A Case Study of Phishing Incident Response in an Educational Organization
Kholoud Althobaiti, Adam D. G. Jenkins, Kami Vaniea
Abstract
Malicious communications aimed at tricking employees are a serious threat for organizations, necessitating the creation of procedures and policies for quickly respond to ongoing attacks. While automated measures provide some protection, they cannot completely protect an organization. In this case study, we use interviews and observations to explore the processes staff at a large University use when handling reports of malicious communication, including how the help desk processes reports, whom they escalate them to, and how teams who manage protections such as the firewalls and mail relays use these reports to improve defenses. We found that the process and work patterns are a distributed cognitive process requiring multiple distinct teams with narrow system access and tactic knowledge. Sudden large campaigns were found to overwhelm the help desk with reports, greatly impacting staff's workflow and hindering the effective application of mitigations and the potential for reflection. We detail potential improvements to ticketing systems and reflect on ITIL, a common framework of best practice in IT management.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers3
- The Effects of Group Discussion and Role-playing Training on Self-efficacy, Support-seeking, and Reporting Phishing Emails: Evidence from a Mixed-design ExperimentXiaowei Chen, Margault Sacré, Gabriele Lenzini, Samuel Greiff et al.CHI 2024 · 21 citations
- Not as easy as just update: Survey of System Administrators and Patching BehavioursAdam D. G. Jenkins, Linsen Liu, Maria K. Wolters, Kami VanieaCHI 2024 · 10 citations
- Judging Phishing Under Uncertainty: How Do Users Handle Inaccurate Automated Advice?Tarini Saka, Kalliopi Vakali, Adam D. G. Jenkins, Nadin Kokciyan et al.CHI 2025 · 1 citation
Builds on6
- How I Learned to be Secure: a Census-Representative Survey of Security Advice Sources and BehaviorElissa M. Redmiles, Sean Kross, Michelle L. MazurekCCS 2016 · 192 citations
- Matched and Mismatched SOCs: A Qualitative Study on Security Operations Center IssuesFaris Bugra Kokulu, Ananta Soneji, Tiffany Bao, Yan Shoshitaishvili et al.CCS 2019 · 134 citations
- Detecting and Characterizing Lateral Phishing at ScaleGrant Ho, Asaf Cidon, Lior Gavish, Marco Schweighauser et al.USENIX Security 2019 · 113 citations
- Cognitive Triaging of Phishing AttacksAmber van der Heijden, Luca AllodiUSENIX Security 2019 · 100 citations
- Detecting Credential Spearphishing in Enterprise SettingsGrant Ho, Aashish Sharma, Mobin Javed, Vern Paxson et al.USENIX Security 2017 · 94 citations
Related papers
- What Mid-Career Professionals Think, Know, and Feel About Phishing: Opportunities for University IT Departments to Better Empower Employees in Their Anti-Phishing DecisionsAnne Clara Tally, Jacob Abbott, Ashley M. Bochner, Sanchari Das et al.CSCW 2023 · 11 citations
- How Experts Detect Phishing Scam EmailsRick WashCSCW 2020 · 76 citations
- Phishing Susceptibility and the (In-)Effectiveness of Common Anti-Phishing Interventions in a Large University HospitalJan Tolsdorf, David Langer, Luigi Lo IaconoCCS 2025
- Tips, Tricks, and Training: Supporting Anti-Phishing Awareness among Mid-Career Office Workers Based on Employees' Current PracticesAnne Clara Tally, Jacob Abbott, Ashley M. Bochner, Sanchari Das et al.CHI 2023 · 12 citations
- Anti-Phishing Training (Still) Does Not Work: A Reproduction of Phishing Training Inefficacy Grounded in the NIST Phish ScaleAndrew T. Rozema, James C. DavisWWW 2026 · 1 citation
