Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
Clinton Campaign Tested Staffers With Fake Phishing Emails
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
ChispaTD
ChispaTD,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/21/2017 | 3:45:12 PM
Re: What a Surprise!
I'm not surprised. The fastest way to get someone to do something, especially an exec, is to tell the person not to do it. 
ChispaTD
ChispaTD,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/21/2017 | 3:29:26 PM
Re: What a Surprise!
I'd like to know that as well. How effective is it to run these tests if it's not rolled out across the entire organization?
Joe Stanganelli
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
2/20/2017 | 5:30:13 AM
Re: What a Surprise!
@Terry: I'm aware of at least one situation in which fake phishing emails were sent within a major organization explicitly warning users "DO NOT CLICK ON THIS LINK" and explaining that it was an example of a phishing email.

10% of the users still clicked -- including one C-suiter.

The C-suiter's justification for clicking?  "I wanted to see what would happen."
tompendergast
tompendergast,
User Rank: Author
2/17/2017 | 10:48:51 AM
Re: What a Surprise!
Good article, thanks. I'm convinced that it's the combination of simulated phishing, relevant training, and persistent reinforcement that is the key to building up human capacity. It sounds like this group did it right. 
T Sweeney
T Sweeney,
User Rank: Moderator
2/16/2017 | 1:44:01 PM
Re: What a Surprise!
I understand wanting to protect the egos of execs, but at the expense of the organization's security?

Is the assumption, then, that your execs open all their email (unlikely) and click on all links (very unlikely)?

Separately, I'd love to know how common this practice is of sending fake phishing emails to test training effectiveness, and what other conditions get used in the exercise.
jries921
jries921,
User Rank: Ninja
2/16/2017 | 11:55:42 AM
Re: What a Surprise!
If the practice really does have management support, then senior managers won't be exempted.  If John Podesta was exempted, I'm sure he regrets it now.
ClarenceR927
ClarenceR927,
User Rank: Strategist
2/16/2017 | 9:35:32 AM
What a Surprise!
We test too. Naturally we are not allowed to send our test phish upstream in the coproration as it would be embarassing for the executives to get caught.  I wonder if Podesta as also skipped on the tests.


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Black Hat USA 2022 Attendee Report
Black Hat attendees are not sleeping well. Between concerns about attacks against cloud services, ransomware, and the growing risks to the global supply chain, these security pros have a lot to be worried about. Read our 2022 report to hear what they're concerned about now.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-2597
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-08
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during 2017. Notes: none.
CVE-2017-2631
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-08
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during 2017. Notes: none.
CVE-2017-2657
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-08
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during 2017. Notes: none.
CVE-2017-7527
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-08
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during 2017. Notes: none.
CVE-2021-41615
PUBLISHED: 2022-08-08
websda.c in GoAhead WebServer 2.1.8 has insufficient nonce entropy because the nonce calculation relies on the hardcoded onceuponatimeinparadise value, which does not follow the secret-data guideline for HTTP Digest Access Authentication in RFC 7616 section 3.3 (or RFC 2617 section 3.2.1). NOTE: 2.1...