Entanglement: cybercrime connections of a public forum population
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many activities related to cybercrime operations do not require much secrecy, such as developing websites or translating texts. This research provides indications that many users of a popular public internet marketing forum have connections to cybercrime. It does so by investigating the involvement in cybercrime of a population of users interested in internet marketing, both at a micro and macro scale. The research starts with a case study of three users confirmed to be involved in cybercrime and their use of the public forum. It provides a first glimpse that some business with cybercrime connections is being conducted in the clear. The study then pans out to investigate the forum population's ties with cybercrime by finding crossover users, that is, users from the public forum who also comment on cybercrime forums. The cybercrime forums on which they discuss are analyzed and the crossover users’ strength of participation is reported. Also, to assess if they represent a sub-group of the forum population, their posting behavior on the public forum is compared with that of non-crossover users. This blend of analyses shows that (i) a minimum of 7.2% of the public forum population are crossover users that have ties with cybercrime forums; (ii) their participation in cybercrime forums is limited; and (iii) their posting behavior is relatively indistinguishable from that of non-crossover users. This is the first study to formally quantify how users of an internet marketing public forum, a space for informal exchanges, have ties to cybercrime activities. We conclude that crossover users are a substantial part of the population in the public forum, and even though they have thus far been overlooked, their aggregate effect in the ecosystem must be considered. This study opens new research questions on cybercrime participation that should consider online spaces beyond their cybercrime branding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it