Combating SEO Poisoning And Its Facilitation Of Misinformation And Cyberattacks
Introduction
Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) is a process through which one can improve website visibility on search engine platforms like Google, Microsoft Bing, etc. There is an implicit understanding that SEO suggestions or the links that are generated on top are the more popular information sources and, hence, are deemed to be more trustworthy. This trust, however, is being misused by threat actors through a process called SEO poisoning.
SEO poisoning is a method used by threat actors to attack and obtain information about the user by using manipulative methods that position their desired link, web page, etc to appear at the top of the search engine algorithm. The end goal is to lure the user into clicking and downloading their malware, presented in the garb of legitimate marketing or even as a valid result for Google search.
An active example of attempts at SEO poisoning has been discussed in a report by the Hindustan Times on 11th November, 2024. It highlights that using certain keywords could make a user more susceptible to hacking. Hackers are now targeting people who enter specific words or specific combinations in search engines. According to the report, users who looked up and clicked on links at the top related to the search query “Are Bengal cats legal in Australia?” had details regarding their personal information posted online soon after.
SEO Poisoning - Modus Operandi Of Attack
There are certain tactics that are used by the attackers on SEO poisoning, these are:
- Keyword stuffing- This method involves overloading a webpage with irrelevant words, which helps the false website appear higher in ranking.
- Typosquatting- This method involves creating domain names or links similar to the more popular and trusted websites. A lack of scrutiny before clicking would lead the user to download malware, from what they thought was a legitimate site.
- Cloaking- This method operates by showing different content to both the search engines and the user. While the search engine sees what it assumes to be a legitimate website, the user is exposed to harmful content.
- Private Link Networks- Threat actors create a group of unrelated websites in order to increase the number of referral links, which enables them to rank higher on search engine platforms.
- Article Spinning- This method involves imitating content from other pre-existing, legitimate websites, while making a few minor changes, giving the impression to search engine crawlers of it being original content.
- Sneaky Redirect- This method redirects the users to malicious websites (without their knowledge) instead of the ones the user had intended to click.
CyberPeace Recommendations
- Employee Security Awareness Training: Security awareness training can help employees familiarise themselves with tactics of SEO poisoning, encouraging them to either spot such inconsistencies early on or even alert the security team at the earliest.
- Tool usage: Companies can use Digital Risk Monitoring tools to catch instances of typosquatting. Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) tools also help keep an eye on client history and assess user activities during security breaches to figure out the source of the affected file.
- Internal Security Measures: To refer to lists of Indicators of Compromise (IOC). IOC has URL lists that show evidence of the strange behaviour of websites, and this can be used to practice caution. Deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) to mitigate and detect malicious traffic is helpful.
Conclusion
The nature of SEO poisoning is such that it inherently promotes the spread of misinformation, and facilitates cyberattacks. Misinformation regarding the legitimacy of the links and the content they display, in order to lure users into clicking on them, puts personal information under threat. As people trust their favoured search engines, and there is a lack of awareness of such tactics in use, one must exercise caution while clicking on links that seem to be popular, despite them being hosted by trusted search engines.
References
- https://www.checkpoint.com/cyber-hub/cyber-security/what-is-cyber-attack/what-is-seo-poisoning/
- https://www.vectra.ai/topics/seo-poisoning
- https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/search-poisoning
- https://www.blackberry.com/us/en/solutions/endpoint-security/ransomware-protection/seo-poisoning
- https://www.coalitioninc.com/blog/seo-poisoning-attacks
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160791X24000186
- https://www.repindia.com/blog/secure-your-organisation-from-seo-poisoning-and-malvertising-threats/
- https://www.hindustantimes.com/technology/typing-these-6-words-on-google-could-make-you-a-target-for-hackers-101731286153415.html
Related Blogs
.webp)
Introduction
India's Competition Commission of India (CCI) on 18th November 2024 imposed a ₹213 crore penalty on Meta for abusing its dominant position in internet-based messaging through WhatsApp and online display advertising. The CCI order is passed against abuse of dominance by the Meta and relates to WhatsApp’s 2021 Privacy Policy. The CCI considers Meta a dominant player in internet-based messaging through WhatsApp and also in online display advertising. WhatsApp's 2021 privacy policy update undermined users' ability to opt out of getting their data shared with the group's social media platform Facebook. The CCI directed WhatsApp not to share user data collected on its platform with other Meta companies or products for advertising purposes for five years.
CCI Contentions
The regulator contended that for purposes other than advertising, WhatsApp's policy should include a detailed explanation of the user data shared with other Meta group companies or products specifying the purpose. The regulator also stated that sharing user data collected on WhatsApp with other Meta companies or products for purposes other than providing WhatsApp services should not be a condition for users to access WhatsApp services in India. CCI order is significant as it upholds user consent as a key principle in the functioning of social media giants, similar to the measures taken by some other markets.
Meta’s Stance
WhatsApp parent company Meta has expressed its disagreement with the Competition Commission of India's(CCI) decision to impose a Rs 213 crore penalty on them over users' privacy concerns. Meta clarified that the 2021 update did not change the privacy of people's personal messages and was offered as a choice for users at the time. It also ensured no one would have their accounts deleted or lose functionality of the WhatsApp service because of this update.
Meta clarified that the update was about introducing optional business features on WhatsApp and providing further transparency about how they collect data. The company stated that WhatsApp has been incredibly valuable to people and businesses, enabling organization's and government institutions to deliver citizen services through COVID and beyond and supporting small businesses, all of which further the Indian economy. Meta plans to find a path forward that allows them to continue providing the experiences that "people and businesses have come to expect" from them. The CCI issued cease-and-desist directions and directed Meta and WhatsApp to implement certain behavioral remedies within a defined timeline.
The competition watchdog noted that WhatsApp's 2021 policy update made it mandatory for users to accept the new terms, including data sharing with Meta, and removed the earlier option to opt-out, categorized as an "unfair condition" under the Competition Act. It was further noted that WhatsApp’s sharing of users’ business transaction information with Meta gave the group entities an unfair advantage over competing platforms.
CyberPeace Outlook
The 2021 policy update by WhatsApp mandated data sharing with Meta's other companies group, removing the opt-out option and compelling users to accept the terms to continue using the platform. This policy undermined user autonomy and was deemed as an abuse of Meta's dominant market position, violating Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the Competition Act, as noted by CCI.
The CCI’s ruling requires WhatsApp to offer all users in India, including those who had accepted the 2021 update, the ability to manage their data-sharing preferences through a clear and prominent opt-out option within the app. This decision underscores the importance of user choice, informed consent, and transparency in digital data policies.
By addressing the coercive nature of the policy, the CCI ruling establishes a significant legal precedent for safeguarding user privacy and promoting fair competition. It highlights the growing acknowledgement of privacy as a fundamental right and reinforces the accountability of tech giants to respect user autonomy and market fairness. The directive mandates that data sharing within the Meta ecosystem must be based on user consent, with the option to decline such sharing without losing access to essential services.
References
Introduction:
Apple is known for its unique innovations and designs. Apple, with the introduction of the iPhone 15 series, now will come up with the USB-C by complying with European Union(EU) regulations. The standard has been set by the European Union’s rule for all mobile devices. The new iPhone will now come up with USB-C. However there is a little caveat here, you will be able to use any USB-C cable to charge or transfer from your iPhone. European Union approved new rules to make it compulsory for tech companies to ensure a universal charging port is introduced for electronic gadgets like mobile phones, tablets, cameras, e-readers, earbuds and other devices by the end of next year.
The new iPhone will now come up with USB-C. However, Apple being Apple, will limit third-party USB-C cables. This means Apple-owned MFI-certified cable will have an optimised charging speed and a faster data transfer speed. MFI stands for 'Made for iPhone/iPad' and is a quality mark or testing program from Apple for Lightning cables and other products. The MFI-certified product ensures safety and improved performance.
European Union's regulations on common charging port:
The new iPhone will have a type-c USB port. EU rules have made it mandatory that all phones and laptops need to have one USB-C charging port. IPhone will be switching to USB-C from the lightning port. European Union's mandate for all mobile device makers to adopt this technology. EU has set a deadline for all new phones to use USB-C for wired charging by the end of 2024. These EU rules will be applicable to all devices, such as tablets, digital cameras, headphones, handheld video game consoles, etc. And will apply to devices that offer wired charging. The EU rules require that phone manufacturers adopt a common charging connection. The mobile manufacturer or relevant industry has to comply with these rules by the end of 2024. The rules are enacted with the intent to save consumers money and cut waste. EU stated that these rules will save consumers from unnecessary charger purchases and tonnes of cut waste per year. With the implementation of these rules, the phone manufacturers have to comply with it, and customers will be able to use a single charger for their different devices. It will strengthen the speed of data transfer in new iPhone models. The iPhone will also be compatible with chargers used by non-apple users, i.e. USB-C.
