IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1803.02887.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A first look at browser-based Cryptojacking

Author

Listed:
  • Shayan Eskandari
  • Andreas Leoutsarakos
  • Troy Mursch
  • Jeremy Clark

Abstract

In this paper, we examine the recent trend towards in-browser mining of cryptocurrencies; in particular, the mining of Monero through Coinhive and similar code- bases. In this model, a user visiting a website will download a JavaScript code that executes client-side in her browser, mines a cryptocurrency, typically without her consent or knowledge, and pays out the seigniorage to the website. Websites may consciously employ this as an alternative or to supplement advertisement revenue, may offer premium content in exchange for mining, or may be unwittingly serving the code as a result of a breach (in which case the seigniorage is collected by the attacker). The cryptocurrency Monero is preferred seemingly for its unfriendliness to large-scale ASIC mining that would drive browser-based efforts out of the market, as well as for its purported privacy features. In this paper, we survey this landscape, conduct some measurements to establish its prevalence and profitability, outline an ethical framework for considering whether it should be classified as an attack or business opportunity, and make suggestions for the detection, mitigation and/or prevention of browser-based mining for non- consenting users.

Suggested Citation

  • Shayan Eskandari & Andreas Leoutsarakos & Troy Mursch & Jeremy Clark, 2018. "A first look at browser-based Cryptojacking," Papers 1803.02887, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1803.02887
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.02887
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Edelman & Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2007. "Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction: Selling Billions of Dollars Worth of Keywords," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 242-259, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Asad Waqar Malik & Zahid Anwar, 2022. "Do Charging Stations Benefit from Cryptojacking? A Novel Framework for Its Financial Impact Analysis on Electric Vehicles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-15, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abou Nabout, Nadia & Skiera, Bernd, 2012. "Return on Quality Improvements in Search Engine Marketing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 141-154.
    2. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    3. Parag A. Pathak & Alex Rees-Jones & Tayfun Sönmez, 2020. "Immigration Lottery Design: Engineered and Coincidental Consequences of H-1B Reforms," NBER Working Papers 26767, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Frank Kelly & Peter Key & Neil Walton, 2016. "Efficient Advert Assignment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 822-837, August.
    5. Ming Chen & Sareh Nabi & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2023. "Advancing Ad Auction Realism: Practical Insights & Modeling Implications," Papers 2307.11732, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    6. Ying-Ju Chen, 2017. "Optimal Dynamic Auctions for Display Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 897-913, August.
    7. Anindya Ghose & Sha Yang, 2007. "An Empirical Analysis of Search Engine Advertising: Sponsored Search and Cross-Selling in Electronic Markets," Working Papers 07-35, NET Institute, revised Sep 2007.
    8. Sami Najafi-Asadolahi & Kristin Fridgeirsdottir, 2014. "Cost-per-Click Pricing for Display Advertising," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 482-497, October.
    9. Mahsa Derakhshan & Negin Golrezaei & Renato Paes Leme, 2022. "Linear Program-Based Approximation for Personalized Reserve Prices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(3), pages 1849-1864, March.
    10. Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver & M. Bumin Yenmez, 2020. "Fair Allocation of Vaccines, Ventilators and Antiviral Treatments: Leaving No Ethical Value Behind in Health Care Rationing," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 1015, Boston College Department of Economics.
    11. Qingmin Liu & George J. Mailath & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson, 2012. "Matching with Incomplete Information," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000000551, David K. Levine.
    12. C.-Philipp Heller & Johannes Johnen & Sebastian Schmitz, 2019. "Congestion Pricing: A Mechanism Design Approach," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 53(1), pages 74-7-98.
    13. Alex Jiyoung Kim & Subramanian Balachander, 2023. "Coordinating traditional media advertising and online advertising in brand marketing," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1865-1879, June.
    14. Fei Long & Kinshuk Jerath & Miklos Sarvary, 2022. "Designing an Online Retail Marketplace: Leveraging Information from Sponsored Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 115-138, January.
    15. Youngwoo Koh, 2013. "Keyword auctions with budget-constrained bidders," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 17(4), pages 307-321, December.
    16. Song Yao & Carl F. Mela, 2008. "A Dynamic Model of Sponsored Search Advertising," Working Papers 08-16, NET Institute, revised Sep 2008.
    17. Francesco Decarolis & Maris Goldmanis & Antonio Penta, 2020. "Marketing Agencies and Collusive Bidding in Online Ad Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4433-4454, October.
    18. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2020. "On the Benefits of Set-Asides," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1655-1696.
    19. Stefan Bechtold & Catherine Tucker, 2014. "Trademarks, Triggers, and Online Search," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 718-750, December.
    20. Jonathan Levin, 2011. "The Economics of Internet Markets," Discussion Papers 10-018, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1803.02887. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.