Disposable Domains: The Hidden Infrastructure Powering Online Scams and Cybercrime
Introduction
In the evolving landscape of cybercrime, attackers are not only becoming more sophisticated in their approach but also more adept in their infrastructure. The Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) has issued a warning about the use of ‘disposable domains’ by cybercriminals. These are short-lived websites designed tomimic legitimate platforms, deceive users, and then disappear quickly to avoid detection and legal repercussions.
Although they may appear harmless at first glance, disposable domains form the backbone of countless online scams, phishing campaigns, malware distributionschemes, and disinformation networks. Cybercriminals use them to host fake websites, distribute malicious files, send deceptive emails, and mislead unsuspecting users, all while evading detection and takedown efforts.
As India’s digital economy grows and more citizens, businesses, and public services move online, it is crucial to understand this hidden layer of cybercrime infrastructure.Greater awareness among individuals, enterprises, and policymakers is essential to strengthen defences against fraud, protect users from harm, and build trust in thedigital ecosystem
What Are Disposable Domains?
A disposable domain is a website domain that is registered to be used temporarily, usually for hours or days, typically to evade detection or accountability.
These domains are inexpensive, easy to obtain, and can be set up with minimal information. They are often bought in bulk through domain registrars that do not strictly verify ownership information, sometimes using stolen credit cards or cryptocurrencies to remain anonymous. They differ from legitimate temporary domains used for testing or development in one significant aspect, which is ‘purpose’. Cybercriminals use disposable domains to carry out malicious activities such as phishing, sextortion, malware distribution, fake e-commerce sites, spam email campaigns, and disinformation operations.
How Cybercriminals Utilise Disposable Domains
1. Phishing & Credential Stealing: Attackers tend to register lookalike domains that are similar to legitimate websites (e.g., go0gle-login[.]com or sbi-verification[.]online) and trick victims into entering their login credentials. These domains will be active only long enough to deceive, and then they will disappear.
2. Malware Distribution: Disposable domains are widely used for ransomware and spyware operations for hosting malicious files. Because the domains are temporary, threat intelligence systems tend to notice them too late.
3. Fake E-Commerce & Investment Scams: Cyber crooks clone legitimate e-commerce or investment sites, place ad campaigns, and trick victims into "purchasing" goods or investing in scams. The domain vanishes when the scam runs out.
4. Spam and Botnets: Disposable domains assist in botnet command-and-control activities. They make it more difficult for defenders to block static IPs or trace the attacker's infrastructure.
5. Disinformation and Influence Campaigns: State-sponsored actors and coordinated troll networks use disposable domains to host fabricated news articles, fake government documents, and manipulated videos. When these sites are detected and taken down, they are quickly replaced with new domains, allowing the disinformation cycle to continue uninterrupted.
Why Are They Hard to Stop?
Registering a domain is inexpensive and quick, often requiring no more than an email address and payment. The difficulty is the easy domain registrations and the absence of worldwide enforcement. Domain registrars differ in enforcing Know-Your-Customer (KYC) standards stringently. ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) has certain regulations in place but enforcement is inconsistent. ICANN does require registrars to maintain accurate Who is information (the “Registrant Data Accuracy Policy”) and to act on abuse complaints. However, ICANN is not an enforcement agency. It oversees contracts with registrars but cannot directly police every registration. Cybercriminals exploit services such as:
- Privacy protection shields that conceal actual WHOIS information.
- Bulletproof hosting that evades takedown notices.
- Fast-flux DNS methods to rapidly alter IP addresses
Additionally, utilisation of IDNs ( Internationalised Domain Names) and homoglyph attacks enables the attackers to register visually similar domains to legitimate ones (e.g., using Cyrillic characters to represent Latin ones).
Real-World Example: India and the Rise of Fake Investment Sites
India has witnessed a wave of monetary scams that are connected with disposable domains. Over hundreds of false websites impersonating government loan schemes, banks or investment websites, and crypto-exchanges were found on disposable domains such as gov-loans-apply[.]xyz, indiabonds-secure[.]top, or rbi-invest[.]store. Most of them placed paid advertisements on sites such as Facebook or Google and harvested user information and payments, only to vanish in 48–72 hours. Victims had no avenue of proper recourse, and the authorities were left with a digital ghost trail.
