Large-scale vulnerability notifications (VNs) can help hosting provider organizations (HPOs) identify and remediate security vulnerabilities that attackers can exploit in data breaches or phishing campaigns. Previous VN studies have primarily focused on factors under the control of reporters, such as sender reputation, email formatting, and communication channels. Despite these efforts, remediation rates for vulnerability notifications continue to remain consistently low. This paper presents the first in-depth study of how HPOs process vulnerability notifications internally and what organizational and operational factors influence VN effectiveness. We examine the problem from a different perspective to provide the first detailed understanding of the reasons behind persistently low remediation rates. Instead of manipulating parameters of VN campaigns, we interview hosting providers directly, investigating how they handle vulnerability notifications and what factors may influence VN effectiveness, such as VN awareness and reachability, HPOs’ service models, and perceived security risks. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 HPOs across shared hosting and web development services, representing varied company sizes and operator roles. Our findings reveal practical insights on VN processing and abuse workflows. While some providers remain hard to reach due to complex infrastructures, most report routinely handling VNs. However, limited remediation often stems from strict responsibility boundaries, where web application issues are seen as the customer’s domain. Low hosting fees and high volumes of daily compromises further discourage both proactive and reactive measures. Our findings show that HPOs blame negligent website owners, and prior works on website owners confirms they often undervalue their sites or lack security know-how. This misalignment raises further concerns about the efficacy of current VN approaches and whether they can reliably prompt remedial action under the existing operational model.

There has been a rise in online platforms facilitating the buying and selling of social media accounts. While the trade of social media profiles is not inherently illegal, these platforms view such transactions as violations of their policies. They often take action against accounts involved in the misuse of platforms for financial gain. In this, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of marketplaces that enable the buying and selling of social media accounts.

Clickbait PDFs, an entry point for multiple Web attacks, are distributed via SEO poisoning and rank high in search results due to being massively uploaded on abused or compromised websites. The central role of these hosts in the distribution of clickbait PDFs remains understudied, and it is unclear whether attackers differentiate the types of hosting for PDF uploads, how long they rely on hosts, and how affected parties respond to abuse. To address this, we conducted real-time analyses on hosts, collecting data on 4,648,939 clickbait PDFs served by 177,835 hosts over 17 months. Our results revealed a diverse infrastructure, with hosts falling into three main hosting types. We also identified at scale the presence of eight software components which facilitate file uploads and which are likely exploited for clickbait PDF distribution. We contact affected parties to report the misuse of their resources via a large-scale vulnerability notification. While we observed some effectiveness in terms of number of cleaned-up PDFs following the notification, long-term improvement in this infrastructure remained insignificant. This finding raises questions about the hosting providers' role in combating abuse and the actual impact of vulnerability notifications.

Clickbait PDFs are PDF documents that do not embed malware but trick victims into visiting malicious web pages leading to attacks like password theft or drive-by download. While recent reports indicate a surge of clickbait PDFs, prior works have largely neglected this new threat, considering PDFs only as accessories of email phishing campaigns.