Skip to main content

Forensic footprints in digital love: Unveiling romance scams with Maltego and machine learning

Priya Vedhanayagam ; Moulik Singh ; Arora Preksha Dadhania ; Sumaiya Thaseen Ikram (2026) — AIP conference proceedings

Citation activity

Total citations · Google Scholar
Unavailable
Average per calendar year
Citation count unavailable

Counts reflect Google Scholar’s coverage and do not measure research quality. Source, calculation and limitations

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.1063/5.0298575 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Conference Paper
Country:   Global
Tags:   Alerts, Blacklisting, Digital Forensics, Email Validation, Ipqs, Logistic Regression, Machine Learning, Maltego, Online Dating, Osint, Phishing Detection, Phishing Websites, Romance Scam Detection, Romance Scams, Website Blacklisting
What do these research terms mean?
Preprint
A manuscript shared before formal peer review and publication. Check whether a later published version is available.
Dataset
A collection of data or examples for others to inspect or reuse. It can appear in Library search and topic mapping, but RSRC does not use dataset records as evidence in Research Insights.
Dissertation or thesis
Research submitted for an academic degree. This describes its format, not its reliability.
Journal article
An article published in a journal. This label alone does not establish peer review, study quality, or how well the findings apply elsewhere.
Qualitative research
Examines experiences, meanings, or processes, often through interviews or observations. It can explain how something happens without estimating how common it is.
Quantitative research
Uses numerical measurements to describe patterns or test relationships. A relationship between two measurements does not by itself show that one causes the other.
Systematic review
Uses a planned, documented method to find and assess research addressing a question. Its conclusions still depend on the included studies and what the search covered.
Meta-analysis
Statistically combines results from multiple studies. Combining studies does not remove weaknesses in their design or make unlike populations interchangeable.
Not classified
This record has no recognized label in this filter. It does not mean the publication used no method, or that no research exists.

Definitions draw on DataCite resource types; Cochrane review methods; NLM: association and causation. RSRC’s dataset and classification rules are explained in our methodology.

Citation tools
Download RIS Download BibTeX 


              
              

            

          

        


      

      

    

        
Transparency

        
Evidence and review status

        
This page contains AI-generated content. No human content review or subject-matter-expert review is recorded.

    


    

                    

                
Source basis

                

                    Downloaded PDF
                

            

                    

                
Source updates

                

                    No notice found at last check
                

            

                    

                
AI-generated page content

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Automated checks

                

                    Passed
                

            

                    

                
Administrative approval

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Human content review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

                    

                
Subject-matter-expert review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

            


    

        
            How this was prepared
        
        

                            

                    
Source basis

                    

                    
RSRC downloaded and privately stored a copy of the paper for internal analysis. The PDF is not offered to viewers from this page.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    PDF added to RSRC:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Source updates

                    

                    
No incoming update notice was found in the dated Crossref response. Coverage is incomplete, particularly for corrections and expressions of concern; this is not a guarantee that the source is valid or unchanged.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Last source-status attempt:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
AI-generated page content

                    

                    
AI-generated research notes displayed on this page: Synopsis, Identified gaps, Methods, Limitations, Future work. The paper itself is not described as AI-generated.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Document analysis recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Page record updated:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Automated checks

                    

                    
The current, source-bound synopsis passed the recorded versioned publication checks.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Checks completed:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                            

                            
                                View passed checks (3)
                            
                            
    
                                                                    
  • Length, completeness, repetition, refusal, boilerplate, and active-markup screening
    • 
                                                                    
  • Numerical claims checked against the available source text
    • 
                                                                    
  • English-source lexical grounding check
    • 
                                                            

                        

                                        

                

                            

                    
Administrative approval

                    

                    
An authenticated administrator approved the bibliographic record for public Library display. This is not a review of every research claim.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Approved for public display:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Human content review

                    

                    
No human review is recorded for the AI-generated content displayed on this page.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Subject-matter-expert review

                    

                    
RSRC has not recorded review of this content by a subject-matter or methods expert.


                    
                                        

                

                    

    


    

        Review-state definitions

        Found a possible error?
        Request a correction.
    



    



              

        
                  

            
Synopsis

            
The study compiles data from open-source scam-reporting sites and Maltego OSINT extraction. Maltego transforms gather website, profile, URL, email, DNS, SSL, hash, IPQS, and linked-account information. Emails and links are cleaned and represented with TF-IDF features; logistic regression classifies suspicious entities and assigns suspiciousness scores. The paper states that romance scams can cause financial, reputational, and emotional harms with long-term psychological effects. The reported experimental evaluation achieved 85% accuracy, 88% precision, 80% recall, and an F1 score of 0.84. The authors state that the proposed algorithms are not infallible and that their effectiveness and accuracy depend heavily on the quality and relevance of input data.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
The paper identifies a gap in using forensic tools for in-depth romance-scam investigation. It also notes that existing detection methods can have high false-positive rates and may not adapt well to evolving scam tactics. The related-work review describes romance-scam research as limited, fragmented, and inconsistent, with constrained access to victim–scammer data and a predominance of qualitative studies.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
The study compiles data from open-source scam-reporting sites and Maltego OSINT extraction. Maltego transforms gather website, profile, URL, email, DNS, SSL, hash, IPQS, and linked-account information. Emails and links are cleaned and represented with TF-IDF features; logistic regression classifies suspicious entities and assigns suspiciousness scores. The system alerts users and adds high-risk sites to a blacklist. Reported evaluation metrics are 85% accuracy, 88% precision, 80% recall, and F1=0.84.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
The authors state that the proposed algorithms are not infallible and that their effectiveness and accuracy depend heavily on the quality and relevance of input data. The approach relies on data extracted from external websites, Maltego transforms, and validation services, so incomplete or inaccurate extraction can affect results. Although performance metrics are reported, the supplied text does not describe dataset size, class balance, ground-truth construction, or external validation.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
The paper proposes prospective enhancements to further fortify the model and extend preventive security measures. Grounded in the discussion, future work should improve data extraction quality and relevance, strengthen adaptation to evolving scam tactics, and further develop the alerting and blacklist functions for online dating contexts.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

            See how this publication connects to RSRC's living evidence syntheses through current citations and research-topic mapping.