How Disposable Domains Undermine Cybersecurity
- Bypass Blacklists: Dynamic domains constantly shifting evade static blacklists.
- Delay Attribution: Time is wasted pursuing non-existent owners or takedowns.
- Mass Targeting: One actor can register thousands of domains and attack at scale.
- Undermine Trust: Frequent users become targets when genuine sites are duplicated and it looks realistic.
Recommendations Addressing Legal and Policy Gaps in India
1. There is a need to establish a formal coordination mechanism between domain registrars and national CERTs such as CERT-In to enable effective communication and timely response to domain-based threats.
2. There is a need to strengthen the investigative and enforcement capabilities of law enforcement agencies through dedicated resources, training, and technical support to effectively tackle domain-based scams.
3. There is a need to leverage the provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 to take action against phishing websites and malicious domains that collect personal data without consent.
4. There is a need to draft and implement specific regulations or guidelines to address the misuse of digital infrastructure, particularly disposable and fraudulent domains, and close existing regulatory gaps.
What Can Be Done: CyberPeace View
1. Stronger KYC for Domain Registrations: Registrars selling domains to Indian users or based in India should conduct verified KYC processes, with legal repercussions for carelessness.
2. Real-Time Domain Blacklists: CERT-In, along with ISPs and hosting companies, should operate and enforce a real-time blacklist of scam domains known.
3. Public Reporting Tools: Observers or victims should be capable of reporting suspicious domains through an easy interface (tied to cybercrime.gov.in).
4. Collaboration with Tech Platforms: Social media services and online ad platforms should filter out ads associated with disposable or spurious domains and report abuse data to CERT-In.
5. User Awareness: Netizens should be educated to check URLs thoroughly, not click on unsolicited links and they must verify the authenticity of websites.
Conclusion
Disposable domains have silently become the foundation of contemporary cybercrime. They are inexpensive, highly anonymous, and short-lived, which makes them a darling weapon for cybercriminals ranging from solo spammers to nation-state operators. In an increasingly connected Indian society where the penetration rate of internet users is high, this poses an expanding threat to economic security, public confidence, and national resilience. Combating this problem will need a combination of technical defences, policy changes, public-private alliances, and end-user sensitisation. As India develops a Cyber Secure Bharat, monitoring and addressing disposable domain abuse must be the utmost concern.
References
- https://www.bitcot.com/disposable-domains
- https://atdata.com/blog/evolution-of-email-fraud-rise-of-hyper-disposable-domains/
- https://www.cyfirma.com/research/scamonomics-the-dark-side-of-stock-crypto-investments-in-india/
- https://knowledgebase.constantcontact.com/lead-gen-crm/articles/KnowledgeBase/50330-Understanding-Blocked-Forbidden-and-Disposable-Domains?lang=en_US
- https://www.meity.gov.in/
- https://intel471.com/blog/bulletproof-hosting-fast-flux-dns-double-flux-vps
Related Blogs
.webp)
Introduction
Social media has emerged as a leading source of communication and information; its relevance cannot be ignored during natural disasters since it is relied upon by governments and disaster relief organisations as a tool for disseminating aid and relief-related resources and communications instantly. During disaster times, social media has emerged as a primary source for affected populations to access information on relief resources; community forums offering aid resources and official government channels for government aid have enabled efficient and timely administration of relief initiatives.
However, given the nature of social media, misinformation risks during natural disasters has also emerged as a primary concern that severely hampers aid administration during natural disasters. The disaster-disinformation network offers some sensationalised influential campaigns against communities at their most vulnerable. Victims who seek reliable resources during natural calamities often reach out to inhospitable campaigns and may experience delayed or lack of access to necessary healthcare, significantly impacting their recovery and survival. This delay can lead to worsening medical conditions and an increased death toll among those affected by the disaster. Victims may lack clear information on the appropriate agencies to seek assistance from, causing confusion and delays in receiving help.
