Fake Submissions for Fake Businesses

Ages ago, when I was still in high school, one of my family members had just begun working as a high school teacher. We happened to discuss the typical subjects given for the written exams, and my view on the subjects was that they were so thematically predictable that one could probably create a generic, pre-written exam paper and simply replace words and phrases according to the specific subject given. The teacher agreed, and we almost set out to develop some software that could auto-generate such a report.

Fast-forward to 2005 where a group of MIT students basically did just that using a context-free grammar to auto-generate an article that, at first glance, would appear to be a scientific paper detailing a computer science topic. Except, of course, that the paper would be complete bogus consisting of phrases that sound right only to someone that doesn't have a clue.

And that's the point. It really looks valid to someone that doesn't have a clue. It looks like a valid scientific paper in the eyes of those people that try to make quick bucks by organizing "fake" conferences, for example.

A "fake" conference isn't all fake, because it actually exists, accepts submissions, and lets the attendees present their speeches. The submission standards are so low, however, that anything qualifies as long as it motivates the would-be attendees to pay the conference registration fee that serves as the organizer's income. The organizer has no interest in scholarly standards and contents and is interested only in profiting from the conference. So by scientific and most ethic standards it's a scam, but one might argue that from a capitalistic point of view it adheres to principles of supply and demand and isn't illegal.

I've received my share of call for submissions from a variety of conferences, which sometimes appear to find prospective candidates by visiting the attendee list of more respected conferences. It's tempting to use the scientific generator to create a bogus paper and get the chance to present my "research" in the same manner as the MIT students did in their video footage from the WMSCI 2005 conference wearing mad-professor wigs and lab coat and all.

To be fair, the MIT students did not give their presentation as part of the conference, and were in fact disinvited from the conference. The fact that their paper was nonetheless accepted as a "non-reviewed paper" is strong enough indication that the conference--which receives suspiciously little mention in academic circles on the web, except about its acceptance of the bogus paper--is a scam.

It is not only fake conferences that can be exposed by honeypots in the form of fake content submissions. "Awardmestar" is a piece of software that does absolutely nothing at all, and is intended as an experiment to see how many shareware awards it would get. If it gets any awards at all, presumable the award is worthless.

"Awardmestar" misses its mark, however, because visitors to the shareware directories find the idea so hilarious that they vote for the software and thus boots its rating in the directory. The rating certainly doesn't reflect the use value of the software, but it doesn't imply that the hosting shareware directory is a bogus site. At best, it illustrates that the site does not attempt to review the submissions, which in case of software would be both prohibitively complicated and dangerous for security reasons.