Pith. sign in

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

arxiv 1606.00887 v1 pith:DPKLHR2M submitted 2016-05-28 cs.CY cs.CR

classification cs.CYcs.CR
keywords emailsuserssocialspear-phishingwereauthoritylinkphishing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
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.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. SEAR: A Multimodal Dataset for Analyzing AR-LLM-Driven Social Engineering Behaviors

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    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.

Pith tools