Misinformation Threat Landscape during Natural Disaster
During the 2018 floods in Kerala, it was noted that a fake video on water leakage from the Mullaperyar Dam created panic among the citizens and negatively impacted the rescue operations. Similarly, in 2017, reports emerged claiming that Hurricane Irma had caused sharks to be displaced onto a Florida highway. Similar stories, accompanied by the same image, resurfaced following Hurricanes Harvey and Florence. The disaster-affected nation may face international criticism and fail to receive necessary support due to its perceived inability to manage the crisis effectively. This lack of confidence from the global community can further exacerbate the challenges faced by the nation, leaving it more vulnerable and isolated in its time of need.
The spread of misinformation through social media severely hinders the administration of aid and relief operations during natural disasters since it hinders first responders' efforts to counteract and reduce the spread of misinformation, rumours, and false information and declines public trust in government, media, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), who are often the first point of contact for both victims and officials due to their familiarity with the region and the community. In Moldova, it was noted that foreign influence has exploited the ongoing drought to create divisions between the semi-autonomous regions of Transnistria and Gagauzia and the central government in Chisinau. News coverage critical of the government leverages economic and energy insecurities to incite civil unrest in this already unstable region. Additionally, First responders may struggle to locate victims and assist them to safety, complicating rescue operations. The inability to efficiently find and evacuate those in need can result in prolonged exposure to dangerous conditions and a higher risk of injury or death.
Further, international aid from other countries could be impeded, affecting the overall relief effort. Without timely and coordinated support from the global community, the disaster response may be insufficient, leaving many needs unmet. Further, misinformation also impedes military, reducing the effectiveness of rescue and relief operations. Military assistance often plays a crucial role in disaster response, and any delays can hinder efforts to provide immediate and large-scale aid.
Misinformation also creates problems of allocation of relief resources to unaffected areas which resultantly impacts aid processes for regions in actual need. Following the April 2015 earthquake in Nepal, a Facebook post claimed that 300 houses in Dhading needed aid. Shared over 1,000 times, it reached around 350,000 people within 48 hours. The originator aimed to seek help for Ward #4’s villagers via social media. Given the average Facebook user has 350 contacts, the message was widely viewed. However, the need had already been reported on quakemap.org, a crisis-mapping database managed by Kathmandu Living Labs, a week earlier. Helping Hands, a humanitarian group was notified on May 7, and by May 11, Ward #4 received essential food and shelter. The re-sharing and sensationalisation of outdated information could have wasted relief efforts since critical resources would have been redirected to a region that had already been secured.
Policy Recommendations
Perhaps the most important step in combating misinformation during natural disasters is the increasing public education and the rapid, widespread dissemination of early warnings. This was best witnessed in the November 1970 tropical cyclone in southeastern Bangladesh, combined with a high tide, struck southeastern Bangladesh, leaving more than 300,000 people dead and 1.3 million homeless. In May 1985, when a comparable cyclone and storm surge hit the same area, local dissemination of disaster warnings was much improved and the people were better prepared to respond to them. The loss of life, while still high (at about 10,000), the numbers were about 3% of that in 1970. On a similar note, when a devastating cyclone struck the same area of Bangladesh in May 1994, fewer than 1,000 people died. In India, the 1977 cyclone in Andra Pradesh killed 10,000 people, but a similar storm in the same area 13 years later killed only 910. The dramatic difference in mortalities was owed to a new early-warning system connected with radio stations to alert people in low-lying areas.
Additionally, location-based filtering for monitoring social media during disasters is considered as another best practice to curb misinformation. However, agencies should be aware that this method may miss local information from devices without geolocation enabled. A 2012 Georgia Tech study found that less than 1.4 percent of Twitter content is geolocated. Additionally, a study by Humanity Road and Arizona State University on Hurricane Sandy data indicated a significant decline in geolocation data during weather events.
Alternatively, Publish frequent updates to promote transparency and control the message. In emergency management and disaster recovery, digital volunteers—trusted agents who provide online support—can assist overwhelmed on-site personnel by managing the vast volume of social media data. Trained digital volunteers help direct affected individuals to critical resources and disseminate reliable information.
