Unveiling the Threat of Fraud Gangs to Graph Neural Networks: Multi-Target Graph Injection Attacks Against GNN-Based Fraud Detectors
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
Graph neural networks (GNNs) have emerged as an effective tool for fraud detection, identifying fraudulent users, and uncovering malicious behaviors. However, attacks against GNN-based fraud detectors and their risks have rarely been studied, thereby leaving potential threats unaddressed. Recent findings suggest that frauds are increasingly organized as gangs or groups. In this work, we design attack scenarios where fraud gangs aim to make their fraud nodes misclassified as benign by camouflaging their illicit activities in collusion. Based on these scenarios, we study adversarial attacks against GNN-based fraud detectors by simulating attacks of fraud gangs in three real-world fraud cases: spam reviews, fake news, and medical insurance frauds. We define these attacks as multi-target graph injection attacks and propose MonTi, a transformer-based Multi-target one-Time graph injection attack model. MonTi simultaneously generates attributes and edges of all attack nodes with a transformer encoder, capturing interdependencies between attributes and edges more effectively than most existing graph injection attack methods that generate these elements sequentially. Additionally, MonTi adaptively allocates the degree budget for each attack node to explore diverse injection structures involving target, candidate, and attack nodes, unlike existing methods that fix the degree budget across all attack nodes. Experiments show that MonTi outperforms the state-of-the-art graph injection attack methods on five real-world graphs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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