prompt stringlengths 173 596 | chosen stringlengths 343 1.07k | rejected stringlengths 78 1.11k | source stringclasses 1
value | defect stringclasses 10
values | negatives stringclasses 3
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
An email with display name 'Google' and sender 'no-reply@google-account-alerts.net' passes SPF but fails DKIM. The message claims suspicious activity and requests a password reset via a provided link. The 'Message-ID' header seems unusual with excessive characters. Would you trust it? | Do not trust it. SPF pass alone is insufficient—DKIM failure means the content is not cryptographically signed. The domain 'google-account-alerts.net' is a lookalike, not google.com. A suspicious-activity alert with a password-reset link is a classic phishing lure. The unusual Message-ID (excessive characters) indicate... | SPF passes, which proves the sender is authorized by the domain owner. DKIM failure is not always critical—some legitimate senders misconfigure DKIM. The suspicious-activity alert is a normal Google security feature. The reset link is probably safe. The Message-ID anomaly is likely a technical glitch. This email is pro... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
a personal email user gets a message from 'bank of america' with display name 'bank alerts' and sender 'security@bankofamerica-alert-service.net', SPF and DKIM pass for that domain, but the email body shows a link to 'bankofamerca.com' and asks for two-factor codes. classify it. | This is definitively phishing. SPF/DKIM pass for the sender domain is irrelevant because the domain 'bankofamerica-alert-service.net' is a lookalike—not the official bankofamerica.com. The display name 'bank alerts' impersonates legitimate notifications. The critical indicator is the link to 'bankofamerca.com' (typosqu... | SPF and DKIM pass for the sender domain, which confirms the email is not spoofed. The display name 'bank alerts' matches the purpose. The link 'bankofamerca.com' might be a typo, but since the sender is authenticated, it's likely a legitimate subdomain or a temporary redirect. Asking for two-factor codes is standard fo... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
A digital marketer receives a newsletter from 'Mailchimp' <campaigns@mailchimp-campaigns.info>, SPF pass, DKIM pass, but the sender domain is a lookalike. The display name is 'Mailchimp' and it includes a 'Manage Preferences' link. How would you evaluate this? | This is a phishing email despite the authentication passes. SPF and DKIM pass only for mailchimp-campaigns.info, a domain the real Mailchimp does not control. The lookalike domain uses 'mailchimp' as a prefix to appear legitimate, but the .info TLD and the hyphenated structure are classic brand-abuse patterns. The 'Man... | This is a phishing email despite the authentication passes. SPF and DKIM pass only for mailchimp-campaigns.info, a domain the real Mailchimp does not control. The lookalike domain uses 'mailchimp' as a prefix to appear legitimate, but the .info TLD and the hyphenated structure are classic brand-abuse patterns. The 'Man... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
5. A research scientist receives a 'research collaboration' email from display name 'MIT' and sender 'professor-secretary@mit-research-institute.org'. SPF/DKIM pass for the .org domain, but the email asks the scientist to review a 'confidential proposal' which is a ZIP file that contains an executable, and the Reply-To... | This is a highly suspicious phishing attempt. The SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates mit-research-institute.org, which is a separate entity from MIT's official domain (mit.edu). The display name 'MIT' is a direct impersonation. The ZIP file containing an executable is a classic malware delivery vector — legitimate resear... | This is a highly suspicious phishing attempt. The SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates mit-research-institute.org, which is a separate entity from MIT's official domain (mit.edu). The display name 'MIT' is a direct impersonation. The ZIP file containing an executable is a classic malware delivery vector — legitimate resear... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A homeowner gets an email from 'Zillow' <listings@zillow-property-alerts.org>. SPF and DKIM pass. The email says a new property matches their filters and provides a link to 'zillow.com.real-estate-updates.net'. The display name is 'Zillow'. Is this safe? | Not safe—this is a spoofing attempt. The SPF/DKIM pass only validates that 'zillow-property-alerts.org' can send for itself; it does not authenticate anything about 'zillow.com' or 'real-estate-updates.net'. The display name 'Zillow' and the link's visual prefix 'zillow.com.' are designed to deceive. The real URL is 'r... | The display name 'Zillow' and the link's visual prefix 'zillow.com.' are designed to deceive. The real URL is 'real-estate-updates.net', a domain with no relation to Zillow. The SPF/DKIM pass only validates that 'zillow-property-alerts.org' can send for itself; it does not authenticate anything about 'zillow.com' or 'r... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'Docusign' <envelopes@docusign-document-center.net> passes SPF/DKIM. The body says you have a 'document pending signature' and includes a link to review and sign. The display name is 'DocuSign'. The reply-to is 'no-reply@docusign-document-center.net'. Is this phishing? | Yes, this is phishing. While SPF/DKIM pass, they only validate the sending infrastructure of 'docusign-document-center.net' — not the identity of the brand. The display name 'DocuSign' is a classic display-name spoof: the recipient sees a trusted brand in the UI, but the actual domain is a lookalike that substitutes 'd... | Yes, this is phishing. While SPF/DKIM pass, they only validate the sending infrastructure of 'docusign-document-center.net' — not the identity of the brand. The display name 'DocuSign' is a classic display-name spoof: the recipient sees a trusted brand in the UI, but the actual domain is a lookalike that substitutes 'd... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A data analyst receives a QR-code report from 'SurveyMonkey' with display name 'Monthly Survey Results' and sender 'results@surveymonkey-data-center.com', SPF passes, DKIM passes, but the questions in the summary don't match the deployed survey template. | This is a phishing email despite perfect SPF/DKIM authentication. The sender domain 'surveymonkey-data-center.com' is a lookalike of the real 'surveymonkey.com' — the extra 'data-center' is an impersonation tactic. The display name 'Monthly Survey Results' is generic but plausible. The critical anomaly is the content m... | This is a phishing email despite perfect SPF/DKIM authentication. The sender domain 'surveymonkey-data-center.com' is a lookalike of the real 'surveymonkey.com' — the extra 'data-center' is an impersonation tactic. The display name 'Monthly Survey Results' is generic but plausible. The critical anomaly is the content m... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
Message from 'Adobe' <noreply@adobe-licensing-renewal.org>. SPF pass, DKIM pass, and the domain has a valid DMARC policy of 'p=none'. The body requests urgent credit card update for 'auto-renewal' with a link to 'adobebillings.com'. Give your reasoning. | This is phishing despite full auth passing. The sender domain 'adobe-licensing-renewal.org' is a lookalike — Adobe uses adobe.com, not a .org with extra words. The DMARC 'p=none' means the domain owner is not telling receivers to reject failures, so this policy provides no protection against spoofing of that domain. Th... | This is phishing despite full auth passing. The sender domain 'adobe-licensing-renewal.org' is a lookalike — Adobe uses adobe.com, not a .org with extra words. The DMARC 'p=none' means the domain owner is not telling receivers to reject failures, so this policy provides no protection against spoofing of that domain. Th... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A banking customer receives a message from 'Chase Bank' <alerts@chasebanking-verification.org>, SPF pass, DKIM pass, but the display name is 'Chase', and the domain is not chase.com. The email contains a suspicious link to a login page. Assess. | This is a phishing attempt. SPF and DKIM pass only for the domain chasebanking-verification.org, which is not owned by Chase. The display name 'Chase' is a social-engineering overlay, and the domain itself is a lookalike designed to mimic a subdomain of 'chase' while adding 'banking-verification'—a common pattern for c... | This is a phishing attempt. SPF and DKIM pass only for the domain chasebanking-verification.org, which is not owned by Chase. The display name 'Chase' is a social-engineering overlay, and the domain itself is a lookalike designed to mimic a subdomain of 'chase' while adding 'banking-verification'—a common pattern for c... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
3. A project coordinator receives a message from 'Trello' with display name 'Card Assignment' and sender 'updates@trello-team-workspace.co', SPF and DKIM pass, but the board name in the email doesn't match any of the user's active boards. | This is a sophisticated phishing attempt. SPF and DKIM pass because the attacker owns the domain 'trello-team-workspace.co', a lookalike of the real 'trello.com'. The display name 'Card Assignment' mimics Trello's notification style. The critical anomaly is the board name—a legitimate Trello email would reference the u... | This is a sophisticated phishing attempt. SPF and DKIM pass because the attacker owns the domain 'trello-team-workspace.co', a lookalike of the real 'trello.com'. The display name 'Card Assignment' mimics Trello's notification style. The critical anomaly is the board name—a legitimate Trello email would reference the u... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
