Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Phishing

Phishing is a cyber attack technique in which perpetrators impersonate trustworthy entities to deceive individuals into divulging sensitive information, such as usernames, passwords, or financial details, often via fraudulent emails, text messages, or websites that mimic legitimate sources.^[1]^[2] This social engineering method exploits human vulnerabilities like trust and urgency rather than technical exploits, making it a persistent threat despite advancing defenses.^[3] The practice traces its origins to the mid-1990s, when hackers used automated tools like AOHell to steal America Online credentials by posing as AOL staff via instant messages and emails.^[4] Over time, phishing evolved alongside digital communication, shifting from dial-up services to targeting e-commerce sites and financial institutions by the early 2000s, with attacks incorporating malware distribution and sophisticated spoofing.^[5] Common variants include spear phishing, which personalizes lures for high-value targets; vishing, involving deceptive phone calls; and smishing, using SMS to prompt harmful actions.^[6]^[7] Phishing's prevalence underscores its effectiveness, with over 90% of organizations experiencing attacks in 2024 and more than 38 million incidents detected globally that year, contributing to average data breach costs exceeding $4.88 million per phishing-initiated event.^[8]^[9]^[10] In the first quarter of 2025 alone, phishing reports surged to over one million, reflecting adaptations like AI-enhanced personalization and polymorphic evasion tactics that challenge email filters and user awareness.^[11]^[12] Despite mitigation efforts through education and technology, phishing's low barrier to entry and high yield sustain its dominance in cybercrime, often serving as an entry point for ransomware and larger breaches.^[13]

Definition and Characteristics

Core Definition and Mechanisms

Phishing is a cyber attack technique wherein perpetrators impersonate legitimate entities to deceive individuals into divulging sensitive information, such as login credentials, financial details, or personal data, typically through electronic communications like email, text messages, or websites.^[1]^[14] This method constitutes a form of social engineering, exploiting human trust and psychological vulnerabilities rather than technical exploits alone.^[15] The term "phishing" derives from the analogy of "fishing" for valuable information using baited lures.^[16] At its core, phishing operates through a sequence of deceptive steps: first, attackers craft messages that mimic authentic sources, often spoofing sender identities or domains to evade initial scrutiny.^[17] Victims are then prompted to interact—such as clicking hyperlinks leading to counterfeit websites, downloading malicious attachments, or directly supplying data—under pretexts of urgency, authority, or reward.^[18] Successful interactions result in either direct theft of entered information on fake login pages or deployment of malware that compromises the victim's device for further exploitation.^[19] Key mechanisms hinge on perceptual manipulation and behavioral triggers; for instance, emails may replicate official branding and language to foster credibility, while urgency cues like "account suspension" compel hasty responses without verification.^[20] Unlike brute-force or vulnerability scanning, phishing prioritizes the human element as the weakest link, with success rates amplified by low awareness or fatigue among targets.^[21] This approach enables scalable attacks, as minimal customization can yield widespread results across mass distributions.^[22]

Key Characteristics and Distinctions

Phishing attacks fundamentally rely on social engineering, wherein perpetrators impersonate legitimate entities—such as financial institutions, government agencies, or colleagues—to deceive recipients into divulging confidential information, clicking malicious links, or downloading harmful attachments.^[19] This deception exploits human vulnerabilities like trust, fear, or curiosity rather than inherent technical flaws in systems, distinguishing phishing from exploits targeting software vulnerabilities.^[21] Common indicators include urgent or threatening language, such as warnings of account suspension or overdue payments, generic greetings lacking personalization, and requests for sensitive data like passwords or credit card details, which legitimate organizations rarely solicit via unsolicited communications.^[23]^[24] A core mechanism involves crafting messages that mimic authentic communications, often through spoofed sender addresses or forged headers, to bypass initial scrutiny and prompt immediate action without verification.^[14] Empirical studies indicate variable success rates, with untargeted phishing emails achieving click-through rates of approximately 3-5% in controlled tests, though susceptibility rises to over 30% for repeated exposures in organizational settings due to fatigue or inadequate training.^[25] Unlike automated malware propagation, which spreads independently via network vulnerabilities, phishing requires active victim participation, underscoring its dependence on psychological manipulation over computational force.^[21] Phishing is distinct from related tactics like vishing (voice phishing via phone calls) or smishing (SMS-based phishing), which adapt the deception to non-email channels but share the impersonation core, whereas pharming involves DNS manipulation to redirect legitimate traffic to fraudulent sites without user deception.^[26] It differs from broader cyber threats such as ransomware deployment through drive-by downloads, which may not require user consent, or brute-force attacks on credentials, emphasizing phishing's reliance on engineered plausibility rather than probabilistic guessing or zero-day exploits.^[27] This human-centric approach explains phishing's prevalence, accounting for the plurality of reported cyber incidents in federal data, including over 114,000 phishing/vishing/smishing/pharming complaints in 2019 alone.^[26]

Types of Phishing Attacks

Mass-Market Phishing

Mass-market phishing, also known as generic or bulk phishing, involves the indiscriminate distribution of fraudulent messages to vast audiences, typically via email, with the intent of deceiving recipients into divulging sensitive information or performing actions that benefit the attacker. These campaigns rely on high volume rather than personalization, sending identical or minimally varied lures to millions of potential victims in hopes that a small percentage will respond.^[28]^[29] Common tactics in mass-market phishing include spoofing sender addresses to mimic trusted entities such as banks, government agencies, or popular services like Microsoft or Amazon, often urging immediate action on fabricated issues like account suspensions, overdue payments, or security alerts. Messages frequently contain malicious links leading to counterfeit websites that harvest credentials or attachments embedding malware. For instance, emails purporting to be from financial institutions may request verification of details under threat of account closure. Success rates are low—typically under 1%—but the scale compensates, with over 3.4 billion phishing emails dispatched daily worldwide, comprising about 1.2% of total email traffic.^[16]^[30]^[31] Prevalence has surged with digital adoption; in 2024, phishing attacks inflicted $12.5 billion in global losses, a 25% rise from the prior year, though mass-market variants contribute to this through sheer quantity rather than sophisticated targeting. Unlike spear-phishing, which accounts for over 71% of targeted incidents, mass-market efforts prioritize automation and botnets for distribution, evading filters via obfuscated URLs or polymorphic content. Victims often include non-technical users, with 94% of malware infections traced to phishing origins, underscoring the tactic's role in broader cybercrime ecosystems.^[30]^[32]^[30] Defensive measures emphasize user education and technical filters, as mass-market phishing exploits human error over zero-day vulnerabilities. Organizations report filtering out most attempts, yet residual successes drive ongoing financial and data breaches, with average per-incident costs reaching $4.88 million in 2024.^[33]

Targeted Phishing Variants

Targeted phishing attacks differ from mass-market variants by employing personalization and research into specific victims, leveraging details such as names, roles, recent events, or organizational hierarchies to craft convincing lures that exploit trust and urgency.^[34]^[7] This customization raises success rates significantly, with spear-phishing emails comprising less than 0.1% of total volume but accounting for 66% of data breaches originating from phishing.^[35] Attackers often gather intelligence via social media, public records, or prior data leaks to mimic legitimate communications, making detection harder than generic campaigns.^[36] Spear phishing represents a core targeted variant, focusing on individuals or small groups within an organization, such as IT administrators or department heads, using tailored messages that reference personal or professional context to induce actions like credential submission or malware downloads.^[7]^[37] For instance, an attacker might pose as a colleague requesting urgent file access, incorporating details from the target's LinkedIn profile. Businesses reported a 150% year-over-year increase in spear-phishing incidents in recent assessments, underscoring its prevalence against mid-level personnel.^[8] Unlike broad phishing, spear efforts prioritize quality over quantity, often yielding higher payoffs through direct access to sensitive systems.^[34] Whaling, a specialized form of spear phishing, targets high-profile executives like CEOs or CFOs—termed "whales" for their value—aiming to extract funds, data, or approvals via impersonation of peers or authorities.^[36]^[38] These attacks exploit the autonomy of senior leaders, who may authorize large transactions without standard verifications; for example, in 2016, Ubiquiti Networks lost $46.7 million after an executive was deceived into wiring funds to fraudulent accounts.^[39] Another case involved Seagate Technology in 2016, where attackers phished W-2 forms for 10,000 employees by spoofing an executive's email.^[40] Whaling demands extensive reconnaissance, including executive travel schedules or board communications, to fabricate urgency, such as fabricated merger deals or legal threats.^[41] Business email compromise (BEC) overlaps with whaling and spear phishing but emphasizes financial fraud through email spoofing of trusted business contacts, often requesting wire transfers or invoice changes.^[42] The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center reported $2.77 billion in BEC losses across 21,442 U.S. incidents in 2024, contributing to cumulative global exposed losses exceeding $55 billion since tracking began.^[43]^[44] A notable BEC whaling incident at Crelan Bank in 2016 resulted in €70 million stolen via targeted executive deception.^[45] These schemes thrive on minimal technical exploits, relying instead on social engineering to bypass controls, with 64% of businesses encountering BEC attempts in 2024 averaging $150,000 per incident.^[13] Recovery rates remain low due to irreversible transfers, highlighting the causal link between targeted personalization and outsized economic damage.^[46]

Non-Email Phishing Modalities

Non-email phishing exploits communication channels and delivery methods beyond electronic mail, leveraging mobile devices, telephony, social platforms, and physical media to deceive victims into divulging sensitive information or executing harmful actions. These modalities capitalize on the ubiquity of smartphones and personal interactions, often bypassing email filters and user wariness toward unsolicited messages. Attackers employ social engineering tactics tailored to the medium's immediacy and perceived legitimacy, such as urgent alerts via text or calls mimicking trusted entities.^[6]^[7] Smishing, or SMS phishing, involves fraudulent text messages urging recipients to click links, download attachments, or provide credentials under pretexts like account alerts or prize notifications. These attacks surged 328% in recent years, reflecting attackers' adaptation to mobile dependency. In 2023, smishing contributed to heightened breach risks, with texts often spoofing banks or delivery services to prompt immediate responses.^[47]^[48] Vishing, voice phishing via telephone, features callers impersonating officials, tech support, or colleagues to extract data through scripted conversations exploiting authority or urgency. Vishing attacks increased 260% from 2022 to 2023 and surged 442% between the first and second halves of 2024, driven by caller ID spoofing and AI-enhanced voice synthesis. Notable incidents include scammers posing as IRS agents demanding payment, leading to millions in losses annually.^[49]^[50]^[51] Quishing employs QR codes in public spaces, posters, or messages, directing scanners to malicious sites mimicking legitimate portals for credential theft. This method gained traction post-2020 with contactless trends, evading traditional digital scrutiny by blending physical and digital deception. Attackers often overlay fake codes on real signage, such as parking payment prompts, to harvest login details.^[48]^[52] Social media phishing occurs through platforms like Facebook or LinkedIn, where fake profiles, ads, or direct messages distribute malicious links or requests disguised as friend connections, job offers, or event invites. These attacks exploit trust networks, with shortened URLs masking destinations; in 2024, such tactics accounted for significant credential compromises amid rising platform usage.^[53]^[54] Physical modalities, including USB drop attacks, involve leaving malware-infected drives in accessible locations like parking lots to entice curious finders into plugging them in, triggering automatic execution of payloads such as ransomware. Studies show recovery rates exceeding 50% in controlled drops, underscoring human curiosity's role; attackers label drives enticingly, e.g., "Confidential Payroll Data," to boost infection likelihood.^[55]^[56]^[57]

Emerging and Hybrid Forms

Artificial intelligence has enabled emerging phishing variants that generate hyper-personalized content at scale, incorporating details from social media, recent news, or corporate events to mimic legitimate communications. For instance, AI tools can produce thousands of tailored emails per minute, optimizing phrasing for higher engagement rates and evading detection through natural language variation. Deepfake audio and video, including voice cloning for vishing, have risen 15% in impersonation attacks targeting finance executives over the past year. These tactics leverage generative AI to create synthetic media for callback scams or video calls, scaling social engineering beyond manual efforts.^[58]^[13]^[59] Quishing, or QR code phishing, represents another recent modality where attackers embed malicious QR codes in emails, PDFs, or physical posters, directing scans to fraudulent sites that harvest credentials or install malware. In 2025, common implementations include password-protected PDFs with hidden QR codes or calendar invites prompting scans for "urgent updates." Phishing-as-a-service platforms have proliferated, allowing non-experts to deploy AI-enhanced kits for credential theft or ransomware precursors, with abuse of legitimate URL shorteners complicating inline detection. Multi-channel sequences, such as email followed by SMS or voicemail lures, further hybridize delivery to bypass single-vector filters.^[60]^[61]^[62] Hybrid phishing attacks integrate credential phishing with malware deployment in unified campaigns, often using emails that offer dual payloads: a benign-looking link for login theft alongside embedded executables or drive-by downloads. Observed in 2025, these combine social engineering with technical exploits like Log4Shell targeting in Java environments to propagate malware such as Qakbot. In hybrid work settings, attackers exploit cloud access post-initial phishing, blending email vectors with mobile SMS or app notifications to escalate privileges. AI-augmented hybrids, such as those mimicking job portals or luxury scams across email and phone, demonstrate causal chains where initial deception funnels victims into persistent access.^[63]^[64]^[65]

Techniques and Tactics

Communication Deception Methods

Communication deception methods in phishing primarily involve forging elements of the message to mimic legitimate communications, thereby eroding user suspicion. Attackers exploit vulnerabilities in email protocols and human perception by altering sender information, such as the "From" field or display name, to impersonate trusted entities like banks or government agencies.^[66]^[2] This spoofing technique disguises the true origin of the message, making it appear to originate from a familiar or authoritative source.^[67] Sender forgery extends to manipulating email headers, where attackers insert falsified routing data or reply-to addresses to reinforce the illusion of authenticity.^[68] In addition to textual deception, phishers incorporate visual mimics, such as replicated logos, signatures, or formatting consistent with the impersonated organization's branding, to enhance credibility.^[69] Domain-level deception complements these tactics through the use of homograph attacks or typosquatted domains that visually resemble legitimate ones, such as replacing "o" with "0" in a URL.^[2] Beyond email, similar methods apply to SMS (smishing) and voice phishing (vishing), where caller ID spoofing or text sender manipulation creates false provenance.^[3] These techniques rely on the absence or circumvention of authentication protocols like SPF, DKIM, and DMARC, which verify sender legitimacy but are not universally enforced.^[70] Empirical analysis of phishing campaigns reveals that over 90% incorporate some form of sender impersonation to bypass initial scrutiny.^[71]

Technical Exploitation Techniques

Phishers exploit weaknesses in email protocols through sender spoofing, forging the "From" header in Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) transmissions to impersonate trusted sources. This technique succeeds because SMTP lacks built-in authentication for the envelope sender, allowing attackers to insert arbitrary addresses without verification, though Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC) policies can align Sender Policy Framework (SPF) and DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) checks to detect mismatches.^[66] Spoofing extends to reply-to and display names, evading basic filters by mimicking legitimate formatting, with attackers often routing through open relays or compromised mail servers to obscure origins.^[72] Credential harvesting occurs via cloned websites that replicate legitimate login interfaces using copied HyperText Markup Language (HTML), Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), and JavaScript to mirror visual and functional elements. Attackers deploy automated tools or manual extraction to duplicate forms, hosting them on domains registered via typosquatting—slight misspellings of real sites—or internationalized domain names (IDNs) exploiting homograph attacks with visually similar Unicode characters (e.g., Cyrillic 'а' resembling Latin 'a'). These sites capture submitted data through server-side scripts like PHP handlers that log POST requests to attacker-controlled databases.^[16] Obfuscated hyperlinks in phishing messages use techniques such as URL encoding, IP literals instead of domain names, or multi-stage redirects to bypass blacklists and antivirus scanners.^[14] Malicious payloads delivered via email attachments exploit software parsing flaws, such as buffer overflows in Adobe Reader or Microsoft Office macros enabling Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) code execution. Attachments disguised as invoices or updates contain embedded executables or scripts that, upon opening, install keyloggers, spyware, or ransomware, often leveraging zero-day vulnerabilities if unpatched.^[14] JavaScript-based exploits on phishing pages may invoke browser APIs for clipboard hijacking or session token theft, while iframe overlays superimpose fake forms over real sites in man-in-the-browser attacks. Phishers further enhance legitimacy by acquiring low-cost Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) certificates from public certificate authorities, displaying HTTPS padlocks despite fraudulent content, as validation typically requires only domain control proof rather than site legitimacy.^[6] Advanced variants incorporate dynamic techniques like JavaScript obfuscation to evade static analysis or QR codes embedding shortened, malicious URLs that redirect to phishing endpoints upon scanning, complicating mobile detection.^[73] These methods collectively exploit gaps in client-side validation, relying on user interaction to bridge technical delivery with data exfiltration.^[16]

Psychological and Behavioral Manipulation

Phishing attacks fundamentally rely on social engineering principles, which exploit inherent human psychological vulnerabilities rather than solely technical flaws, enabling attackers to induce victims to divulge sensitive information or perform compromising actions.^[74] These manipulations target cognitive shortcuts, or heuristics, that individuals use for rapid decision-making under uncertainty, often overriding rational scrutiny. Empirical studies indicate that such tactics succeed because they align with nonconscious mental processes, altering perceptions and decisions without victims' full awareness.^[75] A primary technique involves invoking authority bias, where victims comply with directives perceived as originating from credible sources, such as banks or government agencies, due to ingrained deference to perceived experts or superiors. For instance, emails mimicking official logos and language prompt users to click links or provide credentials, as the brain defaults to trusting familiar symbols of legitimacy.^[76] Similarly, reciprocity is leveraged by offering unsolicited "gifts" like free software updates or prizes, exploiting the social norm of returning favors, which compels disclosure of personal data in response.^[77] Attackers frequently employ urgency and scarcity to trigger loss aversion, a bias where the pain of potential loss outweighs equivalent gains, prompting hasty actions like immediate password resets under threats of account suspension.^[78] This is compounded by emotional hijacking, such as "amygdala hijack," where fear or panic—induced by warnings of security breaches or financial penalties—bypasses prefrontal cortex deliberation, leading to impulsive clicks on malicious links.^[79] Curiosity-driven lures, like notifications of "suspicious activity" or exclusive deals, further exploit hyperbolic discounting, where immediate rewards are overvalued despite long-term risks.^[76] Behavioral patterns are manipulated through habituation and familiarity, as repeated exposure to benign alerts desensitizes users, making phishing variants harder to distinguish; for example, vishing calls mimic routine customer service interactions to elicit verbal confirmations of details.^[80] Social proof, another tactic, incorporates fabricated testimonials or "everyone is doing it" implications to normalize compliance, aligning with humans' tendency to follow perceived group behavior in ambiguous situations.^[81] These methods demonstrate causal efficacy: phishers succeed by engineering scenarios that exploit evolved psychological adaptations for survival and socialization, rather than novel inventions, with success rates in simulated tests exceeding 20% even among trained populations.^[82]

Historical Development

Origins in Early Computing

The roots of phishing techniques emerged from phone phreaking in the 1960s and 1970s, where hackers employed social engineering—such as impersonating telephone operators or technicians—to obtain confidential switching codes and enable free long-distance calls. This practice, which relied on deception to bypass technical controls, transitioned into early computing as phreakers adapted their methods to digital systems, using computers to generate tones or exploit early data networks.^[83]^[84] A phishing technique was first formally described in computing contexts during a 1987 presentation at the Interex conference of the International HP Users Group. Titled "System Security: A Hacker's Perspective," the paper outlined how attackers could impersonate trusted entities or services to trick users into disclosing credentials, such as passwords on Hewlett-Packard minicomputer systems accessed via terminals.^[85]^[86] This approach exploited human trust rather than software vulnerabilities, targeting environments where authentication depended on shared secrets entered at consoles or early networked terminals.^[87] In the pre-internet era of mainframes and minicomputers (1970s–1980s), such deceptions remained theoretical or limited to localized incidents within organizations, as widespread user connectivity was absent. Hackers in communities around bulletin board systems (BBSes), which proliferated from 1978 onward, occasionally used pseudonyms or false pretenses to gain elite access levels or extract login details, foreshadowing scalable digital fraud.^[88] However, without email or public networks, these tactics did not constitute mass phishing, focusing instead on direct interaction or physical/social proximity in academic or corporate settings. The emphasis on psychological manipulation over code-breaking distinguished these origins from contemporaneous technical exploits like buffer overflows.^[89]

Growth During Widespread Internet Adoption (1990s–2000s)

Phishing attacks originated in the mid-1990s amid the expansion of dial-up internet services, particularly targeting America Online (AOL), which dominated early consumer access with millions of subscribers.^[88] Hackers from the warez community posed as AOL staff via instant messaging and email, tricking users into revealing login credentials to gain free access for spamming or distributing pirated software.^[5] The term "phishing," a play on "fishing" for sensitive data with the "ph" borrowed from phone phreaking, first appeared around 1995 in hacker forums, coinciding with tools like AOHell that automated credential theft through password guessing and social engineering.^[90] These early efforts exploited users' limited technical savvy and the novelty of online communication, with AOL's rapid growth—reaching over 10 million members by 1997—providing a vast pool of targets as household internet penetration rose from under 20% in 1995 to nearly 40% by 2000 in the U.S.^[4] By the early 2000s, phishing evolved from credential theft for access to direct financial fraud, paralleling the surge in e-commerce platforms like eBay and PayPal. Attackers sent mass emails mimicking legitimate financial institutions, urging users to "verify" accounts on spoofed websites that captured login details, credit card numbers, and personal data.^[91] In 2003, phishers registered numerous domains resembling trusted brands to host fake login pages, enabling scalable deception as global internet users exceeded 400 million.^[90] The ILOVEYOU worm in May 2000, which infected approximately 45 million computers via enticing email attachments, demonstrated phishing's psychological leverage and amplified awareness of email-borne threats, though it blended malware with social engineering.^[5] Attack volumes escalated dramatically in the mid-2000s, with phishing transitioning to organized, profit-driven operations amid broadband adoption and email's ubiquity—U.S. households with internet access doubled to over 60% by 2005. Between May 2004 and May 2005, an estimated 1.2 million U.S. victims suffered losses totaling $929 million, underscoring the tactic's maturation into a mass-market scam exploiting nascent online banking and low public vigilance.^[88] This growth stemmed from causal factors including minimal email authentication standards, absence of widespread spam filters until tools like Gmail's 2004 launch, and users' overtrust in digital communications during the dot-com era's optimism, enabling attackers to cast wide nets with minimal technical barriers.^[4]

Maturation with Advanced Targeting (2010s)

During the 2010s, phishing evolved from broad-spectrum campaigns to highly targeted operations, with spear-phishing emerging as a dominant vector due to its reliance on personalized reconnaissance and social engineering. Attackers increasingly utilized open-source intelligence (OSINT) from social media platforms, leaked databases, and corporate directories to craft messages mimicking legitimate communications from colleagues, vendors, or authorities, thereby bypassing basic filters and exploiting human trust. This maturation reflected a strategic pivot as global spam volumes plummeted—from roughly 300 billion emails daily in 2010 to 40 billion by 2011—prompting cybercriminals to prioritize quality over quantity for higher yields.^[92] Spear-phishing attacks proliferated as the preferred initial intrusion method for advanced persistent threats (APTs), enabling sustained access to networks through tailored lures that evaded detection by incorporating victim-specific details, such as recent job changes or personal events. By mid-decade, these tactics underpinned state-sponsored operations and financially motivated groups alike, with reports indicating spear-phishing's role in compromising critical infrastructure and intellectual property. The technique's efficacy stemmed from its causal alignment with behavioral vulnerabilities: personalized appeals reduced skepticism, increasing click-through rates on malicious links or attachments by orders of magnitude compared to generic blasts.^[93]^[94] Whaling, an escalated form of spear-phishing aimed at C-suite executives and high-value targets, gained traction for its potential to authorize multimillion-dollar fraudulent transactions or disclose sensitive strategies. These attacks often simulated urgent executive directives, such as fund transfers or confidential file shares, leveraging the targets' authority and limited scrutiny under time pressure. Early warnings about whaling surfaced around 2011, coinciding with publicized cases of familial targeting via publicly available email addresses.^[95] Quantitative trends underscored this shift: spear-phishing's prevalence surged to 64% of phishing incidents by 2018, from 53% in 2017, while mass phishing waned amid improved email authentication protocols. This era's innovations, including the fusion of phishing with malware droppers and remote access tools, amplified impacts, as seen in APT campaigns where initial spear-phishing footholds facilitated lateral movement and data exfiltration over months.^[71]^[96]

Modern Escalations and Technological Integration (2020s)

The decade of the 2020s witnessed a marked escalation in phishing volume and sophistication, driven initially by the COVID-19 pandemic, which prompted a 220% surge in incidents during peak periods as attackers exploited themes like vaccines and relief programs.^[97] Phishing attacks increased by 667% in the first quarter of 2020 alone, with related scams rising 400% since March of that year.^[33]^[98] By 2024, over 38 million attacks were detected globally, culminating in nearly 1 million unique incidents in the fourth quarter, a rise of more than 100,000 from the prior quarter.^[9]^[50] The Anti-Phishing Working Group recorded 1,003,924 attacks in the first quarter of 2025, the highest since late 2023, alongside a 700% increase in malicious phishing sites since 2020, reaching nearly 1 million per month.^[11]^[99] Technological advancements, particularly artificial intelligence (AI), have integrated deeply into phishing operations, enabling attackers to automate and personalize campaigns at scale. Generative AI tools facilitate the creation of highly convincing emails, messages, and social engineering content that evade traditional detection filters by rephrasing suspicious elements or mimicking legitimate communications.^[100]^[101] AI-driven phishing, including deepfake audio for voice cloning and real-time impersonation, emerged as a top concern for 51% of security leaders by 2025, amplifying effectiveness in vishing (voice phishing), which saw a 1633% surge in attacks.^[102]^[103] These tools also support malware development and target analysis, contributing to phishing's role in 22% of ransomware incidents in 2025.^[49]^[104] Hybrid and multi-channel tactics further escalated threats, incorporating platforms like Telegram for phishing distribution, QR codes (quishing) for bypassing visual scrutiny, and blob URLs or Google Translate for obfuscation.^[105] Over 80% of phishing sites now employ HTTPS encryption to appear trustworthy, while business email compromise (BEC) affected 64% of organizations, often leveraging AI for tailored executive impersonations.^[13] These integrations reflect a shift toward "malwareless" attacks, where deception relies on psychological manipulation augmented by technology rather than attachments, sustaining phishing's dominance despite defensive advancements.^[33]

Notable Incidents

Pivotal Early Cases

The earliest documented phishing attacks emerged in the mid-1990s, targeting users of America Online (AOL), the dominant internet service provider at the time with millions of subscribers. Hackers, often young enthusiasts using tools like the AOHell program released around 1994, impersonated AOL customer service via instant messages or emails to solicit usernames, passwords, and credit card details under pretexts such as account verification or billing disputes.^[106]^[107] AOHell facilitated these efforts by automating password guessing and generating fake credit card numbers for purchasing additional AOL hours, marking one of the first instances of the term "phishing" in hacking communities, derived from "fishing" for credentials and "phreaking" telephone hacks.^[90] These AOL campaigns represented a pivotal shift from isolated cracking to mass-targeted deception, exploiting the platform's closed ecosystem where users relied on AOL's proprietary software and lacked widespread awareness of digital fraud. Attackers amassed thousands of valid accounts, reselling them on underground forums or using them for unauthorized access, which strained AOL's support resources and prompted early countermeasures like improved authentication prompts by 1995.^[5]^[108] The scale escalated as phishing kits proliferated, with hackers employing social engineering scripts to mimic official AOL communications, leading to an estimated epidemic of stolen credentials by the late 1990s that foreshadowed broader internet vulnerabilities.^[84] A notable precursor to financial phishing occurred in June 2001 against E-Gold, an early digital currency service, where attackers sent fraudulent emails posing as the company to capture login credentials, though the attempt yielded limited success due to rudimentary tactics.^[84] This case highlighted phishing's expansion beyond dial-up services to e-commerce, setting the stage for attacks on banks by 2003, but the AOL incidents remain foundational for demonstrating scalable, psychology-driven credential theft without technical exploits.^[90]

Major Corporate and Government Breaches

In 2014, Sony Pictures Entertainment suffered a significant breach initiated through spear-phishing emails targeting employees, allowing intruders—later linked by U.S. authorities to North Korean actors—to deploy malware and exfiltrate over 100 terabytes of data, including unreleased films, executive emails, and personal information on 47,000 individuals. The attack, detected on November 24, 2014, disrupted operations, led to the leak of sensitive content online, and incurred costs estimated at over $100 million in remediation and lost productivity.^[109]^[110] The 2016 Democratic National Committee (DNC) intrusion began with a spear-phishing email sent to DNC chairman John Podesta on March 19, 2016, masquerading as a Google password reset notice, which tricked him into revealing credentials and enabled Russian military intelligence operatives to access DNC servers. Hackers from GRU Units 26165 and 74455 exfiltrated approximately 70 gigabytes of data, including over 20,000 emails later released via WikiLeaks, compromising voter databases and internal communications affecting 44,000 individuals. This incident, part of broader election interference efforts, highlighted vulnerabilities in political organizations despite available security tools.^[111]^[112] Twitter (now X) experienced a high-profile breach on July 15, 2020, when attackers used spear-phishing to compromise employee credentials, gaining internal tool access to hijack 130 prominent accounts including those of Elon Musk, Bill Gates, and Joe Biden, promoting a Bitcoin scam that netted $120,000 in cryptocurrency. The social engineering targeted a small number of internal support staff via phone-based deception, bypassing multi-factor authentication weaknesses, and exposed API vulnerabilities affecting 130 million users indirectly through misinformation spread. U.S. authorities arrested perpetrators, including a 17-year-old Florida resident, underscoring risks in internal access controls.^[113]^[114] The 2021 Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack, disrupting 5,500 miles of fuel infrastructure serving 45% of East Coast supply, likely originated from phishing-enabled credential compromise of an outdated VPN account without multi-factor authentication, allowing DarkSide actors to deploy malware on May 7, 2021, and encrypt systems. The company shut down operations for five days, paid a $4.4 million ransom (partially recovered by authorities), and triggered fuel shortages costing an estimated $1 billion in economic impact, revealing critical infrastructure's reliance on basic phishing defenses.^[115]^[116] Between 2013 and 2015, Lithuanian national Evaldas Rimasauskas orchestrated phishing schemes impersonating vendors to defraud Google and Facebook of over $100 million via fraudulent invoices and wire transfers, exploiting email spoofing to bypass financial controls in these tech giants. Convicted in 2017, the case demonstrated phishing's efficacy against even sophisticated corporations through targeted business email compromise, with losses recovered partially through international cooperation.^[117]

Recent High-Impact Events (2020–2025)

In July 2020, attackers conducted a spear-phishing campaign targeting Twitter employees with access to internal tools, tricking at least one into divulging credentials via phone-based social engineering. This enabled the hijacking of high-profile accounts including those of Elon Musk, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Bill Gates, which posted identical Bitcoin scam messages promising to double sent cryptocurrency. The incident netted approximately $120,000 in illicit funds before accounts were locked, exposing vulnerabilities in internal access controls and prompting Twitter to suspend legacy verification and enhance employee training. A 17-year-old from Florida was later identified as a key perpetrator, with accomplices including a British national who pleaded guilty in 2023.^[118]^[119] In January 2022, the Lapsus hacking group phished a support engineer at Sitel, a third-party vendor for [Okta](/page/Okta)'s [customer support](/page/Customer_support), compromising credentials to access Okta's admin console and view files for 134 customers over several weeks. This breach facilitated subsequent attacks on downstream organizations using Okta for [identity management](/page/Identity_management), including data theft and [ransomware](/page/Ransomware) precursors, though Okta reported no direct customer [tenant](/page/Tenant) compromises. The incident highlighted risks in [supply chain](/page/Supply_chain) support systems, leading Okta to mandate hardware tokens for support staff and disclose the breach after Lapsus screenshots surfaced publicly. A related "0ktapus" phishing campaign in mid-2022 targeted Okta users via fake verification texts, compromising entities like 1Password and Cloudflare.^[120]^[121] On September 10, 2023, the Scattered Spider group executed a vishing attack against MGM Resorts International, impersonating a corporate executive to deceive the IT helpdesk into resetting multi-factor authentication for a linked employee account. This granted initial network access, enabling ALPHV/BlackCat ransomware deployment that disrupted operations across MGM's Las Vegas properties, including slot machines, hotel check-ins, and digital payments, for over a week. The attack caused an estimated $100 million in direct losses without ransom payment, as MGM prioritized system restoration over negotiation, and exposed 10.6 million guest records including payment details. Similar tactics hit Caesars Entertainment concurrently, underscoring persistent efficacy of voice-based social engineering against helpdesk protocols.^[122]^[123] In 2024, phishing-enabled ransomware campaigns continued to escalate, with business email compromise variants contributing to billions in global losses, though specific high-profile incidents like the February Change Healthcare attack involved unconfirmed initial phishing amid stolen credentials and remote access exploits. Overall, phishing attacks surged, with the Anti-Phishing Working Group recording over 1 million unique incidents in Q1 2025 alone, often leveraging AI for personalized lures.^[33]

Impacts and Consequences

Economic and Financial Toll

Phishing attacks impose substantial direct and indirect financial burdens on individuals, businesses, and governments, encompassing stolen funds, remediation expenses, and lost productivity. In 2024, the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) recorded over 298,000 complaints related to phishing and spoofing, contributing to total cybercrime losses of $16.6 billion across all categories, with phishing serving as a primary vector for fraud schemes like business email compromise (BEC).^[124] BEC alone, a sophisticated phishing variant, accounted for adjusted losses exceeding $2.9 billion in 2023, with similar patterns persisting into 2024 amid rising complaint volumes.^[124] These figures likely understate the true toll, as victim underreporting and incomplete loss attribution are common in official tallies.^[125] The average financial impact per phishing-initiated data breach reached $4.88 million globally in 2024, marking a 10% increase from $4.45 million in 2023, according to IBM's Cost of a Data Breach Report; this encompasses detection, response, notification, and post-breach costs, with phishing ranking as the costliest initial attack vector at 16% of breaches analyzed.^[126] Large organizations faced average annual phishing-related losses of $15 million, equivalent to roughly $1,500 per employee, driven by recurring attacks and supply chain compromises.^[127] In the U.S., phishing attacks exerted an estimated $3.5 billion economic impact in 2024, including direct theft and indirect expenses like fraud reversal and legal fees.^[50] Broader projections highlight escalating trends, with some analyses estimating phishing's global cost could approach $250 billion by 2024 when factoring in downstream effects like ransomware deployment, though such figures rely on extrapolations from underreported incidents and vary by methodology.^[33] Verizon's 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report notes phishing's role in 14% of analyzed breaches, often amplifying financial damage through credential theft enabling wire fraud or extortion, with median ransomware payouts from such vectors dropping to $115,000 amid refusal rates rising to 64%—yet overall remediation burdens persist.^[128] These costs disproportionately affect sectors like finance and healthcare, where phishing exploits yield high-value data, underscoring phishing's role as a low-barrier, high-return enabler of economic disruption.^[126]

Security and Data Integrity Effects

Phishing attacks erode organizational security by exploiting human vulnerabilities to circumvent perimeter defenses such as firewalls and intrusion detection systems, enabling unauthorized access to networks and systems. In the Verizon 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report, phishing was identified as a contributing factor in 16% of the 12,195 confirmed data breaches analyzed from 22,052 security incidents, often serving as the initial vector for broader intrusions.^[128] This access frequently results in credential compromise, with phishing and stolen credentials together implicated in nearly 80% of breaches according to prior Verizon analyses, allowing attackers to impersonate legitimate users and bypass multi-factor authentication through techniques like session hijacking or SIM swapping.^[129] Data integrity suffers as phishing-delivered payloads, including malware and ransomware, enable attackers to tamper with information assets. The IBM 2025 Cost of a Data Breach Report notes that phishing, the most common initial attack vector at 16% of incidents, correlates with average breach costs of $4.91 million, partly due to the remediation of altered or corrupted data following malware infections that modify files, inject backdoors, or encrypt datasets for extortion.^[126]^[98] For instance, ransomware strains like those from phishing-initiated infections not only deny availability but also risk permanent data alteration if backups are overwritten or exfiltrated data is manipulated for disinformation campaigns. In healthcare, phishing has precipitated breaches where patient records were accessed and potentially falsified, undermining clinical decision-making and regulatory compliance.^[130] Broader security implications include the facilitation of lateral movement within networks, where compromised endpoints serve as pivots for privilege escalation and persistence mechanisms that degrade overall system trustworthiness. Reports indicate that 60% of breaches involve human elements like phishing susceptibility, amplifying risks to supply chain integrity when targeted at vendors, as seen in doubled third-party breach involvement per the 2025 Verizon DBIR.^[131]^[132] AI-enhanced phishing, comprising 37% of AI-involved breaches, further complicates integrity by generating hyper-personalized lures that increase success rates, leading to undetected persistence and cumulative data corruption over time.^[133]

Broader Societal Ramifications

Phishing attacks contribute to widespread erosion of public trust in digital communications and institutions, as victims increasingly question the authenticity of emails, websites, and official interactions. In the financial sector, advanced phishing has led to significant customer distrust, with reports indicating that repeated incidents exacerbate skepticism toward banks and payment systems, potentially reducing online transaction volumes. This skepticism extends to government entities, where phishing-enabled data breaches undermine confidence in public services, fostering a broader reluctance to engage digitally with authorities.^[134]^[135]^[136] Victims of phishing often experience profound psychological effects, including heightened anxiety, diminished self-confidence, and long-term emotional distress akin to trauma from betrayal. Studies document that successful scams trigger self-doubt and job performance declines among affected employees, while broader scam victimization correlates with persistent mental health issues such as depression and social withdrawal. These individual harms aggregate into societal costs, straining mental health resources and reducing overall productivity, as affected persons exhibit avoidance behaviors toward technology.^[137]^[138]^[139] Phishing disproportionately impacts vulnerable populations, widening the digital divide and entrenching social inequalities. Older adults and those with low digital literacy face elevated risks due to limited familiarity with online threats, leading to higher victimization rates and reinforcing exclusion from digital economies. This vulnerability pattern amplifies socioeconomic disparities, as low-income or less-educated groups suffer repeated exploitation, hindering their access to essential online services like banking or healthcare.^[140]^[141]^[142] On a geopolitical level, state-sponsored phishing campaigns enable espionage and influence operations, destabilizing international relations and national security frameworks. Nation-state actors deploy spear-phishing to infiltrate networks for intelligence gathering or sabotage, as seen in campaigns targeting government and critical infrastructure to advance political agendas. Such activities erode trust in global digital infrastructure, prompting escalatory responses like heightened surveillance and international cyber norms debates, while blurring lines between cybercrime and warfare.^[143]^[144]^[145]

Prevention and Mitigation

User-Centric Approaches

Phishing awareness training constitutes a primary user-centric strategy, focusing on educating individuals to identify deceptive communications through recognition of common indicators such as urgent language, mismatched URLs, or unsolicited requests for sensitive information.^[21] Programs often incorporate interactive modules and simulated phishing emails to reinforce learning, with repeated exposure shown to improve detection rates.^[146] For instance, a 2025 study on embedded phishing training found it reduced individual clicking probability by approximately 20% when users encountered targeted simulations shortly after failing an attempt.^[147] Empirical data underscores the impact of ongoing training regimens over one-time sessions. A 2025 KnowBe4 analysis of global organizations reported an 86% average reduction in phishing click rates within 12 months of implementing security awareness training combined with phishing simulations, particularly benefiting initially vulnerable users.^[148] Conversely, isolated awareness efforts yield modest gains; Microsoft's Digital Defense Report documented only a 3% decrease in click rates from training without simulations, highlighting the necessity of behavioral reinforcement to counter habituation to real threats.^[149] Factors influencing efficacy include user demographics and personality traits, with younger or more impulsive individuals showing slower improvements despite training.^[150] Practical user behaviors further mitigate risks when integrated with training. Individuals should independently verify sender legitimacy by contacting organizations via official channels rather than replying to or clicking links in suspicious messages, a method recommended in cybersecurity guidelines to bypass spoofed domains.^[151] Enabling multi-factor authentication (MFA) on accounts adds a layer against credential phishing, as it requires additional verification beyond passwords, though users must avoid phishing lures that target MFA prompts themselves.^[152] Additional habits include using unique, strong passwords per service to limit breach propagation and promptly reporting potential phishing to IT teams, fostering a non-punitive reporting culture that encourages vigilance without fear of reprisal.^[153]^[154] Despite these approaches, persistent human vulnerabilities persist, as studies indicate even trained users fail to detect novel phishing variants at rates exceeding 40% in some scenarios, underscoring the limits of reliance on individual cognition amid evolving tactics like AI-generated personalization.^[146]^[33] Comprehensive programs thus prioritize continuous, adaptive simulations over static education to sustain long-term resilience.^[155]

Technological Countermeasures

Technological countermeasures against phishing encompass software and protocol-based defenses designed to detect, block, or mitigate phishing attempts at various stages, including email filtering, web browsing protections, and authentication enhancements. These tools leverage blacklists, heuristics, machine learning algorithms, and cryptographic verification to identify malicious content without relying solely on user vigilance.^[156] Email authentication protocols form a foundational layer by preventing domain spoofing, a common phishing vector. Sender Policy Framework (SPF) authorizes sending IP addresses for a domain, DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) provides cryptographic signatures for message integrity, and Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC) builds on both to enforce policies like quarantine or rejection of failing emails.^[157] Implementation of these protocols has significantly reduced impersonation-based phishing, with DMARC enabling domain owners to monitor and control unauthorized use.^[158] Browser-integrated protections, such as Google Safe Browsing, scan URLs against vast databases of known threats and issue real-time warnings to users attempting to visit phishing sites. Integrated into browsers like Chrome and Firefox, this service safeguards over five billion devices daily by blocking access to dangerous pages.^[159] Users enabling enhanced modes in Chrome experience 35% fewer phishing incidents, though attackers employ evasion tactics like URL obfuscation to bypass blacklists.^[160] Multi-factor authentication (MFA), particularly phishing-resistant variants using hardware tokens or public-key cryptography like FIDO standards, thwarts credential harvesting by requiring factors not susceptible to interception, such as device-bound biometrics or security keys.^[161] Unlike SMS or app-based one-time passwords vulnerable to SIM swapping or real-time phishing, these methods eliminate shared secrets, rendering stolen credentials useless without physical access.^[162] Government agencies recommend phishing-resistant MFA for high-value accounts to counter evolving attacks.^[163] Machine learning and AI-driven detection systems analyze patterns in emails, URLs, and user behavior to flag anomalies, outperforming traditional rule-based filters against sophisticated campaigns. In 2025, AI tools process features like linguistic anomalies and sender reputation, achieving high accuracy in enterprise environments, though adversarial AI used by attackers complicates detection arms races.^[164]^[165] Leading solutions integrate these into email gateways and endpoint security, adapting to threats like AI-generated phishing content.^[166]

Legal and Organizational Responses

In the United States, phishing is prosecuted primarily under existing federal statutes such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030), which criminalizes unauthorized access to computers and obtaining information through fraud, with penalties including fines and imprisonment up to 10 years for aggravated offenses.^[167] Wire fraud statutes (18 U.S.C. § 1343) also apply to phishing schemes involving interstate communications, enabling convictions for deceptive electronic solicitations leading to financial loss.^[168] Most states have enacted specific anti-phishing laws treating such acts as misdemeanors, with penalties varying by jurisdiction but often including fines and short jail terms for first offenses.^[169] The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigates phishing as consumer fraud, encouraging reports via ReportFraud.ftc.gov to build databases for enforcement actions, though it lacks a dedicated federal anti-phishing statute.^[170] Notable prosecutions include a 2011 federal case where five defendants linked to an international phishing ring using spam emails were convicted, resulting in sentences for roles in stealing credentials and financial data.^[171] More recently, in November 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice charged five individuals in a scheme targeting corporate employees via phishing text messages, seeking to steal sensitive information for extortion.^[172] The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) coordinates investigations, reporting over 300,000 phishing complaints annually, facilitating asset seizures and international extraditions in cross-border cases.^[173] Internationally, the Council of Europe's Budapest Convention on Cybercrime (2001), ratified by over 60 countries, requires signatories to criminalize phishing-equivalent offenses like illegal access and data interference, promoting mutual legal assistance and extradition.^[174] In the European Union, phishing-induced data breaches trigger penalties under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR, effective 2018), with fines up to 4% of global annual turnover for failures in securing personal data against such attacks.^[175] The EU signed the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime in October 2025, which explicitly addresses phishing as a core offense, aiming to harmonize global definitions and enhance cross-border cooperation.^[176] Organizations respond to phishing through mandatory employee training programs emphasizing recognition of indicators like urgent demands or suspicious links, often incorporating simulated attacks to measure and improve detection rates.^[177] Policies typically require reporting suspected incidents within hours and prohibit clicking unverified attachments, with repeat failures in simulations leading to disciplinary measures or retraining.^[178] The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) recommends multi-layered defenses in its guidelines, including email filtering and user education aligned with the Cybersecurity Framework (updated 2024), to categorize phishing susceptibility on a scale assessing message realism and urgency.^[179]^[180] Standards like ISO/IEC 27001:2022 mandate controls for phishing prevention, such as access restrictions and awareness campaigns, adopted by corporations to certify information security management systems.^[181] The UK's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) advises organizations to deploy technical mitigations like domain-based message authentication while minimizing user disruption through targeted filtering.^[151] Post-incident protocols, per Microsoft and similar frameworks, involve isolating affected systems, forensic analysis, and notifications to minimize propagation.^[182]

Effectiveness Critiques and Limitations

Despite substantial investments in anti-phishing training programs, empirical studies indicate minimal long-term reductions in user susceptibility to attacks. A 2025 study analyzing enterprise data found no statistically significant impact from annual cybersecurity awareness training or embedded phishing simulations on click-through rates or reporting behaviors, with trained users showing click rates comparable to untrained ones.^[183] Similarly, researchers at the University of California, San Diego examined over 100,000 simulated phishing emails sent to employees and concluded that routine training programs failed to prevent falls for scams, as click rates remained consistent regardless of prior exposure or instruction.^[184] These findings align with broader analyses revealing low engagement with training materials—often below 20% completion rates—and potential unintended effects, such as desensitization or overconfidence leading to riskier behaviors in some cohorts.^[185] Simulated phishing tests, a common user-centric tactic, face critiques for oversimplifying real threats and fostering a false sense of security. Such exercises typically replicate basic lures but neglect advanced tactics like AI-generated personalization or multi-channel attacks (e.g., email followed by SMS), resulting in trained users underestimating novel variants.^[186] A scoping review of anti-phishing modalities reported post-training click-through rates averaging 10-20% in controlled settings, but real-world efficacy wanes as attackers adapt faster than static simulations can evolve.^[146] Moreover, mandatory programs in high-risk sectors like healthcare yielded only marginal improvements, with click rates dropping temporarily but rebounding within months due to forgetting curves and cognitive overload from repetitive content.^[187] Technological countermeasures, including email filters and browser warnings, exhibit evasion vulnerabilities amid attacker innovations. While filters block obvious phishing—reducing successful compromises from 46% in 2022 to 25% by 2025 per IBM's analysis—they struggle against AI-enhanced lures that mimic legitimate communications with high fidelity, leading to a resurgence in attacks incorporating generative tools for hyper-personalized content.^[188]^[189] Take-down efforts for malicious sites prove largely ineffective, as phishing pages often transmit stolen credentials in seconds before removal, with the Anti-Phishing Working Group documenting over 1 million unique attacks in Q1 2025 alone despite widespread deployment of URL blacklists and heuristics.^[190]^[33] Multi-factor authentication (MFA) mitigates credential theft but is bypassed via social engineering or session hijacking, underscoring that no single tech layer eliminates the human vector, which accounts for over 90% of breaches.^[191] Organizational and legal responses encounter scalability and enforcement limitations. Compliance-driven policies, such as mandatory reporting, yield low adherence—under 5% of incidents self-reported—due to fear of repercussions or unawareness, perpetuating undetected chains.^[192] Regulations like GDPR impose fines but fail to deter prolific actors in jurisdictions with lax oversight, as evidenced by persistent high-volume campaigns from state-affiliated groups.^[25] Collectively, these gaps explain why 94% of organizations reported phishing victimization in 2024, up from prior years, highlighting that mitigations lag behind adaptive threats rooted in psychological exploitation rather than purely technical flaws.^[193]

References

[1]
phishing - Glossary - NIST Computer Security Resource Center
Definitions: A technique for attempting to acquire sensitive data, such as bank account numbers, through a fraudulent solicitation in email or on a web site ...
[2]
Spoofing and Phishing - FBI
Spoofing and phishing are schemes aimed at tricking you into providing sensitive information—like your password or bank PIN—to scammers.
[3]
Recognize and Report Phishing - CISA
Phishing occurs when criminals try to get us to open harmful links, emails or attachments that could request our personal information or infect our devices.
[4]
The History of Phishing Attacks | Verizon Business
It's thought that the first phishing attacks happened in the mid-1990s, when a group of hackers posed as employees of AOL and used instant messaging and email ...
[5]
The History of Phishing Attacks - Cofense
Jun 6, 2023 · Phishing started around 1995 with fake AOL screen names, and the Love Bug in 2000 was a milestone. A 2004 legal case also marked a key event.
[6]
19 Types of Phishing Attacks with Examples - Fortinet
Different Types of Phishing Attacks · 1. Spear phishing · 2. Vishing · 3. Email phishing · 4. HTTPS phishing · 5. Pharming · 6. Pop-up phishing · 7. Evil twin phishing.
[7]
What Are the Different Types of Phishing? | Trend Micro (US)
Types of phishing attacks range from classic email phishing schemes to more inventive approaches such as spear phishing and smishing.What Is Spear Phishing? · What Is Smishing? · What Is Email Phishing?
[8]
Statistics on Phishing Attacks that Target Businesses | Huntress
Over 90% of businesses globally experienced a phishing attack in 2024. More than 80% of all reported security breachesinvolve phishing.
[9]
https://www.statista.com/topics/8385/phishing/
[10]
Phishing Statistics 2025: AI, Behavior & $4.88M Breach Costs
Apr 29, 2025 · Discover 2025 phishing statistics, including $4.88M average breach costs, $2.7B BEC losses, a 1265% surge in AI-powered attacks & the ...
[11]
Phishing Activity Trends Report - APWG
In the first quarter of 2025, APWG observed 1,003,924 phishing attacks, This was the largest number since late 2023. · Criminals are sending millions of emails ...
[12]
[PDF] Phishing Threat Trends Report - KnowBe4
Mar 1, 2025 · In 2024, at least one polymorphic feature was present in 76.4% of all phishing attacks and in 57.49% of commodity attacks (white noise phishing) ...<|separator|>
[13]
Phishing Trends Report (Updated for 2025) - Hoxhunt
According to the 2024 IBM / Ponemon Cost of a Data Breach study, the average annual cost of phishing rose by nearly 10% from 2024 to 2023, from $4.45m to $4.88m ...Part I: Phishing Trends... · AI being used to amplify... · Part II: Phishing Training...
[14]
What Is Phishing? - Meaning, Attack Types & More | Proofpoint US
Phishing is a common type of cyber attack that targets individuals through email, text messages, phone calls, and other forms of communication.Types of Phishing Attacks · How AI Is Evolving Phishing · Phishing Prevention
[15]
[PDF] Phishing Infographic - CISA
Phishing is a form of social engineering in which a cyber threat actor poses as a trustworthy colleague, acquaintance, or organization to lure a victim into ...
[16]
What is phishing | Attack techniques & scam examples - Imperva
It occurs when an attacker, masquerading as a trusted entity, dupes a victim into opening an email, instant message, or text message. The recipient is then ...What is a phishing attack · Phishing attack examples · Phishing techniques
[17]
Phishing | Federal Trade Commission
It seems to be from someone you know, and it asks you to click a link, or give your password, business bank account, or other sensitive information.
[18]
What is phishing? | Phishing attack prevention - Cloudflare
Phishing attacks involve tricking a victim into taking some action that benefits the attacker. These attacks range from simple to complex.How Is Phishing Carried Out? · Website Forgery Scam · Advanced-Fee Scam
[19]
Phishing Attack - What is it and How Does it Work? - Check Point ...
Phishing is a type of cybersecurity attack during which malicious actors send messages pretending to be a trusted person or entity.What Is Clone Phishing? · What is a Phishing Email? · Spoofing vs Phishing
[20]
What is Phishing? | IBM
Phishing is a type of cyberattack that uses fraudulent emails, text messages, phone calls or websites to trick people into sharing sensitive data.What is phishing? · Types of phishing attacks
[21]
What is Phishing? Techniques and Prevention | CrowdStrike
like canvassing your social media feeds — to gather personal details and craft convincing ...
[22]
What Is Phishing? How It Works, Types of Attacks - Zscaler
Phishing attacks use deceptive social engineering to trick users into divulging sensitive information, often disguised as harmless interactions.
[23]
7 Key Indicators of Phishing - ID Agent
Jun 6, 2024 · Key phishing indicators include suspicious senders, generic greetings, urgent language, suspicious links, and requests for personal information.
[24]
[PDF] 10 Common Traits of Phishing Emails - Monroe County, MI
Phishing emails often feature threatening language, such as “Payment overdue!” or “Your account has been compromised!”, in order to generate a response from ...
[25]
A review of organization-oriented phishing research - PMC
A long-term study in various sectors revealed that about 32% will fall for phishing at least once if exposed to phishing emails (Lain, Kostiainen & Čapkun, 2022) ...
[26]
FBI Releases IC3 2019 Internet Crime Report - CISA
Feb 13, 2020 · The top three crimes types reported by victims in 2019 were phishing/vishing/smishing/pharming, non-payment/non-delivery, and extortion.
[27]
Malware, Phishing, and Ransomware - CISA
Malware is software for unauthorized access. Ransomware holds data for ransom. Phishing is online scams to steal private information.Missing: vishing smishing pharming<|separator|>
[28]
9 types of phishing attacks and how to identify them - CSO Online
Phishing: Mass-market emails. The most common form of phishing is the general, mass-mailed type, where someone sends an email pretending to be someone else ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[29]
Phishing & The 6 Types of Phishing Emails Explained | MailSafi
Jan 23, 2021 · Mass-market phishing is the most common form of phishing. It is a general, mass-mailed type, where someone sends an email pretending to be ...
[30]
Phishing Statistics in 2025: The Ultimate Insight | TechMagic
Jun 18, 2025 · In 2024, consumers reported losses surpassing $12.5 billion to different email scams. This marks a 25% increase from the previous year. Experts ...Key Metrics of Phishing... · Trends of Phishing Attacks · What is the Role of AI in...
[31]
99 Global Phishing Statistics & Industry Trends (2023–2025)
Feb 6, 2025 · An estimated 3.4 billion phishing emails are sent each day globally, over 1 trillion per year, making phishing the most pervasive form of cybercrime.
[32]
Phishing Statistics 2025 - 99Firms.com
Over 71% of targeted attacks represent spear phishing. Normal phishing typically has a broader audience, luring the mass public to click on the malicious ...
[33]
2025 Phishing Statistics: (Updated August 2025) - Keepnet Labs
Aug 13, 2025 · Here are phishing statistics by financial and economic impact: The average cost of a phishing breach in 2024 was $4.88 million, up 9.7% from ...Missing: mass | Show results with:mass
[34]
Spear phishing vs phishing: Differences and examples in 2025
Spear phishing is a specific and targeted attack on one or a select number of victims, while regular phishing attempts to scam masses of people.Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[35]
Top 54 Phishing Attack Statistics & Latest Trends for 2025 - Spacelift
Oct 16, 2025 · The volume of phishing emails has increased by an astounding 1,265 ... Phishing attacks focus on data theft and financial gain. However ...Missing: mass | Show results with:mass
[36]
What is Phishing? Types, Risks, and Protection Strategies - Fortinet
Phishing is a type of social engineering attack where a cybercriminal uses email or other text-based messaging to steal sensitive information.<|separator|>
[37]
Phishing, spear-phishing, smishing, vishing, whaling... a quick guide
Principle: Spear-phishing is a more sophisticated form of phishing, one that is more targeted and personalized. Thanks to its higher degree of personalization ...Missing: variants statistics
[38]
What is Whale Phishing? - IBM
Whale phishing, or whaling, is a type of phishing attack that targets high-level corporate officers with fraudulent emails, text messages or phone calls.Missing: variants statistics
[39]
Whaling: The Hunt for High Profile Business Targets
Aug 30, 2016 · In June 2015, Ubiquiti Networks Inc., a network technology company with a market cap of over $2 billion, was the victim of a whaling scam. In ...
[40]
What Is a Whaling Attack? Examples and Statistics | Fortinet
Examples Of Whaling Phishing Attacks The technology company Seagate, in 2016, was tricked into releasing the W2 forms of 10,000 employees.
[41]
What is a Whaling Attack? (Whaling Phishing) | CrowdStrike
Nov 1, 2023 · A whaling attack is a type of phishing attack targeting senior employees with the purpose of stealing money or information.Missing: variants statistics
[42]
Business Email Compromise: The $55 Billion Scam
Sep 11, 2024 · Between December 2022 and December 2023, there was a 9% increase in identified global exposed losses. In 2023, the IC3 saw a growth in BEC ...
[43]
Email Attacks Drive Record Cybercrime Losses in 2024 - Proofpoint
May 1, 2025 · Business email compromise (BEC) was the second costliest cybercrime, generating $2.77 billion in losses across 21,442 incidents. Personal ...
[44]
FBI Issues Warning About BEC Attacks as Losses Increase to $55.5 ...
Sep 13, 2024 · ... losses of The FBI has warned businesses to be alert to business email compromise attempts ... reported that involved $55,499,915,582 in losses.
[45]
10 Phishing Attacks That Shook the Business World
Case Study 7: The Crelan Bank Whale Phishing Attack (2016). This Belgian bank lost €70 million to a whale phishing attack on their leadership executives. It ...
[46]
Business Email Compromise: The $50 Billion Scam
Jun 9, 2023 · The BEC scam has been reported in all 50 states and 177 countries, with over 140 countries receiving fraudulent transfers. Based on the ...
[47]
Phishing vs. smishing vs. vishing: How to educate clients on the ...
Jan 10, 2025 · Smishing (SMS phishing) and vishing (voice phishing) are equally concerning, with smishing attacks surging 328% in recent years2 and 59.4 ...Missing: quishing | Show results with:quishing
[48]
Emerging Trends in Phishing: A Look at Smishing, Vishing, Quishing
Aug 10, 2025 · Sophisticated and varied approaches including Smishing (SMS phishing), vishing (voice phishing), and quishing (QR code phishing) have emerged as ...
[49]
200+ Phishing Statistics (October - 2025) - Bright Defense
Oct 13, 2025 · Phishing initiated 22% of ransomware attacks, down from 26% in 2024. Vulnerabilities and credentials each 26%. Data encryption rate 34%, down ...
[50]
60+ Phishing Attack Statistics: The Facts You Need To Know for 2026
Aug 14, 2025 · Voice phishing (vishing) attacks surged 442% between the first and second halves of 2024. Microsoft was impersonated in over half (51.7%) of all ...Missing: quishing | Show results with:quishing
[51]
Vishing Statistics 2025: Unmasking the Voice Phishing Threat
Jan 26, 2024 · Global Phishing Attack Trends: In the first quarter of 2024, nearly 964,000 phishing attacks were recorded, with a notable rise in vishing. 35.The Rise Of Vishing: A... · Vishing Statistics Around... · Vishing Stats On The...
[52]
Phishing 2024: Vishing, Smishing and Quishing – AI!
Jul 30, 2024 · Discover how AI is intensifying phishing in 2024, with smarter Vishing, Smishing, & Quishing attacks that bypass traditional security ...Missing: 2023 | Show results with:2023
[53]
19 Most Common Types of Phishing Attacks in 2025 - UpGuard
Jun 25, 2025 · A phishing attack is a type of cyber attack that uses social engineering tactics to steal sensitive information from victims.What Is A Phishing Attack? · 1. Email Phishing · 2. Spear Phishing
[54]
20 types of phishing attacks + examples and prevention tips - Norton
Oct 3, 2022 · Spear phishing is a targeted phishing method that cybercriminals use to steal your information by impersonating a trusted source.
[55]
Preventing USB Baiting - Aware EC-Council
Under USB drop attack, a form of social engineering attack, cybercriminals use USB baiting to lure their victims. See how your staff reacts to this social ...
[56]
What is a USB Drop? | TraceSecurity
Jun 9, 2025 · While not a common form of social engineering, USB drops can still cause a lot of problems. Never use a USB drive off the ground.
[57]
Types of USB Drop Attacks & Cybersecurity Threats with Examples
Sep 11, 2023 · A USB drop attack is a type of cyber-attack where a USB drive, typically pre-loaded with malware, is physically left in a location.
[58]
https://vipre.com/blog/ai-is-changing-phishing-tactics/
[59]
https://www.pmmi.org/blog/phishing-has-evolved-deepfakes-voice-clones-and-business-email-compromise-3-0
[60]
https://securelist.com/email-phishing-techniques-2025/117801/
[61]
Phishing Trends to Watch Out for in 2025 - Anubisnetworks
Feb 18, 2025 · Phishing Trends to Watch Out for in 2025 · AI-Generated Phishing Emails · Quishing: · Credential phishing: · Multi-channel phishing: · Headhunters ...Missing: emerging techniques
[62]
Threat Spotlight: Phishing techniques to look out for in 2025
Dec 4, 2024 · Phishing-as-a-service and credential theft · The abuse of legitimate URL protection services · QR code and voicemail phishing · HR impersonation.Missing: emerging | Show results with:emerging
[63]
How to spot and stop hybrid phishing attacks - LinkedIn
Sep 10, 2025 · One phishing email. Two ways to attack. Threat actors are now combining credential theft and malware delivery into a single, stealthy attack ...
[64]
Hybrid Phishing Attack Vector – Complementing Phishing Campaigns
May 24, 2022 · Cyber-crime groups are targeting Java-based infrastructures susceptible to the Log4Shell vulnerability and are delivering Qakbot phishing ...
[65]
Global Hybrid AI Phishing Scam: Luxury Cars, Job Portals & Phone ...
Apr 29, 2025 · AI-driven email security solutions help manufacturers prevent costly supply chain phishing scams. Learn key strategies for securing every inbox.
[66]
What is email spoofing? | How it works & prevention - Cloudflare
