Journal of Computer Science and Technology

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 616–624 | Cite as

Securing Recommender Systems Against Shilling Attacks Using Social-Based Clustering

  • Xiang-Liang Zhang
  • Tak Man Desmond Lee
  • Georgios Pitsilis
Regular Paper


Recommender systems (RS) have been found supportive and practical in e-commerce and been established as useful aiding services. Despite their great adoption in the user communities, RS are still vulnerable to unscrupulous producers who try to promote their products by shilling the systems. With the advent of social networks new sources of information have been made available which can potentially render RS more resistant to attacks. In this paper we explore the information provided in the form of social links with clustering for diminishing the impact of attacks. We propose two algorithms, CluTr and WCluTr, to combine clustering with \trust" among users. We demonstrate that CluTr and WCluTr enhance the robustness of RS by experimentally evaluating them on data from a public consumer recommender system


shilling attack recommender system collaborative filtering social trust clustering 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

11390_2013_1362_MOESM1_ESM.doc (38 kb)
(DOC 38.5 KB)


  1. [1]
    Lam S K, Riedl J. Shilling recommender systems for fun and profit. In Proc. the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), May 2004, pp.393-402.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Mehta B. Unsupervised shilling detection for collaborative filtering. In Proc. the 22nd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Jul. 2007, pp.1402-1407.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Mobasher B, Burke R D, Sandvig J J. Model-based collaborative filtering as a defense against profile injection attacks. In Proc. the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Jul. 2006, pp.1388-1393.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Su X F, Zeng H J, Chen Z. Finding group shilling in recommendation system. In Special Interest Tracks and Posters of the 14th WWW, May 2005, pp.960-961.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Zhang S, Chakrabarti A, Ford J, Makedon F. Attack detection in time series for recommender systems. In Proc. the 12th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Aug. 2006, pp.809-814.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    DuBois T, Golbeck J, Kleint J, Srinivasan A. Improving recommendation accuracy by clustering social networks with trust. In Proc. ACM Workshop on Recommender Systems & the Social Web, Oct. 2009.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Sarwar B M, Karypis G, Konstan J, Riedl J. Recommender systems for large-scale e-commerce: Scalable neighborhood formation using clustering. In Proc. the 5th Int. Conf. Computer and Information Technology, Dec. 2002.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Pitsilis G, Zhang X L, Wang W. Clustering recommenders in collaborative ¯ltering using explicit trust information. In Proc. the 5th IFIP WG 11.11 International Conference on Trust Management (IFIPTM), Jun. 2011, pp.82-97.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Truong K Q, Ishikawa F, Honiden S. Improving accuracy of recommender system by item clustering. Transactions on Information and Systems, 2007, E90-D(9): 1363–1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    O’Connor M, Herlocker J. Clustering items for collaborative filtering. In Proc. SIGIR 2001 Workshop on Recommender Systems, Sept. 2001.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    O’Donovan J, Smyth B. Trust in recommender systems. In Proc. the 10th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Jan. 2005, pp.167-174.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Marsh S P. Formalising trust as a computational concept [Ph.D. Thesis]. University of Stirling, Apr. 1994.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Mobasher B, Burke R, Bhaumik R, Williams C. Effective attack models for shilling item-based collaborative filtering systems. In Proc. WebKDD Workshop, Aug. 2005.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Mobasher B, Burke R, Bhaumik R, Williams C. Toward trustworthy recommender systems: An analysis of attack models and algorithm robustness. ACM Trans. Internet Technol., Oct. 2007, 7(4): Article No.23.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Cheng Z P, Hurley N. Effective diverse and obfuscated attacks on model-based recommender systems. In Proc. the 3rd ACM Conf. Recommender Systems, Oct. 2009, pp.141-148.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Cheng Z P, Hurley N. Robustness analysis of model-basedcollaborative filtering systems. In Proc. the 20th Irish Conf. Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science, Aug. 2009, pp.3-15.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Ziegler C, Lausen G. Analyzing correlation between trust and user similarity in online communities. In Proc. the 2nd Int. Conf. Trust Management, May 2004, pp.251-265.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Jamali M, Ester M. TrustWalker: A random walk model for combining trust-based and item-based recommendation. In Proc. the 15th ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Jun. 2009, pp.397-406.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Massa P, Avesani P. Trust-aware recommender systems. In Proc. the 1st ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, Oct. 2007, pp.17-24.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Ma H, King I, Lyu M R. Learning to recommend with social trust ensemble. In Proc. the 32nd Int. ACM SIGIR Conf. Research and Develop. in Inform. Retrieval, Jul. 2009, pp.203-210.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Ma H, Lyu M R, King I. Learning to recommend with trust and distrust relationships. In Proc. the 3rd ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, Oct. 2009, pp.189-196.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Arthur D, Vassilvitskii S. k-means++: The advantages of careful seeding. In Proc. the 18th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, Jan. 2007, pp.1027-1035.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Rodgers J, Nicewander A. Thirteen ways to look at the correlation coefficient. The American Statistician, 1988, 42: 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York & Science Press, China 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiang-Liang Zhang
    • 1
  • Tak Man Desmond Lee
    • 1
  • Georgios Pitsilis
    • 2
  1. 1.King Abdullah University of Science and TechnologyThuwalSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Faculty of Science, Technology and CommunicationUniversity of LuxembourgLuxembourgLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations