REVIEW 1 cited by
Breaching the Human Firewall: Social engineering in Phishing and Spear-Phishing Emails
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
We examined the influence of three social engineering strategies on users' judgments of how safe it is to click on a link in an email. The three strategies examined were authority, scarcity and social proof, and the emails were either genuine, phishing or spear-phishing. Of the three strategies, the use of authority was the most effective strategy in convincing users that a link in an email was safe. When detecting phishing and spear-phishing emails, users performed the worst when the emails used the authority principle and performed best when social proof was present. Overall, users struggled to distinguish between genuine and spear-phishing emails. Finally, users who were less impulsive in making decisions generally were less likely to judge a link as safe in the fraudulent emails. Implications for education and training are discussed.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
SEAR: A Multimodal Dataset for Analyzing AR-LLM-Driven Social Engineering Behaviors
SEAR is the first cited multimodal dataset of AR-plus-LLM social engineering, showing high self-reported trust and click intentions in a 60-person lab study.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.