Economic Evaluation of Interactive Audio Media for Securing Internet Services

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 99)


Internet Telephony (Voice over Internet Protocol or VoIP) has recently become increasingly popular mainly due to its cost advantages and range of advance services. On the same time, SPam over Internet Telephony (SPIT) referred as unsolicited bulk calls sent via VoIP networks by botnets, is expected to become a serious threat in the near future. Audio CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Human Apart) mechanism were introduced and employed as a security measure to distinguish automated software agents from human beings. The scope of this paper is to present the security economics frame and to have an in-depth review of the related economic models of SPAM and its analogies with SPIT.


Network Externality Positive Externality Security Investment Security Incident Marginal Social Cost 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Anderson, R.: Why information security is hard: An economic perspective. In Proc. of the 17th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference (ACSAC 2001), USA, pp. 358-365 (2001) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhao, X., Fang, F., Whinston, A.: An economic mechanism for better Internet security. Decision Support Systems 45(4), 811–821 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Motoyama, M., Levchenko, K., Kanich, C., McCoy, D., Voelker, G., Savage, S.: Re: CAPTCHAs - Understanding CAPTCHA-Solving from an Economic Context. In: Proc. of the USENIX Security Symposium, USA (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lai, F., Wang, J., Hsieh, C., Chen, J.: On network externalities, e-business adoption and information asymmetry. Industrial Management & Data Systems 107(5), 728–746 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bauer, J., van Eeten, M.: Cybersecurity: Stakeholder incentives, externalities, and policy options. Telecommunications Policy 33, 706–719 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shetty, N., Schwartz, G., Walrand, J.: Can Competitive Insurers Improve Network Security? In: Acquisti, A., Smith, S.W., Sadeghi, A.-R. (eds.) TRUST 2010. LNCS, vol. 6101, pp. 308–322. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van Eeten, M., Bauer, J.: The economics of malware: security decisions, incentives and externalities, Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry, Committee for Information, Computer and Communications Policy, DSTI/ICCP/REG, 27, Paris, OECD (2007),
  8. 8.
    Vaknin, S.: The Economics of Spam,
  9. 9.
    Prentice, B.: Tangible and intangible benefits of transportation security measures. Journal of Transportation Security 1(1), 3–14 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ravi, B., Derrick, H., Qing, H.: A System Dynamics Model of Information Security Investments. In: Proc. of the ECIS (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Böhme, R., Nowey, T.: Economic Security Metrics. In: Eusgeld, I., Freiling, F.C., Reussner, R. (eds.) Dependability Metrics. LNCS, vol. 4909, pp. 176–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lelarge, M.: Economics of Malware: Epidemic Risks Model, Network Externalities and Incentives. In: Proc. of the 5th Bi-annual Conference on the Economics of the Software and Internet Industries, France, pp. 1353–1360 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ridzuan, F., Potdar, V., Talevski, A.: Factors Involved in Estimating Cost of Email Spam. In: Taniar, D., Gervasi, O., Murgante, B., Pardede, E., Apduhan, B.O. (eds.) ICCSA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6017, pp. 383–399. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Allman, E.: The Economics of Spam. Queue-Distributed Development 1(9), 203–212 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kanich, C., Kreibich, C., Levchenko, K., Enright, B., Voelker, G., Paxson, V., Savage, S.: Spamalytics: An Empirical Analysis of Spam Marketing Conversion. In: Proc. of the 15th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), USA, pp. 27–31 (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kimakova, A., Rajabiun, R.: The Dangerous Economics of Spam Control. In: Proc. of the MIT Spam Conference, USA (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leyden, J.: The economics of spam, the register (2003),
  18. 18.
    Cobb, S.: The Economics of Spam. Technical Report (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Petur, J.: The economics of spam and the context and aftermath of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry 2(1), 40–52 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Minto, R.: The economics of spam, Financial Times Tech Blog: Industry analysis (2008),
  21. 21.
    Khong, D.: An economic analysis of SPAM law. Erasmus Law and Economics Review 1(1), 23–45 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jia, D.: Cost-Effective Spam Detection in P2P File-Sharing Systems. In: Proc. of the 2008 ACM Workshop on Large-Scale Distributed Systems for Information Retrieval (LSDS-IR 2008), USA, pp. 19–26 (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Plice, R., Pavlov, O., Melville, N.: Spam and Beyond: An Information-Economic Analysis of Unwanted Commercial Messages. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 18(4), 278–306 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chim, H.: To Build a Blocklist Based on the Cost of Spam. In: Deng, X., Ye, Y. (eds.) WINE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3828, pp. 510–519. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Quinten, V.M., van de Meent, R., Pras, A.: Analysis of Techniques for Protection Against Spam over Internet Telephony. In: Pras, A., van Sinderen, M. (eds.) EUNICE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4606, pp. 70–77. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ding, W., Yurcik, W., Yin, X.: Outsourcing Internet Security: Economic Analysis of Incentives for Managed Security Service Providers. In: Deng, X., Ye, Y. (eds.) WINE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3828, pp. 947–958. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schryen, G.: Spam and its economic significance. In: Anti-Spam Measures Analysis and Design, pp. 7–27 (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Takemura, T., Ebara, H.: Spam Mail Reduces Economic Effects. In: Berntzen, L. (ed.) Proc. of the 2nd International Conference on Digital Society (ICDS), France, pp. 20–24 (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ukai, Y., Takemura, T.: Spam Mails Impede Economic Growth. Rev. Socionetwork Strat. 1, 14–22 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nakulas, A., Ekonomou, L., Kourtesi, S., Fotis, G., Zoulias, E.: A Review of Techniques to Counter Spam and Spit. In: Mastorakis, N., et al. (eds.) Proc. of the European Computing Conference. LNEE, vol. 27, pp. 501–510. Springer science+Business media, LLC (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Science, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. of MarketingTechnological Educational Institute of ThessalonikiGreece
  2. 2.Dept. of InformaticsAristotle University of ThessalonikiGreece
  3. 3.Dept. of InformaticsAthens University of Economics and BusinessGreece

Personalised recommendations