Enhancing the quality of communication requires double-verifying information to eliminate ambiguity and reduce the impact of misinformation, rumors, and false information must also be emphasised. This approach helps prevent alert fatigue and "cry wolf" scenarios by ensuring that only accurate, relevant information is disseminated. Prioritizing ground truth over assumptions and swiftly releasing verified information or acknowledging the situation can bolster an agency's credibility. This credibility allows the agency to collaborate effectively with truth amplifiers. Prebunking and Debunking methods are also effective way to counter misinformation and build cognitive defenses to recognise red flags. Additionally, evaluating the relevance of various social media information is crucial for maintaining clear and effective communication.
References
- https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-40399-9#:~:text=Moreover%2C%20misinformation%20can%20create%20unnecessary,impacting%20the%20rescue%20operations29.
- https://www.redcross.ca/blog/2023/5/why-misinformation-is-dangerous-especially-during-disasters
- https://www.soas.ac.uk/about/blog/disinformation-during-natural-disasters-emerging-vulnerability
- https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/SMWG_Countering-False-Info-Social-M dia-Disasters-Emergencies_Mar2018-508.pdf
Introduction
Misinformation and disinformation are significant issues in today's digital age. The challenge is not limited to any one sector or industry, and has been seen to affect everyone that deals with data of any sort. In recent times, we have seen a rise in misinformation about all manner of subjects, from product and corporate misinformation to manipulated content about regulatory or policy developments.
Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) play an important role in economies, particularly in developing nations, by promoting employment, innovation, and growth. However, in the evolving digital landscape, they also confront tremendous hurdles, such as the dissemination of mis/disinformation which may harm reputations, disrupt businesses, and reduce consumer trust. MSMEs are particularly susceptible since they have minimal resources at their disposal and cannot afford to invest in the kind of talent, technology and training that is needed for a business to be able to protect itself in today’s digital-first ecosystem. Mis/disinformation for MSMEs can arise from internal communications, supply chain partners, social media, competitors, etc. To address these dangers, MSMEs must take proactive steps such as adopting frameworks to counter misinformation and prioritising best practices like digital literacy and training, monitoring and social listening, transparency protocols and robust communication practices.
Assessing the Impact of Misinformation on MSMEs
To assess the impact of misinformation on MSMEs, it is essential to get a full sense of the challenges. To begin with, one must consider the categories of damage which can include financial loss, reputational damage, operational damages, and regulatory noncompliance. Various assessment methodologies can be used to analyze the impact of misinformation, including surveys, interviews, case studies, social media and news data analysis, and risk analysis practices.
Policy Framework and Gaps in Addressing Misinformation
The Digital India Initiative, a flagship program of the Government of India, aims to transform India into a digitally empowered society and knowledge economy. The Information Technology Act, 2000 and the rules made therein govern the technology space and serve as the legal framework for cyber security and data protection. The Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 also contains provisions regarding ‘fake news’. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 is a brand new law aimed at protecting personal data. Fact-check units (FCUs) are government and private independent bodies that verify claims about government policies, regulations, announcements, and measures. However, these policy measures are not sector-specific and lack specific guidelines, which have limited impact on their awareness initiatives on misinformation and insufficient support structure for MSMEs to verify information and protect themselves.
Recommendations for Countering Misinformation in the MSME Sector
To counter misinformation for MSMEs, recommendations include creating a dedicated Misinformation Helpline, promoting awareness campaigns, creating regulatory support and guidelines, and collaborating with tech platforms and expert organisations for the identification and curbing of misinformation.
Organisational recommendations include the Information Verification Protocols for the consumers of Information for the verification of critical information before acting upon it, engaging in employee training for regular training on the identification and management of misinformation, creating a crisis management plan to deal with misinformation crisis, form collaboration networks with other MSMEs to share verified information and best practices.
Engage with technological solutions like AI and ML tools for the detection and flagging of potential misinformation along with fact-checking tools and engaging with cyber security measures to prevent misinformation via digital channels.
Conclusion: Developing a Vulnerability Assessment Framework for MSMEs
Creating a vulnerability assessment framework for misinformation in Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) in India involves several key components which include the understanding of the sources and types of misinformation, assessing the impact on MSMEs, identifying the current policies and gaps, and providing actionable recommendations. The implementation strategy for policies to counter misinformation in the MSME sector can be by starting with pilot programs in key MSME clusters, and stakeholder engagement by involving industry associations, tech companies and government bodies. Initiating a feedback mechanism for constant improvement of the framework and finally, developing a plan to scale successful initiatives across the country.
References
- https://publications.ut-capitole.fr/id/eprint/48849/1/wp_tse_1516.pdf
- https://techinformed.com/how-misinformation-can-impact-businesses/
- https://pib.gov.in/aboutfactchecke.aspx
Introduction
The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has unanimously adopted the first global resolution on Artificial Intelligence (AI), encouraging countries to take into consideration human rights, keeping personal data safe, and further monitoring the threats associated with AI. This non-binding resolution proposed by the United States and co-sponsored by China and over 120 other nations advocates the strengthening of privacy policies. This step is crucial for governments across the world to shape how AI grows because of the dangers it carries that could undermine the protection, promotion, and right to human dignity and fundamental freedoms. The resolution emphasizes the importance of respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms throughout the life cycle of AI systems, highlighting the benefits of digital transformation and safe AI systems.
Key highlights
● This is indeed a landmark move by the UNGA, which adopted the first global resolution on AI. This resolution encourages member countries to safeguard human rights, protect personal data, and monitor AI for risks.
● Global leaders have shown their consensus for safe, secure, trustworthy AI systems that advance sustainable development and respect fundamental freedom.
● Resolution is the latest in a series of initiatives by governments around the world to shape AI. Therefore, AI will have to be created and deployed through the lens of humanity and dignity, Safety and Security, human rights and fundamental freedoms throughout the life cycle of AI systems.
● UN resolution encourages global cooperation, warns against improper AI use, and emphasizes the issues of human rights.
● The resolution aims to protect from potential harm and ensure that everyone can enjoy its benefits. The United States has worked with over 120 countries at the United Nations, including Russia, China, and Cuba, to negotiate the text of the resolution adopted.
Brief Analysis
AI has become increasingly prevalent in recent years, with chatbots such as the Chat GPT taking the world by storm. AI has been steadily attempting to replicate human-like thinking and solve problems. Furthermore, machine learning, a key aspect of AI, involves learning from experience and identifying patterns to solve problems autonomously. The contemporary emergence of AI has, however, raised questions about its ethical implications, potential negative impact on society, and whether it is too late to control it.
While AI is capable of solving problems quickly and performing various tasks with ease, it also has its own set of problems. As AI continues to grow, global leaders have called for regulations to prevent significant harm due to the unregulated AI landscape to the world and encourage the use of trustworthy AI. The European Union (EU) has come up with an AI act called the “European AI Act”. Recently, a Senate bill called “The AI Consent Bill” was introduced in the US. Similarly, India is also proactively working towards setting the stage for a more regulated Al landscape by fostering dialogues and taking significant measures. Recently, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) issued an advisory on AI, which requires explicit permission to deploy under-testing or unreliable AI models related to India's Internet. The following advisory also indicates measures advocating to combat deepfakes or misinformation.
AI has thus become a powerful tool that has raised concerns about its ethical implications and the potential negative influence on society. Governments worldwide are taking action to regulate AI and ensure that it remains safe and effective. Now, the groundbreaking move of the UNGA, which adopted the global resolution on AI, with the support of all 193 U.N. member nations, shows the true potential of efforts by countries to regulate AI and promote safe and responsible use globally.
New AI tools have emerged in the public sphere, which may threaten humanity in an unexpected direction. AI is able to learn by itself through machine learning to improve itself, and developers often are surprised by the emergent abilities and qualities of these tools. The ability to manipulate and generate language, whether with words, images, or sounds, is the most important aspect of the current phase of the ongoing AI Revolution. In the future, AI can have several implications. Hence, it is high time to regulate AI and promote the safe, secure and responsible use of it.
Conclusion
The UNGA has approved its global resolution on AI, marking significant progress towards creating global standards for the responsible development and employment of AI. The resolution underscores the critical need to protect human rights, safeguard personal data, and closely monitor AI technologies for potential hazards. It calls for more robust privacy regulations and recognises the dangers associated with improper AI systems. This profound resolution reflects a unified stance among UN member countries on overseeing AI to prevent possible negative effects and promote safe, secure and trustworthy AI.
References
