Crowdflower that aim to connect task requesters with task workers, toward creating new crowdsourcing systems that can intelligently organize large numbers of people. However, these positive opportunities have a sinister counterpart: what we dub “Weaponized Crowdsourcing”. Already we have seen the first glimmers of this ominous new trend—including large-scale “crowdturfing”, wherein masses of cheaply paid shills can be organized to spread malicious URLs in social media (Grier, Thomas, Paxson, & Zhang, 2010; Lee & Kim, 2012), form artificial grassroots campaigns (“astroturf”) (Gao et al., 2010; Lee, Caverlee, Cheng, & Sui, 2013), spread rumor and misinformation (Castillo, Mendoza, & Poblete, 2011; Gupta, Lamba, Kumaraguru, & Joshi, 2013), and manipulate search engines. A recent study finds that 90 % of tasks on many crowdsourcing platforms are for crowdturfing (Wang et al., 2012), and our initial research (Lee, Tamilarasan, & Caverlee, 2013) shows that most malicious tasks in crowdsourcing systems target either online communities (56 %) or search engines (33 %). Unfortunately, little is known about Weaponized Crowdsourcing as it manifests in existing systems, nor what are the ramifications on the design and operation of emerging socio-technical systems. Hence, this chapter shall focus on key research questions related to Weaponized Crowdsourcing as well as outline the potential of building new preventative frameworks for maintaining the information quality and integrity of online communities in the face of this rising challenge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexa (2014). Fiverr.com site info—alexa. http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/fiverr.com.

  • Castillo, C., Mendoza, M., & Poblete, B. (2011). Information credibility on twitter. In WWW.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao, H., Hu, J., Wilson, C., Li, Z., Chen, Y., & Zhao, B. Y. (2010). Detecting and characterizing social spam campaigns. In Proceedings of the 10th annual conference on Internet measurement (IMC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Grier, C., Thomas, K., Paxson, V., & Zhang, M. (2010). @spam: The underground on 140 characters or less. In CCS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A., Lamba, H., Kumaraguru, P., & Joshi, A. (2013). Faking sandy: Characterizing and identifying fake images on twitter during hurricane sandy. In WWW Companion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Analyzing the amazon mechanical turk marketplace. In XRDS, (Vol. 17, pp. 16–21).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K., Caverlee, J., Cheng, Z., & Sui, D. Z. (2013). Campaign extraction from social media. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 5, 9:1–9:28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K., Tamilarasan, P., & Caverlee, J. (2013). Crowdturfers, campaigns, and social media: Tracking and revealing crowdsourced manipulation of social media. In ICWSM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K., Webb, S., & Ge, H. (2014).The dark side of micro-task marketplaces: Characterizing fiverr and automatically detecting crowdturfing. In ICWSM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Kim, J. (2012). Warningbird: Detecting suspicious urls in twitter stream. In NDSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennebaker, J., Francis, M., & Booth, R. (2001). Linguistic inquiry and word count. Mahwah: Erlbaum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, J., Irani, L., Silberman, M. S., Zaldivar, A., & Tomlinson, B. (2010). Who are the crowdworkers?: shifting demographics in mechanical turk. In CHI Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • TradingEconomics (2011). Gni per capita; atlas method (us dollar) in bangladesh. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/bangladesh/gni-per-capita-atlas-method-us-dollar-wb-data.html.

  • Wang, G., Mohanlal, M., Wilson, C., Wang, X., Metzger, M. J., Zheng, H., et al. (2013). Social turing tests: Crowdsourcing sybil detection. In NDSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, G., Wilson, C., Zhao, X., Zhu, Y., Mohanlal, M., Zheng, H., et al. (2012). Serf and turf: crowdturfing for fun and profit. In WWW.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witten, I. H., & Frank, E. (2005). Data mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques, 2nd ed. New York: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James Caverlee .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Caverlee, J., Lee, K. (2015). Weaponized Crowdsourcing: An Emerging Threat and Potential Countermeasures. In: Matei, S., Russell, M., Bertino, E. (eds) Transparency in Social Media. Computational Social Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18552-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18552-1_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18551-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18552-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics