conducting-phishing-incident-response▌
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills · updated May 25, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Responds to phishing incidents by analyzing reported emails, extracting indicators, assessing credential compromise, quarantining malicious messages across the organization, and remediating affected accounts. Covers email header analysis, URL/attachment sandboxing, and mailbox-wide purge operations. Activates for requests involving phishing response, email incident, credential phishing, spear phishing investigation, or phishing remediation.
| name | conducting-phishing-incident-response |
| description | 'Responds to phishing incidents by analyzing reported emails, extracting indicators, assessing credential compromise, quarantining malicious messages across the organization, and remediating affected accounts. Covers email header analysis, URL/attachment sandboxing, and mailbox-wide purge operations. Activates for requests involving phishing response, email incident, credential phishing, spear phishing investigation, or phishing remediation. ' |
| domain | cybersecurity |
| subdomain | incident-response |
| tags | - phishing-response - email-security - credential-compromise - email-header-analysis - mailbox-remediation |
| mitre_attack | - T1566 - T1204 - T1534 - T1598 |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| author | mahipal |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| nist_csf | - RS.MA-01 - RS.MA-02 - RS.AN-03 - RC.RP-01 |
Conducting Phishing Incident Response
When to Use
- A user reports receiving a suspicious email via the phishing report button or abuse mailbox
- Email gateway detects a malicious email that bypassed initial filtering
- Threat intelligence indicates an active phishing campaign targeting the organization
- A user confirms they clicked a link or opened an attachment from a suspicious email
- Credentials have been entered on a suspected phishing page
Do not use for business email compromise (BEC) involving compromised internal accounts; use BEC response procedures which focus on account takeover investigation.
Prerequisites
- Email security gateway with message trace and quarantine capabilities (Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Proofpoint, Mimecast)
- Microsoft 365 admin access or Google Workspace admin for mailbox search and purge
- Malware sandbox for attachment and URL analysis (ANY.RUN, Joe Sandbox, Hybrid Analysis)
- Email header analysis tools (MXToolbox Header Analyzer, Google Admin Toolbox)
- Identity provider access for account remediation (Azure AD, Okta, Duo)
- Phishing report intake process (dedicated mailbox or integrated report button)
Workflow
Step 1: Receive and Triage the Phishing Report
Evaluate the reported email to determine if it is malicious:
- Extract the email as an .EML or .MSG file (preserves headers)
- Analyze email headers to determine the true sender, relay path, and authentication results
Email Header Analysis Checklist:
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Return-Path: billing@spoofed-domain[.]com
From: "IT Support" <support@corp-lookalike[.]com>
Reply-To: attacker@gmail[.]com (different from From)
SPF: FAIL (sender IP not authorized for domain)
DKIM: FAIL (signature invalid)
DMARC: FAIL (policy: none - no enforcement)
Received: from mail.attacker-infra[.]net [45.33.x.x]
X-Originating-IP: 45.33.x.x
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Classification criteria:
- Confirmed Phishing: Malicious URL/attachment, spoofed sender, credential harvesting page
- Suspicious: Anomalous headers but no confirmed malicious content
- Spam/Marketing: Unwanted but not malicious
- Legitimate: Not a phishing email (false report)
Step 2: Analyze Malicious Content
Examine URLs and attachments in a safe environment:
URL Analysis:
- Check URL against VirusTotal, URLscan.io, and Google Safe Browsing
- Open URL in a sandbox browser to capture the landing page
- Check if the URL redirects to a credential harvesting page
- Identify the phishing kit type (Microsoft 365 login clone, Okta clone, generic)
- Determine if the phishing page is still active
Attachment Analysis:
- Calculate file hash (SHA-256) and check against VirusTotal
- Detonate in sandbox (ANY.RUN, Joe Sandbox)
- Analyze document for macros (olevba for Office files)
- Check for embedded exploits (CVE exploitation in document parsers)
Step 3: Determine Scope of Impact
Identify all recipients and assess who interacted with the phishing email:
Scope Assessment:
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Total Recipients: 47 users
Delivered to Inbox: 38 users (9 caught by email gateway)
Opened Email: 24 users (email tracking pixel data)
Clicked Link: 8 users (proxy/firewall logs)
Entered Credentials: 3 users (phishing page submitted form data)
Opened Attachment: 2 users (EDR process execution telemetry)
Search methods:
- Microsoft 365: Use Threat Explorer or Content Search to find all instances of the email
- Google Workspace: Use Admin Console > Investigation tool for message search
- Proxy logs: Search for connections to the phishing URL from internal IPs
- EDR: Search for attachment file hash execution across all endpoints
Step 4: Contain the Threat
Execute containment actions based on impact assessment:
Email Containment:
- Purge the phishing email from all mailboxes using Microsoft 365 Content Search and Purge or Google Workspace Admin delete
- Block the sender domain at the email gateway
- Add the phishing URL to the web proxy blocklist
- Add attachment hash to email gateway and EDR blocklists
Account Containment (for users who entered credentials):
- Force password reset immediately
- Revoke all active sessions and OAuth tokens
- Enable or re-verify MFA enrollment
- Review mailbox rules for attacker-created forwarding rules
- Check for unauthorized OAuth application grants
- Review recent sign-in activity for suspicious locations
# Microsoft 365: Revoke sessions and reset password
Connect-AzureAD
Revoke-AzureADUserAllRefreshToken -ObjectId "[email protected]"
Set-AzureADUserPassword -ObjectId "[email protected]" -ForceChangePasswordNextLogin $true
# Check for mailbox forwarding rules
Get-InboxRule -Mailbox "[email protected]" | Where-Object {$_.ForwardTo -or $_.RedirectTo}
# Remove suspicious forwarding rules
Remove-InboxRule -Mailbox "[email protected]" -Identity "Rule Name"
Step 5: Eradicate and Recover
Remove all traces of the phishing attack:
- Confirm email purge completed successfully across all mailboxes
- Verify compromised accounts have been secured (password changed, sessions revoked, MFA verified)
- Remove any malware installed via phishing attachments from affected endpoints
- Monitor compromised accounts for 72 hours for signs of continued unauthorized access
- Check for data exfiltration from compromised accounts during the exposure window
Step 6: Post-Incident Actions
Strengthen defenses against similar phishing attacks:
- Report the phishing URL to Google Safe Browsing and Microsoft SmartScreen
- Submit the phishing domain for takedown via the domain registrar abuse contact
- Update email gateway filtering rules based on observed evasion techniques
- Send targeted security awareness notification to affected users
- Update phishing simulation program to include the observed technique
Key Concepts
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Spear Phishing | Targeted phishing attack crafted for a specific individual or organization using personalized content |
| Credential Harvesting | Phishing technique that mimics a legitimate login page to capture usernames and passwords |
| SPF (Sender Policy Framework) | Email authentication protocol that specifies which mail servers are authorized to send email for a domain |
| DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) | Email authentication method using cryptographic signatures to verify that an email was not altered in transit |
| DMARC | Policy framework that uses SPF and DKIM to determine email authenticity and instructs receivers on handling failures |
| OAuth Consent Phishing | Attack that tricks users into granting malicious OAuth applications access to their email and data |
| Email Header | Metadata embedded in every email containing routing, authentication, and sender information used for forensic analysis |
Tools & Systems
- Microsoft Defender for Office 365: Email threat protection with Threat Explorer for investigation and automated purge
- Proofpoint TAP (Targeted Attack Protection): Email security platform with URL rewriting and attachment sandboxing
- URLscan.io: Online service that scans URLs and captures screenshots of phishing pages for evidence
- PhishTool: Phishing analysis platform that automates header analysis, URL inspection, and IOC extraction
- GoPhish: Open-source phishing simulation platform for security awareness testing
Common Scenarios
Scenario: Microsoft 365 Credential Phishing via QR Code
Context: Users report an email claiming to be from IT requiring MFA re-enrollment. The email contains a QR code that links to a convincing Microsoft 365 login page clone hosted on a compromised WordPress site.
Approach:
- Scan the QR code in a sandbox to extract the URL
- Analyze the phishing page: captures credentials and MFA tokens (adversary-in-the-middle attack)
- Search email gateway for all recipients using message subject and sender as search criteria
- Cross-reference with proxy logs to identify users who visited the phishing URL
- Force password reset and revoke sessions for all users who visited the URL
- Purge the email from all mailboxes and block the sender domain
- Notify users about the specific campaign with visual examples of the phishing email
Pitfalls:
- Not checking for adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) capability that captures session tokens even with MFA
- Only resetting passwords without revoking active sessions (attacker retains access via stolen session cookies)
- Not searching for mailbox forwarding rules created by the attacker after compromising an account
- Missing QR code phishing (quishing) because URL scanning tools cannot decode QR code images
Output Format
PHISHING INCIDENT RESPONSE REPORT
===================================
Incident: INC-2025-1602
Date Reported: 2025-11-16T09:15:00Z
Reported By: [email protected]
Classification: Credential Phishing (AiTM)
EMAIL ANALYSIS
Subject: "Action Required: MFA Re-enrollment"
Sender: it-support@corp-security[.]com (spoofed)
SPF: FAIL | DKIM: FAIL | DMARC: FAIL
Phishing URL: hxxps://compromised-site[.]com/ms365/login
Phishing Type: Microsoft 365 AiTM credential harvester
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Recipients: 47
Clicked Link: 8
Credentials Entered: 3 (confirmed via proxy POST data)
CONTAINMENT ACTIONS
[x] Email purged from all 47 mailboxes
[x] Phishing domain blocked at web proxy
[x] Sender domain blocked at email gateway
[x] 3 compromised accounts: passwords reset, sessions revoked
[x] Mailbox forwarding rules reviewed (1 malicious rule removed)
[x] OAuth app grants reviewed (no unauthorized grants found)
IOCs EXTRACTED
Domain: corp-security[.]com
URL: hxxps://compromised-site[.]com/ms365/login
IP: 104.21.x.x (Cloudflare-hosted)
Sender: it-support@corp-security[.]com
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Implement DMARC enforcement (p=reject) for corp domain
2. Deploy QR code scanning in email gateway
3. Send targeted awareness notification to all 47 recipients
4. Request domain takedown via registrar abuse contact
How to use conducting-phishing-incident-response on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add conducting-phishing-incident-response
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches conducting-phishing-incident-response from GitHub repository mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate conducting-phishing-incident-response. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /conducting-phishing-incident-response) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
Task Automation & Efficiency
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Knowledge Enhancement
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Quality Improvement
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
- ›Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
- ›Willingness to iterate and refine outputs
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Installation Steps
- 1.Install skill using provided installation command
- 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 5.Integrate into regular workflow if valuable
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Expecting perfect results without iteration
- ⚠Not providing enough context in prompts
- ⚠Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
- ⚠Accepting outputs without review and validation
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Start with clear, specific prompts
- +Provide relevant context and constraints
- +Review and refine all outputs before using
- +Iterate to improve output quality
- +Document successful prompt patterns
✗ Don't
- −Don't use without understanding skill limitations
- −Don't skip validation of outputs
- −Don't share sensitive information in prompts
- −Don't expect skill to replace human judgment
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Be specific about desired format and style
- ★Ask for multiple options to choose from
- ★Request explanations to understand reasoning
- ★Combine AI efficiency with human expertise
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
Learning Path▌
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.5★★★★★72 reviews- ★★★★★Hassan Abbas· Dec 28, 2024
I recommend conducting-phishing-incident-response for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Sophia Chawla· Dec 24, 2024
conducting-phishing-incident-response reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Carlos Wang· Dec 24, 2024
conducting-phishing-incident-response has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Ganesh Mohane· Dec 20, 2024
We added conducting-phishing-incident-response from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Dec 16, 2024
I recommend conducting-phishing-incident-response for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Naina Wang· Dec 12, 2024
Registry listing for conducting-phishing-incident-response matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Arjun Haddad· Dec 8, 2024
conducting-phishing-incident-response fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Jin Lopez· Dec 4, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: conducting-phishing-incident-response is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Arjun Malhotra· Nov 27, 2024
We added conducting-phishing-incident-response from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Carlos Srinivasan· Nov 23, 2024
Registry listing for conducting-phishing-incident-response matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
showing 1-10 of 72