I received an email from 'support@microsoft-cert-notice.com' with display name 'Microsoft Security Center'. SPF passes, DKIM passes, DMARC passes for this .com domain. The body says my Outlook account is compromised and asks me to download a diagnostic tool to fix it. What is the correct trust assessment? | The correct assessment is that this is a phishing attempt despite full authentication. The sender domain 'microsoft-cert-notice.com' is a lookalike—Microsoft does not use 'cert-notice' in any of its official domains. The display name 'Microsoft Security Center' is a spoofing tactic to appear official. The authenticatio... | The correct assessment is that this is a phishing attempt despite full authentication. The request to download a 'diagnostic tool' is a common malware delivery method, and Microsoft never sends unsolicited security tools via email. The urgency of a compromised account is a social-engineering pressure. The sender domain... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A travel agent receives a booking confirmation from 'Expedia' with sender 'confirmations@expedia-travel-support.com'. SPF passes, DKIM passes, and DMARC reports are sent to a suspicious domain. The email contains a link to view the itinerary. Is this legitimate or a spoofing attempt? | This is a spoofing attempt. SPF/DKIM passing only authenticate expedia-travel-support.com, which is a lookalike domain, not Expedia's official expedia.com or expedia.com. The DMARC reports going to a 'suspicious domain' is a major red flag — it means the DMARC policy is set up by an attacker to monitor authentication f... | This is a spoofing attempt. The link to 'view itinerary' probably goes to a credential-harvesting or malware site, which is the most important red flag to act on. SPF/DKIM passing only authenticate expedia-travel-support.com, which is a lookalike domain, not Expedia's official expedia.com. The DMARC reports going to a ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'service@outlook.com' passes SPF and DKIM. Display name is 'Outlook Team'. The body says my mailbox is almost out of storage and I need to click 'Manage storage' to expand it. The link goes to 'outlook-store-upgrades.net'. Also, the message has an attachment called 'storage_report.rtf' that was not mentio... | Yes, this is phishing. SPF and DKIM pass only prove the sending server is authorized for the domain 'outlook.com', not that the content is legitimate. The display name 'Outlook Team' is a classic impersonation tactic—the actual sender is service@outlook.com, which is plausible, but the link to 'outlook-store-upgrades.n... | Yes, this is phishing. The unsolicited attachment 'storage_report.rtf' is a strong red flag, especially since it's not referenced in the body; RTF files can carry macros or exploits. SPF and DKIM pass only prove the sending server is authorized for the domain 'outlook.com', not that the content is legitimate. The displ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An employee receives a 'Notice of Outstanding Payment' from 'Microsoft Office 365' — display name 'MS Office 365', From 'billing@microsoft-office365-suite.net'. SPF pass, DKIM pass. The document attached is a macro-enabled Word file. The 'Reply-To' is a personal Outlook.com address. The sender's messaging says 'This pa... | Grade: Critical/High-risk phishing. The gate's SPF/pass signal is irrelevant to the payload—it only validates the sending domain 'microsoft-office365-suite.net', which is not Microsoft's domain (that would be microsoft.com). The macro-enabled Word file is the primary threat: such files are the #1 vector for malware del... | Grade: Critical/High-risk phishing. The gate's SPF/pass signal is irrelevant to the payload—it only validates the sending domain 'microsoft-office365-suite.net', which is not Microsoft's domain (that would be microsoft.com). The macro-enabled Word file is the primary threat: such files are the #1 vector for malware del... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'Fidelity Investments' <alerts@fidelity.com> with SPF/DKIM pass, but the 'Sender' field is 'security@fidelity-verify.com' and the sign-off asks you to text a number to confirm your identity. Does the mismatch outweigh the auth pass? | The sender mismatch is critical: the 'From' domain passes SPF and DKIM, but the 'Sender' field reveals a different domain, 'fidelity-verify.com', which is a classic spoofing tactic to route replies or hide the true origin. Legitimate Fidelity alerts would not use a separate 'Sender' domain, and requesting identity conf... | The sign-off asking you to text a number to confirm your identity is the most striking and consequential feature of this email—it is a known vishing tactic that often goes unnoticed by recipients. The 'Sender' field reveals 'fidelity-verify.com', which is a different domain from the 'From' field, and that mismatch is t... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email to a payroll clerk displays 'ADP TotalSource', sender 'payroll@adp-total-source-notify.net', SPF/DKIM pass. It asks for W-2 re-upload via a portal link at 'adp-verify-identity.com'. The Reply-To is 'payroll.support@adp.com'. Analyze its trustworthiness. | This is a spear-phishing email targeting payroll. The display name 'ADP TotalSource' is used to appear official, but the sender domain 'adp-total-source-notify.net' is a lookalike—ADP's real domain is 'adp.com'. The SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates the sender's own domain, not the brand. The link 'adp-verify-identity.c... | The Reply-To header 'payroll.support@adp.com' is a legitimate-looking address that matches ADP's real support domain. The SPF/DKIM pass confirms the email was sent from an authorized server for the sender domain 'adp-total-source-notify.net', which is a standard notification subdomain that ADP uses for automated payrol... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An employee receives an email from 'Atlassian' <noreply@atlassian-tickets.xyz>, SPF pass, DKIM pass, but the domain is misspelled. The display name is 'Atlassian' and the subject is 'Support Ticket Update'. How should this be assessed? | This is a phishing attempt. The domain atlassian-tickets.xyz is not Atlassian's; the real domain is atlassian.com. The .xyz TLD and the hyphenated 'tickets' suffix are classic typosquatting tactics that exploit user reliance on display names. SPF and DKIM pass only for the attacker's domain, so they provide zero legiti... | SPF and DKIM both pass, so the email is authenticated and not a spoof. The display name 'Atlassian' is correct, and the subject about a support ticket is plausible. The .xyz domain might be a new subdomain Atlassian uses for ticket notifications. Since the message is authenticated, it's safe to click the link and check... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
6. a team lead receives an 'urgent wire transfer' email from 'finance director' with sender 'finance@companyname-finance.org', SPF pass and DKIM pass, but the display name is 'cfo' and the reply-to is 'director.finance@gmail.com'. the message asks to approve a large payment to an unknown beneficiary. how risky is it? | This is a critical-risk BEC (business email compromise) attack. The SPF/DKIM pass for companyname-finance.org doesn't legitimize the email because that domain is not your company's official domain — it's a lookalike with '-finance.org'. The display name 'Cfo' is direct impersonation of an executive. The reply-to being ... | This is a critical-risk BEC (business email compromise) attack. The SPF/DKIM pass for companyname-finance.org doesn't legitimize the email because that domain is not your company's official domain — it's a lookalike with '-finance.org'. The display name 'Cfo' is direct impersonation of an executive. The reply-to being ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
You receive an email from 'Google' with sender 'noreply@google-account-activity-check.net'. SPF and DKIM pass. The subject is 'Suspicious sign-in attempt' and it includes a link to 'google-account-activity-check.net/secure'. The display name is 'Google'. The email asks you to enter your password on a page that mimics G... | This is a phishing email. The sender domain 'google-account-activity-check.net' is not google.com — it's a lookalike. SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates that domain, not Google. The link goes to the same lookalike domain, and requesting your password on a mimic page is a definitive credential-phishing indicator. The subj... | This is a phishing email. The sender domain 'google-account-activity-check.net' is not google.com — it's a lookalike. SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates that domain, not Google. The link goes to the same lookalike domain, and requesting your password on a mimic page is a definitive credential-phishing indicator. The subj... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A user gets an email from 'Twitter' <no-reply@twitter-account-support.xyz> about a security breach. The message contains a link to 'twitter-account-support.xyz/reset'. SPF and DKIM pass for the sender domain. Is this a spoofed email? | Yes, this is a spoofed email. The sender domain 'twitter-account-support.xyz' is a lookalike and uses a non-standard TLD (.xyz), which is common in phishing. The display name 'Twitter' is spoofed. SPF/DKIM passing only means the attacker has set up proper authentication for their own malicious domain—it doesn't validat... | Yes, this is a spoofed email. The sender domain 'twitter-account-support.xyz' is a lookalike and uses a non-standard TLD (.xyz), which is common in phishing. The display name 'Twitter' is spoofed. SPF/DKIM passing only means the attacker has set up proper authentication for their own malicious domain—it doesn't validat... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
