APPLICATION OF MACHINE LEARNING METHODS FOR PHISHING ATTACK DETECTION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MODELS AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS

Journal of problem in computer science and information technologies, 2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.26577/jpcsit4220267
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Despite significant progress in combating, phishing continues to be one of the top cybersecurity risks, capitalizing on both technological gaps and human behavior. In this work, we propose a machine learning (ML) framework for creating phishing URL detector based on the LegitPhish labeled dataset that consists of 101,219 URLs and 17 engineered features for each URL. There is a particular focus on pre-modelling data diagnostics to resolve any data leakage, shortcuts and highly correlated variables that can drive the model results and cause artificial over-optimism. Six classification models were tested such as Logistic Regression (LR), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest, XGBoost, Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) and CNN-LSTM architecture. Seven informative features were selected for model development: After discarding two leakage-prone features has_ip_address, https_flag and eight redundant features. Experimental results revealed that the overall performance of the two models, Random Forest and XGBoost, were the best with an F1-score of 0.952 and an ROC-AUC value of 0.992 respectively. The precision score for the Random Forest model was 0.928 and the Recall score was 0.978, which provides a good balance between the detection of phishing and control of false positives. Despite the complexity of the CNN-LSTM model, it did not perform better than the ensemble-based models, while the MLP model proved competitive. The results confirm the significance of careful feature diagnostics and leakage prevention and show that well-tuned ensemble classifiers are able to deliver accurate, efficient, and viable results for the phishing URL detection task.