Indian Standards on USB-C Type Charging Ports in India
The Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) has also issued standards for USB-C-type chargers. The standards aim to provide a solution of a common charger for all different charging devices. Consumers will not need to purchase multiple chargers for their different devices, ultimately leading to a reduction in the number of chargers per consumer. This would contribute to the Government of India's goal of reducing e-waste and moving toward sustainable development.
Conclusion:
New EU rules require all mobile phone devices, including iPhones, to have a USB-C connector for their charging ports. Notably, now you can see the USB-C port on the upcoming iPhone 15. These rules will enable the customers to use a single charger for their different Apple devices, such as iPads, Macs and iPhones. Talking about the applicability of these rules, the EU common-charger rule will cover small and medium-sized portable electronics, which will include mobile phones, tablets, e-readers, mice and keyboards, digital cameras, handheld videogame consoles, portable speakers, etc. Such devices are mandated to have USB-C charging ports if they offer the wired charging option. Laptops will also be covered under these rules, but they are given more time to adopt the changes and abide by these rules. Overall, this step will help in reducing e-waste and moving toward sustainable development.
References:
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66708571
Overview:
The rapid digitization of educational institutions in India has created both opportunities and challenges. While technology has improved access to education and administrative efficiency, it has also exposed institutions to significant cyber threats. This report, published by CyberPeace, examines the types, causes, impacts, and preventive measures related to cyber risks in Indian educational institutions. It highlights global best practices, national strategies, and actionable recommendations to mitigate these threats.
Significance of the Study:
The pandemic-induced shift to online learning, combined with limited cybersecurity budgets, has made educational institutions prime targets for cyberattacks. These threats compromise sensitive student, faculty, and institutional data, leading to operational disruptions, financial losses, and reputational damage. Globally, educational institutions face similar challenges, emphasizing the need for universal and localized responses.
Threat Faced by Education Institutions:
Based on the insights from the CyberPeace’s report titled 'Exploring Cyber Threats and Digital Risks in Indian Educational Institutions', this concise blog provides a comprehensive overview of cybersecurity threats and risks faced by educational institutions, along with essential details to address these challenges.
🎣 Phishing: Phishing is a social engineering tactic where cyber criminals impersonate trusted sources to steal sensitive information, such as login credentials and financial details. It often involves deceptive emails or messages that lead to counterfeit websites, pressuring victims to provide information quickly. Variants include spear phishing, smishing, and vishing.
💰 Ransomware: Ransomware is malware that locks users out of their systems or data until a ransom is paid. It spreads through phishing emails, malvertising, and exploiting vulnerabilities, causing downtime, data leaks, and theft. Ransom demands can range from hundreds to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
🌐 Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS): DDoS attacks overwhelm servers, denying users access to websites and disrupting daily operations, which can hinder students and teachers from accessing learning resources or submitting assignments. These attacks are relatively easy to execute, especially against poorly protected networks, and can be carried out by amateur cybercriminals, including students or staff, seeking to cause disruptions for various reasons
🕵️ Cyber Espionage: Higher education institutions, particularly research-focused universities, are vulnerable to spyware, insider threats, and cyber espionage. Spyware is unauthorized software that collects sensitive information or damages devices. Insider threats arise from negligent or malicious individuals, such as staff or vendors, who misuse their access to steal intellectual property or cause data leaks..
🔒 Data Theft: Data theft is a major threat to educational institutions, which store valuable personal and research information. Cybercriminals may sell this data or use it for extortion, while stealing university research can provide unfair competitive advantages. These attacks can go undetected for long periods, as seen in the University of California, Berkeley breach, where hackers allegedly stole 160,000 medical records over several months.
🛠️ SQL Injection: SQL injection (SQLI) is an attack that uses malicious code to manipulate backend databases, granting unauthorized access to sensitive information like customer details. Successful SQLI attacks can result in data deletion, unauthorized viewing of user lists, or administrative access to the database.
🔍Eavesdropping attack: An eavesdropping breach, or sniffing, is a network attack where cybercriminals steal information from unsecured transmissions between devices. These attacks are hard to detect since they don't cause abnormal data activity. Attackers often use network monitors, like sniffers, to intercept data during transmission.
🤖 AI-Powered Attacks: AI enhances cyber attacks like identity theft, password cracking, and denial-of-service attacks, making them more powerful, efficient, and automated. It can be used to inflict harm, steal information, cause emotional distress, disrupt organizations, and even threaten national security by shutting down services or cutting power to entire regions
Insights from Project eKawach
The CyberPeace Research Wing, in collaboration with SAKEC CyberPeace Center of Excellence (CCoE) and Autobot Infosec Private Limited, conducted a study simulating educational institutions' networks to gather intelligence on cyber threats. As part of the e-Kawach project, a nationwide initiative to strengthen cybersecurity, threat intelligence sensors were deployed to monitor internet traffic and analyze real-time cyber attacks from July 2023 to April 2024, revealing critical insights into the evolving cyber threat landscape.