You receive an email from 'admin@account-verification.org' with display name 'Google Security' and SPF/DKIM pass. The message says your Google account was used to send spam and you must verify your identity by replying with your password. What do you conclude? | This is a phishing attempt. The SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates 'account-verification.org', not Google. The display name 'Google Security' is social engineering, and the domain is a lookalike of Google's actual domains. The request to reply with a password is a classic credential-harvesting technique—real Google never... | This is a phishing attempt. The SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates 'account-verification.org', not Google. The display name 'Google Security' is social engineering, and the domain is a lookalike of Google's actual domains. The request to reply with a password is a classic credential-harvesting technique—real Google never... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
5. A social-engineering review: 'Facebook' <security@facebook-notice.xyz> with SPF pass and DKIM pass for the .xyz domain, but the 'To' header contains a plus-tag alias not used by the recipient, and 'Subject' says 'unauthorized login'. The email has a 'secure your account' button. Give your phishing probability with r... | Phishing probability: 95%. The domain facebook-notice.xyz is a clear lookalike — Facebook's real domain is facebook.com, and .xyz TLDs are commonly used for phishing due to cheap registration. SPF/DKIM passing only proves the attacker's domain is configured properly; it says nothing about Facebook. The plus-tag alias i... | SPF and DKIM pass, so the email is authenticated. The .xyz domain might be a regional or testing domain Facebook uses. The plus-tag alias could be a mistake or an auto-generated alias. The 'unauthorized login' is a common security alert, and the button is the standard way to secure the account. Phishing probability: 10... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
The CEO's executive assistant gets an email from 'Google Calendar' <calendar-notification@google.com> with passing SPF and DKIM, but the event invite has an RSVP link to a lookalike subdomain of google.com rather than the standard calendar.google.com. What do you think? | This is a targeted phishing attempt, likely a spear-phish against the executive assistant to gain access to the CEO's calendar or credentials. The SPF/DKIM pass on google.com means the email technically originated from Google's infrastructure, but Google Calendar invitations always use calendar.google.com for RSVP link... | This is a targeted phishing attempt, likely a spear-phish against the executive assistant to gain access to the CEO's calendar or credentials. The SPF/DKIM pass on google.com means the email technically originated from Google's infrastructure, but Google Calendar invitations always use calendar.google.com for RSVP link... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An executive receives an email from 'Board of Directors' with the From address 'directors@yourcompany-board-room.com' — SPF and DKIM pass for that domain. The domain is one character off from a real board-management service. The email asks for confidentiality on a wire transfer. Discuss the determination. | The SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates 'yourcompany-board-room.com', not the real service 'yourcompany-boardroom.com'—the one-character substitution is a classic typosquatting technique. The display name 'Board of Directors' exploits authority bias, and the request for a confidential wire transfer is a business email com... | The SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates 'yourcompany-board-room.com', not the real service 'yourcompany-boardroom.com'—the one-character substitution is a classic typosquatting technique. The display name 'Board of Directors' exploits authority bias, and the request for a confidential wire transfer is a business email com... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
