Online criminal forums, both on the public internet and on the “dark web” of Tor .onion sites, are a rich resource for threat intelligence researchers. The Sophos Counter Threat Unit (CTU) have a team of darkweb researchers collecting intelligence and interacting with darkweb forums, but combing through these posts is a time-consuming and resource-intensive task, and it’s always possible that things are missed.
As we strive to make better use of AI and data analysis, Sophos AI researcher Francois Labreche, working with Estelle Ruellan of Flare and the Université de Montréal and Masarah Paquet-Clouston of the Université de Montréal, set out to see if they could approach the problem of identifying key actors on the dark web in a more automated way. Their work, originally presented at the 2024 APWG Symposium on Electronic Crime Research, has recently been published as a paper.
The approach
The research team combined a modification of a framework developed by criminologists Martin Bouchard and Holly Nguyen to separate professional criminals from amateurs in an analysis of the criminal cannabis industry with social-network analysis. With this, they were able to connect accounts posting in forums to exploits of recent Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs), either based upon the naming of the CVE or by matching the post to the CVEs’ corresponding Common Attack Pattern Enumerations and Classifications (CAPECs) defined by MITRE.
Using the Flare threat research search engine, they gathered 11,558 posts by 4,441 individuals from between January 2015 and July 2023 on 124 different e-crime forums. The posts mentioned 6,232 different CVEs. The researchers used the data to create a bimodal social network that connected CAPECs to individual actors based on the contents of the actors’ posts. In this initial stage, they focused the dataset down to eliminate, for instance, CVEs that have no assigned CAPECs, and overly general attack methods that many threat actors use (and the posters who only discussed those general-purpose CVEs). Filtering such as this ultimately whittled the dataset down to 2,321 actors and 263 CAPECs.
The research team then used the Leiden community detection algorithm to cluster the actors into communities (“Communities of Interest”) with a shared interest in particular attack patterns. At this stage, eight communities stood out as relatively distinct. On average, individual actors were connected to 13 different CAPECs, while CAPECs were linked with 118 actors.