Cyber Attack Trends
Between July 2023 and April 2024, the e-Kawach network recorded 217,886 cyberattacks from IP addresses worldwide, with a significant portion originating from countries including the United States, China, Germany, South Korea, Brazil, Netherlands, Russia, France, Vietnam, India, Singapore, and Hong Kong. However, attributing these attacks to specific nations or actors is complex, as threat actors often use techniques like exploiting resources from other countries, or employing VPNs and proxies to obscure their true locations, making it difficult to pinpoint the real origin of the attacks.
Brute Force Attack:
The analysis uncovered an extensive use of automated tools in brute force attacks, with 8,337 unique usernames and 54,784 unique passwords identified. Among these, the most frequently targeted username was “root,” which accounted for over 200,000 attempts. Other commonly targeted usernames included: "admin", "test", "user", "oracle", "ubuntu", "guest", "ftpuser", "pi", "support"
Similarly, the study identified several weak passwords commonly targeted by attackers. “123456” was attempted over 3,500 times, followed by “password” with over 2,500 attempts. Other frequently targeted passwords included: "1234", "12345", "12345678", "admin", "123", "root", "test", "raspberry", "admin123", "123456789"
Insights from Threat Landscape Analysis
Research done by the USI - CyberPeace Centre of Excellence (CCoE) and Resecurity has uncovered several breached databases belonging to public, private, and government universities in India, highlighting significant cybersecurity threats in the education sector. The research aims to identify and mitigate cybersecurity risks without harming individuals or assigning blame, based on data available at the time, which may evolve with new information. Institutions were assigned risk ratings that descend from A to F, with most falling under a D rating, indicating numerous security vulnerabilities. Institutions rated D or F are 5.4 times more likely to experience data breaches compared to those rated A or B. Immediate action is recommended to address the identified risks.
Risk Findings :
The risk findings for the institutions are summarized through a pie chart, highlighting factors such as data breaches, dark web activity, botnet activity, and phishing/domain squatting. Data breaches and botnet activity are significantly higher compared to dark web leakages and phishing/domain squatting. The findings show 393,518 instances of data breaches, 339,442 instances of botnet activity, 7,926 instances related to the dark web and phishing & domain activity - 6711.
Key Indicators: Multiple instances of data breaches containing credentials (email/passwords) in plain text.
- Botnet activity indicating network hosts compromised by malware.
- Credentials from third-party government and non-governmental websites linked to official institutional emails
- Details of software applications, drivers installed on compromised hosts.
- Sensitive cookie data exfiltrated from various browsers.
- IP addresses of compromised systems.
- Login credentials for different Android applications.
Below is the sample detail of one of the top educational institutions that provides the insights about the higher rate of data breaches, botnet activity, dark web activities and phishing & domain squatting.
Risk Detection:
It indicates the number of data breaches, network hygiene, dark web activities, botnet activities, cloud security, phishing & domain squatting, media monitoring and miscellaneous risks. In the below example, we are able to see the highest number of data breaches and botnet activities in the sample particular domain.
Risk Changes:
Risk by Categories:
Risk is categorized with factors such as high, medium and low, the risk is at high level for data breaches and botnet activities.
Challenges Faced by Educational Institutions
Educational institutions face cyberattack risks, the challenges leading to cyberattack incidents in educational institutions are as follows:
🔒 Lack of a Security Framework: A key challenge in cybersecurity for educational institutions is the lack of a dedicated framework for higher education. Existing frameworks like ISO 27001, NIST, COBIT, and ITIL are designed for commercial organizations and are often difficult and costly to implement. Consequently, many educational institutions in India do not have a clearly defined cybersecurity framework.
🔑 Diverse User Accounts: Educational institutions manage numerous accounts for staff, students, alumni, and third-party contractors, with high user turnover. The continuous influx of new users makes maintaining account security a challenge, requiring effective systems and comprehensive security training for all users.
📚 Limited Awareness: Cybersecurity awareness among students, parents, teachers, and staff in educational institutions is limited due to the recent and rapid integration of technology. The surge in tech use, accelerated by the pandemic, has outpaced stakeholders' ability to address cybersecurity issues, leaving them unprepared to manage or train others on these challenges.
📱 Increased Use of Personal/Shared Devices: The growing reliance on unvetted personal/Shared devices for academic and administrative activities amplifies security risks.
💬 Lack of Incident Reporting: Educational institutions often neglect reporting cyber incidents, increasing vulnerability to future attacks. It is essential to report all cases, from minor to severe, to strengthen cybersecurity and institutional resilience.
Impact of Cybersecurity Attacks on Educational Institutions
Cybersecurity attacks on educational institutions lead to learning disruptions, financial losses, and data breaches. They also harm the institution's reputation and pose security risks to students. The following are the impacts of cybersecurity attacks on educational institutions:
📚Impact on the Learning Process: A report by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that cyberattacks on school districts resulted in learning losses ranging from three days to three weeks, with recovery times taking between two to nine months.
💸Financial Loss: US schools reported financial losses ranging from $50,000 to $1 million due to expenses like hardware replacement and cybersecurity upgrades, with recovery taking an average of 2 to 9 months.
🔒Data Security Breaches: Cyberattacks exposed sensitive data, including grades, social security numbers, and bullying reports. Accidental breaches were often caused by staff, accounting for 21 out of 25 cases, while intentional breaches by students, comprising 27 out of 52 cases, frequently involved tampering with grades.
⚠️Data Security Breach: Cyberattacks on schools result in breaches of personal information, including grades and social security numbers, causing emotional, physical, and financial harm. These breaches can be intentional or accidental, with a US study showing staff responsible for most accidental breaches (21 out of 25) and students primarily behind intentional breaches (27 out of 52) to change grades.
🏫Impact on Institutional Reputation: Cyberattacks damaged the reputation of educational institutions, eroding trust among students, staff, and families. Negative media coverage and scrutiny impacted staff retention, student admissions, and overall credibility.
🛡️ Impact on Student Safety: Cyberattacks compromised student safety and privacy. For example, breaches like live-streaming school CCTV footage caused severe distress, negatively impacting students' sense of security and mental well-being.
CyberPeace Advisory:
CyberPeace emphasizes the importance of vigilance and proactive measures to address cybersecurity risks:
- Develop effective incident response plans: Establish a clear and structured plan to quickly identify, respond to, and recover from cyber threats. Ensure that staff are well-trained and know their roles during an attack to minimize disruption and prevent further damage.
- Implement access controls with role-based permissions: Restrict access to sensitive information based on individual roles within the institution. This ensures that only authorized personnel can access certain data, reducing the risk of unauthorized access or data breaches.
- Regularly update software and conduct cybersecurity training: Keep all software and systems up-to-date with the latest security patches to close vulnerabilities. Provide ongoing cybersecurity awareness training for students and staff to equip them with the knowledge to prevent attacks, such as phishing.
- Ensure regular and secure backups of critical data: Perform regular backups of essential data and store them securely in case of cyber incidents like ransomware. This ensures that, if data is compromised, it can be restored quickly, minimizing downtime.
- Adopt multi-factor authentication (MFA): Enforce Multi-Factor Authentication(MFA) for accessing sensitive systems or information to strengthen security. MFA adds an extra layer of protection by requiring users to verify their identity through more than one method, such as a password and a one-time code.
- Deploy anti-malware tools: Use advanced anti-malware software to detect, block, and remove malicious programs. This helps protect institutional systems from viruses, ransomware, and other forms of malware that can compromise data security.
- Monitor networks using intrusion detection systems (IDS): Implement IDS to monitor network traffic and detect suspicious activity. By identifying threats in real time, institutions can respond quickly to prevent breaches and minimize potential damage.
- Conduct penetration testing: Regularly conduct penetration testing to simulate cyberattacks and assess the security of institutional networks. This proactive approach helps identify vulnerabilities before they can be exploited by actual attackers.
- Collaborate with cybersecurity firms: Partner with cybersecurity experts to benefit from specialized knowledge and advanced security solutions. Collaboration provides access to the latest technologies, threat intelligence, and best practices to enhance the institution's overall cybersecurity posture.
- Share best practices across institutions: Create forums for collaboration among educational institutions to exchange knowledge and strategies for cybersecurity. Sharing successful practices helps build a collective defense against common threats and improves security across the education sector.
Conclusion:
The increasing cyber threats to Indian educational institutions demand immediate attention and action. With vulnerabilities like data breaches, botnet activities, and outdated infrastructure, institutions must prioritize effective cybersecurity measures. By adopting proactive strategies such as regular software updates, multi-factor authentication, and incident response plans, educational institutions can mitigate risks and safeguard sensitive data. Collaborative efforts, awareness, and investment in cybersecurity will be essential to creating a secure digital environment for academia.