Email spoofing disguises messages as if sent from trusted sources, leading to phishing risks. Learn what email spoofing is and how to protect your inbox.
[67]
What is email spoofing? How it works and ways to prevent it - Valimail
Email spoofing is a cyberattack technique where bad actors forge the header information of an email, making it appear as though it was sent from someone other ...
[68]
What is Email Spoofing? Types & Examples - SentinelOne
Apr 7, 2025 · Email spoofing is a technique by which attackers forge email headers, making the message appear to come from someone or somewhere other than the actual sender.
[69]
What is Email Spoofing? - Identify Fake Sender Scams | Mimecast
Email spoofing is the practice of sending email messages with a forged sender address, making the email appear to be from someone it is not.
[70]
Email Spoofing, Technique T1672 - Enterprise | MITRE ATT&CK®
Mar 24, 2025 · Use anti-spoofing and email authentication mechanisms to filter messages based on validity checks of the sender domain (using SPF) and integrity ...
[71]
Phishing Attacks: A Recent Comprehensive Study and a New Anatomy
Mar 8, 2021 · Deceptive phishing is the most common type of phishing attack in which the attacker uses social engineering techniques to deceive victims.
[72]
What Is Email Spoofing? How It Works, Precautions and Protections
Many email providers allow users to create a blacklist that filters out spam. One way of blocking a spammer is by adding their name or domain address to a ...
[73]
Phish Emails Hidden Behind QR Codes and Human Verification
Aug 14, 2024 · In this blog post, we look at how threat actors use QR codes in phishing emails to gain access to employee credentials.
[74]
What is Social Engineering | Attack Techniques & Prevention Methods
Social engineering uses psychological manipulation to trick users into making security mistakes or giving away sensitive information.Missing: core | Show results with:core
[75]
Psychological techniques correlated with online phishing attacks
This study presents a comprehensive taxonomy and analysis of psychological techniques utilized in social engineering, introducing novel metrics.
[76]
The Psychology of Phishing Attacks | Cyberdise AG
Dec 5, 2024 · The Main Psychological Tactics in Phishing: · 1. Emotional Manipulation · 2. Cognitive Biases · 3. Social Engineering.Key Weaknesses Of... · The Rocky Road To Reducing... · Why Hackers Love Your Social...
[77]
How Phishing Uses Your Cognitive Biases Against You
like reciprocity, authority and scarcity — to manipulate people's decisions ...
[78]
9 Cognitive Biases Hackers Exploit During Social Engineering Attacks
May 9, 2023 · Loss Aversion: The tendency to prefer avoiding losses to acquiring equivalent gains. Example: Phishing attacks threatening credit score damage ...
[79]
The Use Of Psychology In Phishing Attacks - Packetlabs
Jan 5, 2024 · One of the primary techniques attackers use to manipulate victims is called 'amygdala hijack'. It is based on exploiting the victim's emotional ...
[80]
The Psychology of Phishing: Unraveling the Success Behind ... - Trellix
Feb 1, 2024 · These techniques rely on psychological manipulation, exploiting trust, authority, curiosity, and fear to deceive victims into revealing ...
[81]
The Psychology Behind Phishing - Phishfirewall
Sep 10, 2024 · This article explores how cognitive biases—grouped into categories such as "Too Much Information" and "Not Enough Meaning"—can make individuals ...
[82]
[PDF] Cognitive Biases Hackers Exploit the Most - KnowBe4 blog
Here are examples of the top cognitive biases hackers use the most. ... Phishing emails will offer fake job opportunities or insider info. Hyperbolic.
[83]
Phone Phreaking: Hacking Before The Internet - Cybercrime Magazine
Feb 13, 2025 · They were the precursors to today's network hackers, sharing tips and tactics not by closed and encrypted message groups but by printed ...
[84]
History of Phishing: How Phishing Attacks Evolved From Poorly ...
Phishing began in the 90s with AOL impersonation, evolved to e-commerce sites, and became a profitable business by 2004, using techniques like spoof emails.
[85]
Phishing - KnowBe4
Rating 9.1/10 (1,136) Mobile phishing attacks have increased by 475% from 2019 to 2020, according to a recent report by Lookout. Attacks on mobile devices are nothing new, however ...History Of Phishing · Real World Phishing Examples · Social Media Exploits
[86]
Phishing and spearphishing: A cheat sheet for business professionals
Jan 8, 2019 · The concept of phishing was first discussed in 1987 in a paper presented at Interex titled “System Security: A Hacker's Perspective.” From ...
[87]
https://www.eset.com/us/phishing/
[88]
The History of Phishing - Kaseya
Apr 4, 2023 · A phishing technique was first described in a paper by the International HP Users Group, Intertex, in 1987. Phishing gained widespread notice in ...
[89]
[PDF] Phishing Emails: An Evolving Cyberattack - ODU Digital Commons
Nov 17, 2024 · These cybercriminals' origin was hacking into phone systems and using these systems for free phone calls and other uses. This was known as phone ...
[90]
History of Phishing - KnowBe4
Phishing originated around 1995, first recorded in 1996, linked to AOL, and evolved to online payments in 2001, with major attacks in 2004-2005.
[91]
The Evolution of Phishing Attacks - Phishfirewall
Sep 10, 2024 · The name “phishing” was coined, inspired by the idea of “fishing” for victims using digital bait.
[92]
A Brief History of Spear Phishing - Infosec Institute
Sep 4, 2015 · The number of spam messages went from 300 billion messages per day to 40 billion between 2010 and 2011. Within the same period, spear phishing ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[93]
The Evolution of Phishing and Future Directions: A Review
Phishing has emerged as one of the most persistent and evolving threats in cybersecurity. Its development from simple email scams to highly sophisticated and ...
[94]
[PDF] The Evolution of Phishing and Future Directions: A Review
Apr 1, 2025 · Advanced persistent threat (APT) groups emerged during this period, using spear phishing as their primary initial access vector to compromise.
[95]
Spear-Phishing Lawsuit Threats and “Whaling” - KnowBe4
Nov 7, 2011 · IT Security Expert Stu Sjouwerman Warns That Cybercriminals Are Using Publicly Available Email Addresses to Target Employees and Executives' Spouses.
[96]
[PDF] Phishing Evolves: Analyzing the Enduring Cybercrime
Feb 16, 2021 · Spear phishing has risen in popularity as earlier “simple” mass phishing has declined; a spear phishing attack is targeted (Parmar, 2012).
[97]
Phishing Attacks Soar 220% During COVID-19 Peak as ... - F5
Based on data from F5's Security Operations Center (SOC), the number of phishing incidents in 2020 is now set to increase 15% year-on-year, though this could ...<|separator|>
[98]
81 Phishing Attack Statistics 2025: The Ultimate Insight - Astra Security
Aug 19, 2025 · Phishing email statistics suggest that nearly 1.2% of all emails sent are malicious, which in numbers translated to 3.4 billion phishing emails daily.Missing: escalations 2020s
[99]
Phishing-based attacks have risen 140% year-over-year
Mar 19, 2025 · Malicious actors developed nearly 1 million phishing sites per month, showing a 700% increase since 2020; Over half of browser-based phishing ...
[100]
Generative AI: a double-edged sword in the cyber threat landscape
Jul 1, 2025 · In the realm of offensive applications, LLMs are used for crafting deceptive content in phishing emails and social engineering messages.
[101]
Evolution of Phishing Detection with AI: A Comparative Review of ...
Jul 10, 2025 · Using LLMs to reword emails effectively reduces the efficiency of phishing detectors, with traditional Machine Learning models losing a ...
[102]
Security Leaders Cite AI-Driven Phishing Attacks as a Top Concern
Oct 6, 2025 · “Generative or agentic AI-driven phishing attacks (51%) are leadership teams' top concern when it comes to new cyberattack techniques,” the ...
[103]
Phishing Trends 2025: Statistics, Tactics & Expert Protection Tips
Jul 3, 2025 · Phishing trends in 2025 include 45% of ransomware attacks, a 1633% vishing surge, AI-generated emails, deepfake audio, and fake software ...
[104]
80% of ransomware attacks now use artificial intelligence - MIT Sloan
Sep 8, 2025 · AI is being used to create malware, phishing campaigns, and deepfake-driven social engineering, such as fake customer service calls.<|separator|>
[105]
Phishing and scams: how fraudsters are deceiving users in 2025
Aug 13, 2025 · Common tactics in phishing and scams in 2025: learn about the use of AI and deepfakes, phishing via Telegram, Google Translate and Blob URLs ...
[106]
Famous Phishing Incidents from History | Hempstead Town, NY
Operation Phish Phry. 2009 saw one of the FBI's biggest cybersecurity busts ever after $1.5 million was stolen via bank frauds by various cyber thieves located ...
[107]
Throwback Attack: The first phishing attack is launched on AOL
Apr 13, 2023 · The first recorded phishing cyberattack took place in the mid-1990s and was carried out by a group of hackers who targeted America Online (AOL) users.
[108]
[PDF] Early Phishing - arXiv
The history of phishing traces back in important ways to the mid-1990s when hacking software facilitated the mass targeting of people in password stealing ...
[109]
North Korean programmer charged in Sony hack, WannaCry attack
Sep 6, 2018 · The hackers used the same aliases and accounts from the Sony attack when they sent spear-phishing emails to several U.S. defense contractors, ...
[110]
Update on Sony Investigation - FBI
Dec 19, 2014 · The FBI has determined that the intrusion into SPE's network consisted of the deployment of destructive malware and the theft of proprietary ...
[111]
How Russians broke into Democrats' email - CNBC
Jul 16, 2018 · In the Democratic National Committee hack in 2016, those emails were just spoofed to look like security updates from Google, according to ...
[112]
Grand Jury Indicts 12 Russian Intelligence Officers for Hacking ...
Jul 13, 2018 · They also were able to hack into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the Democratic National ...
[113]
How to Prevent Spear Phishing Attacks Post Twitter Hack by
Spear phishing involves targeted texts or emails aimed at individuals in an attempt to 'hook' them into opening an attachment or malicious link.<|separator|>
[114]
What Happened During The Twitter Spear-Phishing Attack?
Aug 9, 2021 · 19-year-old Mason Sheppard and 22-year-old Joseph O'Connor of the United Kingdom were responsible for the Bitcoin scam, while 22-year-old Nima ...
[115]
Colonial Pipeline Attack Likely Due to Phish | Abnormal AI
Based on all evidence, we can now assume that the Colonial Pipeline attack was likely caused by a credential phishing email or a socially-engineed attack.
[116]
The Attack on Colonial Pipeline: What We've Learned & What ... - CISA
May 7, 2023 · On May 7, 2021, a ransomware attack on Colonial Pipeline captured headlines around the world with pictures of snaking lines of cars at gas stations across the ...
[117]
8 Devastating Phishing Attack Examples (and Prevention Tips)
We'll cover some of the most devastating phishing attacks in recent years, including the Google/Facebook attack that resulted in $87 million in losses.
[118]
An update on our security incident - Blog - X
Jul 30, 2020 · The social engineering that occurred on July 15, 2020, targeted a small number of employees through a phone spear phishing attack.
[119]
Twitter hack: Staff tricked by phone spear-phishing scam - BBC
Jul 31, 2020 · Twitter hack: Staff tricked by phone spear-phishing scam. 31 July ... Twitter said the initial spear-phishing attempt happened on 15 July ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
[120]
Okta Concludes its Investigation Into the January 2022 Compromise
Apr 20, 2022 · We have concluded our investigation into the January 2022 compromise of our third-party vendor. At the outset of our investigation, ...Missing: phishing | Show results with:phishing
[121]
Okta Breach Timeline: Breaking Down the Hacks - Beyond Identity
Nov 22, 2023 · The Lapsus$ incident (January 2022) ... This was quickly followed by a sophisticated phishing campaign that successfully compromised the source ...
[122]
What Everyone Got Wrong About the MGM Hack - 1Password Blog
Aug 12, 2024 · An attack that hinged on a simple vishing call (that's phishing over the phone) to MGM's IT desk had snowballed into one of the most notorious ransomware ...
[123]
MGM Breach: Lessons Learned for Cybersecurity Teams - Cobalt.io
Aug 5, 2024 · Summary of the MGM Attack. The attackers gained access to MGM's systems through a social engineering attack, specifically vishing. Vishing is ...
[124]
[PDF] 1 2024 IC3 ANNUAL REPORT
Dec 3, 2024 · Last year saw a new record for losses reported to IC3, totaling a staggering $16.6 billion. Fraud represented the bulk of reported losses in ...
[125]
FBI Releases Annual Internet Crime Report
Apr 23, 2025 · The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) has released its latest annual report detailing reported losses exceeding $16 billion—a 33% ...Missing: compromise | Show results with:compromise
[126]
Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025 - IBM
The global average cost of a data breach, in USD, a 9% decrease over last year—driven by faster identification and containment. 0%. Share of organizations ...
[127]
2024 phishing statistics: Latest figures and trends - Paubox
Aug 5, 2024 · Large organizations lose an average of $15 million annually due to phishing attacks, or roughly $1,500 per employee. The cost of phishing- ...Missing: economic | Show results with:economic
[128]
2025 Data Breach Investigations Report - Verizon
Read the complete report for an in-depth, authoritative analysis of the latest cyber threats and data breaches. Download report. 2025 DBIR Executive Summary.Missing: impact | Show results with:impact
[129]
Verizon: Nearly 80% of Data Breaches Involve Phishing and the ...
May 7, 2024 · We see credentials and phishing involved in nearly 80% of data breaches – making the combination of email, social engineering and your users the most critical ...
[130]
Healthcare Data Breaches Due to Phishing - The HIPAA Journal
Jan 6, 2024 · Phishing is a leading cause of healthcare data breaches. Discover the four pillars of phishing defense that will help you improve resilience ...
[131]
Verizon 60 of breaches involve human error | Mimecast
May 1, 2025 · The 2025 Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR) delivers a clear warning: nearly 60% of breaches involve a human element, whether through error, ...
[132]
