Web Phishing Detection Using Decision Tree Random Forest and XGBoost

The rise in web phishing attacks poses a critical threat to cybersecurity because they deceive users into disclosing personal information through fraudulent websites. This study compares three machine learning models for the identification of phishing websites based on important URL-based variables such as domain age, HTTPS presence, and lexical analysis: The Decision Tree provides an interpretable hierarchical classification, while the Random Forest builds resilience through multiple trees to improve accuracy and minimize overfitting. The gradient boosting algorithm XG Boost achieves substantial classification performance gains through boosting approaches [1]. The effectiveness of each model is evaluated by applying the ROC AUC analysis along with the measurements of the F1 score for accuracy, precision, and recall. ROC-AUC curves demonstrate how well each model can distinguish between phishing sites and legitimate websites. Experimental research shows that ensemble models like RF and XG Boost surpass individual decision trees in predictive capacity, which provides crucial insights for improving automated phishing detection systems. This research supports the development of reliable web security systems while highlighting machine learning as a key element in cybersecurity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-04-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/icict64420.2025.11005064
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Spam and Phishing Detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.25
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Web Phishing Detection Using Decision Tree Random Forest and XGBoost

Nirmal Kumar Prabhu, T. Palanisamy, Kartik Srinivasan, T Senthilkumar et al.
1 citations
Spam and Phishing Detection
3.25
article

Web Phishing Detection Using Decision Tree Random Forest and XGBoost

Nirmal Kumar Prabhu, T. Palanisamy, Kartik Srinivasan, T Senthilkumar, Ajay Siva, Keerthana BP
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The rise in web phishing attacks poses a critical threat to cybersecurity because they deceive users into disclosing personal information through fraudulent websites. This study compares three machine learning models for the identification of phishing websites based on important URL-based variables such as domain age, HTTPS presence, and lexical analysis: The Decision Tree provides an interpretable hierarchical classification, while the Random Forest builds resilience through multiple trees to improve accuracy and minimize overfitting. The gradient boosting algorithm XG Boost achieves substantial classification performance gains through boosting approaches [1]. The effectiveness of each model is evaluated by applying the ROC AUC analysis along with the measurements of the F1 score for accuracy, precision, and recall. ROC-AUC curves demonstrate how well each model can distinguish between phishing sites and legitimate websites. Experimental research shows that ensemble models like RF and XG Boost surpass individual decision trees in predictive capacity, which provides crucial insights for improving automated phishing detection systems. This research supports the development of reliable web security systems while highlighting machine learning as a key element in cybersecurity.

IBM (India) (IN), Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Spam and Phishing Detection
3.25
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Web Phishing Detection Using Decision Tree Random Forest and XGBoost — Nirmal Kumar Prabhu, T. Palanisamy, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS