Ethical Phishing Piergiorgio Venuti

Ethical Phishing: the key to protecting your business from cyber threats

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

Index

  1. Introduction
  2. What is Ethical Phishing
  3. The different types of Ethical Phishing
  4. The benefits of an Ethical Phishing campaign
  5. The role of training
  6. Ethical Phishing with Cyberfero
  7. Conclusion

Introduction

In the digital age, cyber security has become a priority for all businesses. One of the most insidious threats is phishing, a social engineering technique used to steal sensitive information by sending fraudulent emails. To combat this threat, it is imperative that companies implement effective security measures, including Ethical Phishing campaigns. In this article, we’ll explore why every business should run an Ethical Phishing campaign on a regular basis, the different types of Ethical Phishing, and how Cyberfero’s Ethical Phishing service could boost corporate security.

What is Ethical Phishing

Ethical Phishing, also known as “Simulated Phishing” or “Phishing Test“, is a practice which consists of carrying out controlled and planned phishing attacks against one’s own personnel. The goal is to test user awareness of phishing threats and to evaluate the effectiveness of security policies and procedures in place.

Ethical Phishing campaigns are simulated in order to replicate real attacks as closely as possible, using fake emails and websites that imitate the legitimate ones. In this way, it is possible to evaluate the behavior of users in the face of phishing attempts and identify any vulnerabilities.

The different types of Ethical Phishing

There are different types of Ethical Phishing, which vary according to the degree of customization and the objective of the simulated attack. The main types are:

  1. General Phishing: This is a non-personalized attack, where generic emails are sent to a large group of users. The goal is to evaluate general user awareness of phishing threats.
  2. Spear Phishing: In this case, the attack is aimed at a specific group of users or a single individual. Emails are personalized with information about the recipient, such as name, company role or other personal information, in order to increase the likelihood of a successful attack.
  3. Whaling: this type of attack is aimed at individuals with roles of responsibility within the company, such as executives or managers. The emails are personalized with detailed and targeted information, in order to convince the recipient to perform actions that could jeopardize the company’s security.
  4. Clone Phishing: in this case, a legitimate communication previously sent to the user is replicated, with the addition of malicious elements, such as infected links or attachments. The goal is to evaluate the user’s ability to recognize fraudulent emails that imitate legitimate ones.

The benefits of an Ethical Phishing campaign

Regularly running an Ethical Phishing campaign has many advantages for companies. Below, we list some of the most significant:

  1. Identification of vulnerabilities: an Ethical Phishing campaign allows you to identify the areas where personnel are most exposed to phishing attacks, allowing you to take targeted corrective measures.
  2. Improved Awareness: Through exposure to simulated attacks, users learn to recognize the warning signs and behave more confidently in the face of real phishing attempts.
  3. Evaluation of policies and procedures: an Ethical Phishing campaign allows you to verify the effectiveness of the security policies and procedures in place, identifying any gaps or areas for improvement.
  4. Risk reduction: Raising awareness and fixing vulnerabilities helps reduce the risk of falling victim to real phishing attacks, thus safeguarding sensitive information and company reputation.

The role of training

A key component of an Ethical Phishing campaign is staff training. Once you’ve identified vulnerabilities and areas for improvement, it’s essential to equip your employees with the knowledge and tools they need to recognize and deal with phishing attacks.

Training may include information sessions, hands-on simulations, role-playing exercises and the use of educational materials, such as videos, guides and quizzes. Additionally, it’s important to monitor progress over time and update training as new threats and emerging trends change.

Ethical Phishing with Cyberfero

The Ethical Phishing service offered by Cyberfero represents an effective solution for increasing corporate security. Through a variety of simulated and customized attacks, Cyberfero helps organizations identify vulnerabilities, evaluate the effectiveness of security policies and procedures, and improve user awareness.

In addition, Cyberfero provides targeted and up-to-date training, which takes into account the latest threats and trends in the field of information security. In this way, companies can be sure that they have well-trained and knowledgeable staff capable of dealing with the challenges posed by phishing attacks.

Conclusion

Running an Ethical Phishing campaign on a regular basis is critical to protecting businesses from phishing threats. By identifying vulnerabilities, training staff, and evaluating security policies and procedures, organizations can reduce the risk of falling victim to real attacks and safeguard sensitive information and their reputation. The Ethical Phishing service offered by Cyberfero represents an effective solution to achieve these objectives and increase corporate security in the long term.

Useful links:

Share


RSS

More Articles…

Categories …

Tags

RSS feed: Unknown Feed Unknown Feed

RSS feed: Full Disclosure Full Disclosure

  • Apache Struts2 Core Arbitrary Code Execution via OGNL Sandbox Escape November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below attempt to prevent arbitrary code execution via Object-Graph Navigation Language (OGNL) through several different mechanisms but only in a cursory fashion -- the libraries only guard against immediate calls evaluated by the OGNL engine via `SecurityMemberAccess`, but an allowed […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core TokenHelper Token Cryptographic Timing Side-Channel November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 Core 7.4.0 and below performs session token comparisons cryptographically insecure early-exit comparison functions (e.g., `!=`, `memcmp`, byte-by-byte loops with `break`) that return as soon as the first mismatched byte is encountered. The execution time of the comparison is therefore proportional to the number […]
  • Apache Struts2 Spring Plugin Uses a Previously Closed Resource November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 Spring Plugin opens a Spring `ApplicationContex` via a try-with-resources block and, outside of said block, then continues to use the closed resource, resulting in an uncaught `IllegalStateException`. This particular issue prevents proper functionality and indicates poor code quality and code review standards and […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core Integer Overflow November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below fails to properly prevent integer overflows, causing wrap-arounds and other issues on a downstream forced casting into types smaller than `BigInteger`. Importantly, this finding underscores why all applications using Struts and other such platforms should perform their own input […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core Cross-Origin Protection Exemption Miskeyed to a Deployment-Wide Path November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below's `FetchMetadataInterceptor`, `CoepInterceptor`, and `CoopInterceptor` each compare their `exemptedPaths` configuration -- a per-interceptor-reference, administrator-supplied set of paths intended to exempt specific actions from the corresponding cross-origin protection -- against `HttpServletRequest.getContextPath()`. `getContextPath()` is fixed for the entire deployed web...
  • Apache Struts2 REST Plugin Fails to Properly Parse Chunked Requests November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 REST Plugin's (version 7.4.0 and below) `ContentTypeInterceptor.intercept(ActionInvocation)` only deserialises a request body and enforces the `struts.rest.content.maxLength` bound when `HttpServletRequest#getContentLength()` returns a positive value. `getContentLength()` returns `-1` whenever the `Content-Length` header is absent, which normal and appropriate for any Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)...
  • Apache Struts2 REST Plugin Untrimmed `Accept` Header Tokens Break Content Negation Fallback November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 REST Plugin's `DefaultContentTypeHandlerManager.getHandlerForResponse(HttpServletRequest, HttpServletResponse)` splits the `Accept` header on commas and passes each resulting token directly to `findHandler(String)` without trimming leading or trailing whitespace. `findHandler(String)` only retries a trimmed lookup when a token contains a semicolon (`;`), so a token that merely carries […]
  • Apache Struts2 JSON Plugin Insecure Deserialisation -- Object Deserialisation Element-Count Limit Bypass November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01As of the current versions of the Apache Struts2 JSON Plugin (e.g., version 7.4.0 and the 7.5.0 snapshot dated 28 October 2026), attackers can bypass the element-count limit purported to protect Object deserialisation added to said code as part of the WW-5618 and S2-072 "hardening controls". Please […]
  • [0day-rubbish] NETGEAR RAX120 V1.2.5.18 authenticated SOAP InstallApp OS command injection to root-configured web-stack execution (6.8 Medium; conditionally 7.2 High with management exposure) October 29, 2026
    Posted by disclosure via Fulldisclosure on Oct 280day Rubbish Research Team is publicly disclosing a vulnerability in NETGEAR RAX120 (Nighthawk AX12) firmware V1.2.5.18, the WiFi 6 consumer router from NETGEAR (United States), built on the Qualcomm IPQ8074 platform. The administrative web plane of this firmware generation is a lighttpd server fronting the vendor's DNI-framework CGI […]
  • [0day-rubbish] Raritan PX3 PDU G4 firmware 4.3.14 command injection in the ping and traceroute diagnostics through an inverted hostname-validation return check (8.8) October 29, 2026
    Posted by disclosure via Fulldisclosure on Oct 280day Rubbish Research Team is publicly disclosing a vulnerability in the Raritan PX3 PDU G4, firmware version 4.3.14, the intelligent rack power distribution unit from Raritan, a Legrand company (United States). A low-privilege authenticated session converts one diagnostics request into operating-system command execution in the product's web-service context, […]

Customers