Verizon's 2025 DBIR report finds spike in cyberattacks, complexity in ...
Apr 24, 2025 · The DBIR report shows that third-party involvement in breaches has doubled to 30 percent, highlighting the risks associated with supply chain ...
[133]
[PDF] Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025 The AI Oversight Gap
Aug 22, 2025 · This year's report shows the impact: on average, 16% of data breaches involved attackers using AI, most often for AI-generated phishing (37%) ...
[134]
Phishing, fraud, and the financial sector's crisis of trust
Apr 8, 2025 · The financial sector is under growing pressure from advanced phishing attacks and fraud, causing major financial losses and eroding customer trust.
[135]
The Rising Toll of Phishing Undermines Trust in Banking
Aug 4, 2021 · Fighting the Phishers. It's easy to think that only fools fall for such scams, but that's far from the case. In "spear-phishing" campaigns, ...
[136]
Cyberattacks on Public Sector Websites | Meritalk
Disruptions to essential services, theft of personal data, financial fraud, and erosion of public trust are some ways these attacks ripple through society, ...
[137]
The psychological impact of phishing attacks on employees
Apr 27, 2023 · When individuals fall victim to a phishing attack, they may start to doubt their abilities and judgment, leading to a decrease in confidence and job ...
[138]
The Emotional Impact of Being Scammed - Verywell Mind
Feb 20, 2025 · Regardless of the scammer's tactics, a scam is a violation of your sense of safety. Realizing that you are not immune from scams can shake your ...
[139]
The Long Term Impact of Scams on Mental Health
Aug 13, 2025 · Common Emotional Responses After a Scam ... Everyone processes scams differently, but many survivors describe similar mental health effects.Missing: psychological phishing
[140]
How scammers exploit the fear factor and society's digital divide
Oct 24, 2024 · Scammers exploit fear by creating urgent threats and fear of missing out, and the digital divide by posing as authorities and using lack of ...
[141]
Digital habits and cyber vulnerabilities among older victims of cyber ...
Aug 25, 2025 · This study aims to examine the pre-fraud digital habits and cyber vulnerabilities among older people. This study adopted a purposive sampling ...
[142]
Cybersecurity and the Digital Divide - Government CIO Outlook
This makes them more susceptible to online threats like phishing, malware, and identity theft. If that is bad for individuals, the risks and the dangers are ...
[143]
What are State Sponsored Cyber Attacks? - Detailed Guide
Aug 16, 2023 · Security & Geopolitical Impacts. Nation-states exploit digital vulnerabilities to influence elections, gather classified intelligence, and ...
[144]
The Weaponization of Social Media: Spear Phishing and ...
Sep 20, 2018 · State-sponsored cyber groups have long utilized spear phishing to pierce government networks. Spear phishing relies on social engineering to ...Missing: implications | Show results with:implications
[145]
Impact of Geopolitical Conflicts on Cybersecurity Risks - Iseo Blue
State-sponsored hackers from adversary nations are launching espionage and sabotage campaigns that can spill over into Western networks. Cybercriminals are ...
[146]
Exploring the evidence for email phishing training: A scoping review
(2010) found that even though the rate of phishing victimisation reduced by 40 % post training, participants still failed to detect phishing emails 28 % of the ...
[147]
[PDF] Understanding the Efficacy of Phishing Training in Practice
Although embedded training has a statistical correlation with a lower phishing failure rate, the success rate of many phishing attacks dwarfs the marginal.
[148]
KnowBe4 Report Reveals Security Training Reduces Global ...
May 13, 2025 · KnowBe4's 2025 report shows security training reduces phishing click rates by 86% over 12 months, with initial vulnerability highest in ...
[149]
We Trained 3 Million Employees: How Effective Is Security ... - Hoxhunt
Apr 28, 2025 · But a Microsoft Digital Defense Report observed that awareness training by itself yielded only about a 3% reduction in phishing click rates on ...<|separator|>
[150]
Examining Factors Impacting the Effectiveness of Anti-Phishing ...
Aug 17, 2021 · This research evaluates the effects of user demographics and personality traits on the effectiveness of a phishing security training program.Missing: centric | Show results with:centric
[151]
Phishing attacks: defending your organisation - NCSC.GOV.UK
Phishing is when attackers send scam emails (or text messages) that contain links to malicious websites. The websites may contain malware (such as ransomware) ...
[152]
Preventing Phishing Attacks: Cybersecurity Best Practices for 2025
Feb 23, 2025 · To avoid phishing attacks, organizations can update passwords regularly, enable and enforce multi-factor authentication, keep IT assets, systems, and passwords ...Missing: 2023-2025 | Show results with:2023-2025
[153]
How To Prevent Phishing: Essential Strategies for Businesses
Oct 16, 2025 · 6. Use strong, unique passwords: Avoid password reuse across services – especially between users' company and personal accounts.
[154]
Identifying and Avoiding Phishing Scams in 2025 - LinkedIn
Feb 20, 2025 · 11 Ways to Protect Yourself from Phishing Attacks · 1. Be cautious with emails and messages · 2. Use multi-factor authentication · 3. Don't click ...
[155]
How to Measure the Impact of Phishing Simulations
Jul 7, 2025 · Organizations that implement continuous, adaptive phishing training experience dramatic reductions in click rates. With Adaptive Security ...
[156]
How to prevent phishing | Cloudflare
Evaluate emails for suspicious elements. · Do not share personal information. · Block spam. · Use email security protocols. · Run a browser isolation service.
[157]
SPF, DKIM, and DMARC made simple: An easy guide to email ...
Setting up SPF, DKIM, and DMARC is one of the most effective ways to protect your domain from impersonation and phishing. Each of these protocols plays a ...
[158]
SPF vs. DKIM vs. DMARC: A Guide - Mimecast
DMARC helps to prevent email spoofing and phishing by ensuring that email messages are only accepted if they meet the authentication policies specified by the ...Why Is Email Authentication... · Types Of Email... · How To Set Up Dkim, Spf, Or...<|separator|>
[159]
Google Safe Browsing
Google Safe Browsing helps protect over five billion devices every day by showing warnings to users when they attempt to navigate to dangerous sites or ...Browsing · Google Search Help · Google Account Help · Research
[160]
The Pros and Cons of Google Chrome's Enhanced Safe Browsing ...
Jul 18, 2023 · Google reports that people who turn these protections on are 35% less likely to fall victim to phishing scams than others.
[161]
What is Phishing-Resistant Multi-Factor Authentication? - Yubico
Spear phishing attacks, vishing, trap phishing, whaling phishing and email phishing scams are all variations of this basic method. Multi-factor authentication ...
[162]
What Is Phishing-Resistant MFA and How Does it Work? - HYPR Blog
Sep 16, 2024 · Phishing-resistant authentication does not use shared secrets at any point in the login process, eliminating the attacker's ability to intercept ...
[163]
[PDF] Implementing Phishing-Resistant MFA - CISA
Some forms are vulnerable to phishing, “push bombing” attacks, exploitation of Signaling System 7 (SS7) protocol vulnerabilities, and/or SIM Swap attacks. These ...
[164]
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Phishing Detection ...
Jul 15, 2025 · This blog explores how AI and ML are revolutionizing phishing detection and prevention, providing a beacon of hope for organizations worldwide.
[165]
Top 5 AI‑Powered Phishing Detection Tools for 2025
Learn what to look for when choosing an AI-powered phishing detection tool, and what are considered the top solutions in 2025.<|separator|>
[166]
Enhancing Phishing Detection with AI: A Novel Dataset and ...
This paper introduces a comprehensive dataset curated explicitly for detecting phishing emails, featuring a collection of authentic and phishing emails.
[167]
18 U.S. Code § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with ...
18 U.S. Code § 1030 covers unauthorized computer access, obtaining restricted data, accessing financial records, accessing nonpublic government computers, and ...Missing: responses | Show results with:responses
[168]
Cybercrime and the Law: Primer on the Computer Fraud and Abuse ...
May 16, 2023 · The wire fraud statute provides an additional statutory tool to prosecute some conduct that may also violate the CFAA, and an alternate tool to ...
[169]
Email Phishing Scam Criminal Charges - FindLaw
May 27, 2025 · Almost all states have enacted anti-phishing laws to deter cybercrime. Most phishing scams are misdemeanors. No Specific Anti-Phishing Federal ...<|separator|>
[170]
Phishing Scams | Federal Trade Commission
Phishing is a type of online scam that targets consumers by sending them an e-mail that appears to be from a well-known source.
[171]
FBI — Five Domestic Defendants Linked to International Computer ...
Mar 25, 2011 · LOS ANGELES—Five people were convicted today of federal charges for their roles in an international “phishing” operation that used spam ...
[172]
5 Defendants Charged Federally with Running Scheme that ...
Nov 20, 2024 · Law enforcement today unsealed criminal charges against five defendants who allegedly targeted employees of companies nationwide with phishing text messages.
[173]
Major Cases - FBI
Case against Internet fraud ring reveals millions unknowingly affected worldwide. ... FBI.gov is an official site of the U.S. Department ...
[174]
About the Convention - Cybercrime - The Council of Europe
The Budapest Convention is more than a legal document; it is a framework that permits hundreds of practitioners from Parties to share experience and create ...Missing: GDPR | Show results with:GDPR
[175]
What is GDPR, the EU's new data protection law?
The regulation was put into effect on May 25, 2018. The GDPR will levy harsh fines against those who violate its privacy and security standards, with penalties ...Does the GDPR apply to... · GDPR and Email · Article 5.1-2Missing: phishing | Show results with:phishing
[176]
Fighting cybercrime: EU to sign UN Convention on cybercrime
Oct 13, 2025 · The Council adopted a decision for the EU and its member states to sign the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime.Missing: GDPR | Show results with:GDPR
[177]
Teach Employees to Avoid Phishing - CISA
Train employees to watch for red flags such as strange or unexpected requests, urgent language or suspicious links.
[178]
How to Deal with Individuals Who Repeatedly Fail Phishing ...
May 5, 2022 · This piece explains the underlying issues behind repeat responders to phishing simulations and recommends steps to address them.
[179]
Phishing | NIST - National Institute of Standards and Technology
Oct 22, 2021 · Phishing is the use of convincing emails or other messages to trick us into opening harmful links or downloading malicious software.<|separator|>
[180]
The New NIST Phish Scale, Revealing Why End Users Click | CSRC
This talk will cover why users click, why it's important to understand phishing detection difficulty, and how to use the NIST Phish Scale.Missing: anti- ISO
[181]
Cybersecurity Framework | NIST
Cybersecurity Framework helping organizations to better understand and improve their management of cybersecurity risk.CSF 1.1 Archive · ISO/IEC-27001:2022-to... · Updates Archive · CSF 2.0 ProfilesMissing: phishing | Show results with:phishing
[182]
Phishing investigation | Microsoft Learn
This article provides guidance on identifying and investigating phishing attacks within your organization.<|separator|>
[183]
Anti-Phishing Training Does Not Work: A Large-Scale Empirical ...
Jun 24, 2025 · The NIST Phish Scale successfully predicted behavior (click rates: 7.0% easy to 15.0% hard emails, p < 0.001), but training showed no ...
[184]
Cybersecurity Training Programs Don't Prevent Employees from ...
Sep 17, 2025 · In addition, researchers found that some phishing emails were considerably more effective than others. For example, only 1.82% of recipients ...
[185]
[PDF] Understanding the Efficacy of Phishing Training in Practice
Abstract—This paper empirically evaluates the efficacy of two ubiquitous forms of enterprise security training: annual cy- bersecurity awareness training ...
[186]
Are Simulated Phishing Tests the Best Prevention - DNSFilter
Jan 17, 2025 · Limited Effectiveness: Simulated tests often fail to accurately replicate real-world phishing scenarios. · False Sense of Security: Successfully ...
[187]
Evaluation of a mandatory phishing training program for high-risk ...
Mar 12, 2019 · The study sought to understand the impact of a phishing training program on phishing click rates for employees at a single, anonymous US healthcare institution.
[188]
IBM X-Force 2025 Threat Intelligence Index
Apr 16, 2025 · The share of successful phishing compromises has declined steadily over the last several years from 46% in 2022 to 29% in 2023 to now just 25% ...Top Initial Access Vectors · Phishing As A Shadow... · Success Of Vulnerability...Missing: succeed | Show results with:succeed
[189]
The Resurgence of Phishing - ISC2
Jan 29, 2025 · Phishing is resurgent due to new technologies, AI, and innovation, with increased click rates, and the use of websites alongside emails.Missing: succeed despite mitigations
[190]
Don't click: towards an effective anti-phishing training. A comparative ...
Aug 9, 2020 · Moreover, take-down measures are often ineffective, as the landing pages used in phishing attacks transmit the stolen data before they can be ...Literature Analysis · Target Group Impact · Email Content And Structure
[191]
Analysis of Phishing Attacks and Effective Countermeasures
Jul 9, 2025 · Key countermeasures described in the report include email filtering technology, multi-factor authentication (MFA), and raising awareness by ...
[192]
Mitigation strategies against the phishing attacks - ScienceDirect.com
Use security advice: Users should be more attentive to their computer security. For example, they should avoid using public computers when handling confidential ...Keywords · 4. Reporting The Results · Appendix-Ii<|control11|><|separator|>
[193]
Must-know phishing statistics for 2025 - Egress
Dec 18, 2024 · Explore essential phishing statistics used in 2024, including emerging threats like quishing and multi-channel attacks.Headline Stats For 2024... · In The Us, According To Ic3 · Phishing Breakdown In 2024...<|separator|>