Summary
Identifying phishing emails is challenging, especially when services rewrite headers. Manual header inspection is too technical for most users. Look for red flags like spoofed addresses, urgent language, requests for personal information, poor grammar, and design inconsistencies. Verify sender identity through separate channels (phone, direct contact) and be cautious of branding as it can be faked. Avoid clicking suspicious links or opening unknown attachments. Email providers often flag suspicious emails, and users should heed these warnings. Sender authentication failures are not always indicative of phishing and may be due to misconfigurations or forwarding issues. SPF and DMARC help, but are invisible to end-users.
Key findings
- Header Rewriting Complicates Detection: Services that rewrite headers make it more difficult to identify phishing emails.
- Manual Inspection Impractical: Inspecting email headers is too technical for the average user.
- Behavioral and Visual Clues: Phishing emails often exhibit urgent language, poor grammar, design inconsistencies, and spoofed sender information.
- Verification is Key: Verifying sender identity through alternative channels is crucial for confirmation.
- Automated Systems Help: Email providers often flag suspicious emails.
Key considerations
- Technical Skill Gap: Most users lack the technical skills to effectively analyze email headers.
- Social Engineering Exploitation: Phishers exploit human behavior with tactics like creating a sense of urgency.
- Trust No Visuals: Logos and branding can be easily faked, so relying on them is risky.
- Look Beyond Authentication Failures: Authentication failures don't always mean it's phishing, there could be other reasons.
- Systems Provide Support: Email providers have implemented systems like SPF and DMARC, but they are not always visible or understandable to the end user.
What email marketers say
11 marketer opinions
Identifying phishing emails when services rewrite headers poses a challenge for normal users. While inspecting headers is technically feasible, it's not practical for most. Common tactics include spoofed addresses, urgent language, requests for personal information, poor grammar, generic greetings, and inconsistencies in design. It's crucial to verify sender identity through separate channels, avoid clicking suspicious links or opening unknown attachments, and be wary of emails creating a sense of urgency. Checking the actual email address and hovering over links can also reveal discrepancies.
Key opinions
- Header Inspection: Inspecting email headers can reveal the true sender but is too technical for most users.
- Phishing Tactics: Common phishing indicators include spoofed addresses, urgent language, and requests for personal information.
- Visual Clues: Poor grammar, generic greetings, and design inconsistencies can signal a phishing attempt.
- Link Verification: Hovering over links reveals the actual URL and can expose suspicious destinations.
- Attachment Risk: Unknown attachments, especially with unusual extensions, should be avoided.
- Sender Verification: Verifying sender identity through separate channels (phone, direct message) is crucial.
Key considerations
- Technical Limitations: Normal users lack the technical skills to effectively inspect email headers.
- Behavioral Cues: Phishers exploit human psychology through urgency and social engineering.
- Brand Replication: Logos and branding are not reliable indicators of authenticity as they can be easily replicated.
- Multi-Factor Verification: Relying on a single piece of information (display name, email content) is insufficient; multiple verification methods are needed.
- Service Notifications: Even if services provide sender authentication notifications, users may ignore them or not understand their implications.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Troy Hunt's Blog explains that inspecting email headers can reveal the true sender and path of the email, but this is a technical process that most normal users won't be able to do.
28 Dec 2022 - Troy Hunt's Blog
Marketer view
Email marketer from Kaspersky shares that always verify the sender's identity by contacting them through a separate channel, such as a phone call or direct message. Don't rely solely on the email itself to confirm the sender's legitimacy.
14 Nov 2021 - Kaspersky
What the experts say
4 expert opinions
Identifying phishing emails is especially difficult for normal users when services rewrite headers, even for legitimate senders. Sender authentication failures don't automatically indicate phishing; they can stem from misconfiguration or forwarding issues. Furthermore, relying on branding and logos is unreliable as these can be easily replicated by phishers, emphasizing the need for alternative verification methods.
Key opinions
- Difficulty in Identification: Distinguishing between real and phishing emails is challenging for average users, particularly with header rewriting.
- Authentication Failures: Sender authentication failures are not always indicative of phishing attempts.
- Branding Unreliability: Logos and branding are easily replicated and cannot be solely relied upon for verification.
Key considerations
- Header Rewriting Impact: Header rewriting by services complicates phishing detection, necessitating alternative methods.
- Sender Configuration: Sender authentication failures can arise from issues beyond phishing, such as configuration problems.
- Verification Methods: Alternative methods for verifying sender identity are crucial due to the unreliability of branding and authentication signals.
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks shares that Mailchimp had to make the decision to rewrite headers as part of the Yahoo and Google requirements.
7 Apr 2022 - Email Geeks
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks explains that it's difficult for normal people to distinguish between real and phishing emails, especially when services like Mailchimp rewrite headers, even for legitimate senders like local candidates using Gmail.
20 May 2024 - Email Geeks
What the documentation says
4 technical articles
Email providers like Gmail automatically flag suspicious emails, warning users of potential phishing attempts. Phishing attacks often use social engineering tactics to trick users, such as impersonating trusted entities or creating a sense of urgency. Security protocols like DMARC and SPF help prevent spoofing and phishing by authenticating emails, although these mechanisms are largely invisible to end-users but contribute to overall email security.
Key findings
- Automated Flagging: Gmail automatically flags suspicious emails as potential phishing attempts.
- Social Engineering: Phishing attacks commonly use social engineering to trick users into revealing sensitive information.
- DMARC and SPF: DMARC and SPF are email authentication protocols that help prevent spoofing, enhancing email security.
Key considerations
- Heed Warnings: Users should pay attention to warnings from email providers, even for emails that appear legitimate.
- Human Element: Phishing exploits human behavior, so caution and awareness are crucial.
- Invisible Security: While DMARC and SPF improve security, their impact is not directly visible to average email users.
Technical article
Documentation from IETF details that Sender Policy Framework (SPF) is an email authentication method that helps prevent spammers from forging the 'From' address in emails. Although end-users don't directly see it, it makes it harder for phishers to spoof legitimate domains.
30 Oct 2024 - IETF
Technical article
Documentation from Google Help explains that Gmail automatically flags suspicious emails as potential phishing attempts. Users should pay attention to these warnings, even if the email appears to be from a legitimate source.
17 Oct 2024 - Google Help
Are people still falling for email scams?
How can a phishing email pass SPF and DKIM authentication checks?
How can email senders and users prevent and identify phishing emails?
How can I identify the ESP used to send a spam email using the email headers?
Is it ok to use the customer's email as the reply-to address in emails sent from a website contact form?
What are some funny examples of spam or phishing attempts targeting email marketers?
What are the symptoms of a DKIM replay attack and how can a compromised account be identified?
What filtering methods do Optimum, Windstream, and CenturyLink use for email, and how can I troubleshoot content-related blocks?
What should I do if my email domain gets spoofed?
