Credential Harvesting and Account Takeover: Mechanisms, Impacts, and Defenses

Abstract

In the digital era, cyber threats such as credential harvesting and account takeover (ATO) have emerged as significant challenges to online security, compromising personal and organizational data. Credential harvesting involves stealing login credentials through techniques like phishing, malware, and keylogging, while ATO leverages these credentials to gain unauthorized access to accounts, leading to financial losses, identity theft, and privacy breaches. This research examines the mechanisms behind these attacks, their socioeconomic impacts, and effective countermeasures. Through a qualitative analysis of cybersecurity reports, academic literature, and case studies from 2018 to 2024, we confirm that phishing remains the dominant method for credential theft, accounting for over 80% of incidents. Multi-factor authentication (MFA) and user awareness significantly reduce ATO risks. The study highlights the need for adaptive security measures and continuous education to counter evolving threats. Recommendations include integrating AI- driven detection systems and fostering behavioral changes to enhance cybersecurity resilience.

Introduction

The rapid expansion of digital platforms has increased dependence on online accounts, while simultaneously amplifying cyber threats such as credential harvesting and account takeover (ATO). Credential harvesting involves stealing login details through phishing, malware, or malicious websites, which are then used to gain unauthorized access to user accounts. Despite advances in cybersecurity, these attacks persist due to evolving attacker tactics, human vulnerabilities, and technological gaps, undermining trust in digital systems.

This study examines how credential harvesting and ATO are carried out, their impacts, and effective defense mechanisms. Drawing on secondary data from cybersecurity reports and academic literature (2018–2024), the research adopts a qualitative, thematic analysis approach. The literature identifies phishing as the dominant attack vector, responsible for over 80% of credential theft incidents, with automation tools like credential-stuffing bots further increasing the scale of ATO attacks. Theoretical frameworks such as the Attack Chain Model, Social Engineering Framework, and CIA Triad are used to contextualize these threats.

Findings show that ATO leads to severe consequences, including financial losses, identity theft, and reputational damage, with data breaches costing organizations an average of $4.37 million. Phishing, malware, and credential stuffing are the most common attack mechanisms. Effective countermeasures include multi-factor authentication (MFA), which can reduce ATO risk by up to 99%, user awareness training, and AI-driven anomaly detection systems. However, human error remains a significant factor in most breaches.

The discussion confirms the study’s hypotheses that phishing is the primary cause of credential harvesting and that MFA is highly effective in preventing ATO. While advanced defenses are important, the results also highlight the continued value of basic security practices such as strong password policies. Overall, the study emphasizes the need for a combined technical and user-centric approach to mitigate credential-based cyber threats and strengthen digital trust.

References

[1] Kaspersky. (2020). Phishing Threats and Prevention. Kaspersky Labs. [2] Verizon. (2022). 2022 Data Breach Investigations Report. Verizon. [3] Mandiant. (2019). The Attack Chain Model and Cyber Defense. Mandiant. [4] IBM Security. (2022). Cost of a Data Breach Report. IBM Security. [5] Cybersecurity Ventures. (2023). Cybercrime Report 2023. Cybersecurity Ventures. [6] Akamai. (2021). State of the Internet: Credential Stuffing Attacks. Akamai Technologies. [7] Hadnagy, C. (2010). Social Engineering: The Art of Human Hacking. Wiley. [8] Pfleeger, C. P., & Pfleeger, S. L. (2015). Security in Computing. Prentice Hall. [9] Microsoft. (2021). Cyber Signals: Defending Against Phishing Attacks. Microsoft Security. [10] Google. (2020). Security Keys and Multi-Factor Authentication: A Study on Effectiveness. Google Security Blog. [11] Bada, M., Sasse, A. M., & Nurse, J. R. C. (2019). Cyber Security Awareness Campaigns: Why Do They Fail to Change Behaviour? International Conference on Cyber Security. [12] Krebs, B. (2020). Twitter Hack: How Social Engineering Enabled Account Takeover. Krebs on Security. [13] Capital One. (2019). Information on the Capital One Cyber Incident. Capital One Press Release. [14] CrowdStrike. (2023). 2023 Global Threat Report. CrowdStrike. [15] NIST. (2020). Digital Identity Guidelines: Authentication and Lifecycle Management. NIST Special Publication 800-63B.

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Sejal B. Gorave , Prof. Suhas Rautmare . This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.