5. An email from 'Amazon' <store-news@amazon-order-update.co> with SPF pass and DKIM pass. The display name is 'Amazon Customer Service' and the message contains a link to 'https://amazon-order-update.co/order-status'. It claims your order could not be delivered and you need to reschedule. The sender domain is not amaz... | The risk level is high — this is a phishing email. The domain 'amazon-order-update.co' is a lookalike that mimics Amazon but is not amazon.com. SPF/DKIM passing only authenticates the lookalike domain, not Amazon. The display name 'Amazon Customer Service' is spoofed. The link goes to the same fraudulent domain, and th... | The risk level is high — this is a phishing email. The domain 'amazon-order-update.co' is a lookalike that mimics Amazon but is not amazon.com. SPF/DKIM passing only authenticates the lookalike domain, not Amazon. The display name 'Amazon Customer Service' is spoofed. The link goes to the same fraudulent domain, and th... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
2. A mid-level manager gets a calendar invitation from display name 'Google Calendar' with sender 'invitations@calendar-google.com'. SPF and DKIM both pass, but the sender domain is a lookalike (calendar-google.com vs google.com). The invite includes a link to a fake login page. Evaluate the risk. | This is a high-risk phishing attempt. SPF and DKIM passing only prove that calendar-google.com controls its own mail servers—it says nothing about whether that domain is trustworthy. The domain is a clear lookalike (hyphenated and reversed) designed to deceive users into thinking it's Google. The display name 'Google C... | This is a high-risk phishing attempt. SPF and DKIM passing only prove that calendar-google.com controls its own mail servers—it says nothing about whether that domain is trustworthy. The domain is a clear lookalike (hyphenated and reversed) designed to deceive users into thinking it's Google. The display name 'Google C... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A message from 'service@amazon.com' passes SPF and DKIM, but the DMARC policy is 'none'. The subject line is 'Your Amazon order cannot be processed'. Inside, it asks me to update my payment method by clicking a link that shows 'amazon.com/update-payment' in the visible text but actually points to 'amazon-prim-tls.xyz'.... | Yes, this is a phishing attempt. The visible link text is a classic anchor-text disguise—the actual href points to a lookalike domain. With DMARC p=none, the domain accepts spoofed emails, but here SPF/DKIM pass for the envelope; however, the content is the decisive factor. Amazon never asks to update payment via a non... | Yes, this is a phishing attempt primarily because of the DMARC policy being 'none'. The visible link text is a classic anchor-text disguise—the actual href points to a lookalike domain. With DMARC p=none, the domain accepts spoofed emails, and although SPF/DKIM pass for the envelope, the content is the decisive factor.... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'Slack' (display name) with sender 'no-reply@slack-workspace-invite.com'. SPF passes, DKIM passes. The message invites you to join a new workspace, with a 'Join Workspace' button. The 'To' field is 'undisclosed-recipients'. The domain is not the official slack.com. Weigh the evidence. | The evidence strongly indicates phishing. The domain 'slack-workspace-invite.com' is not slack.com — it's a lookalike. Slack uses slack.com for all official invitations. The 'To: undisclosed-recipients' is a classic mass-phishing technique to hide the target list. The 'Join Workspace' button is a clickable lure. SPF/DK... | The evidence indicates phishing. The domain 'slack-workspace-invite.com' is not slack.com — it's a lookalike. The 'To: undisclosed-recipients' is a classic mass-phishing technique to hide the target list. The 'Join Workspace' button is a clickable lure. SPF/DKIM pass only for the lookalike domain, which is an attacker-... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A customer receives a confirmation email after a purchase, display name 'Online Store', sender 'confirm@store-order-verification.com'. The 'Reply-To' field has a different domain 'store-issues-support@outlook.com'. SPF and DKIM pass for the sender domain, but the display name is generic. What is your assessment? | This email is suspicious and likely phishing. While SPF and DKIM pass for the sender domain, the Reply-To field pointing to a completely different domain (outlook.com) is a critical anomaly. Legitimate transactional emails use the same domain in the Reply-To to manage customer support; a mismatch indicates the attacker... | This email is suspicious and likely phishing. While SPF and DKIM pass for the sender domain, the Reply-To field pointing to a completely different domain (outlook.com) is a critical anomaly. Legitimate transactional emails use the same domain in the Reply-To to manage customer support; a mismatch indicates the attacker... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'Slack' <no-reply@slack-workspace-claim.biz> with SPF pass and DKIM pass. The message says your workspace is about to be deactivated and you need to click a link to 'claim your workspace' at 'https://slack-workspace-claim.biz/claim'. The display name is 'Slack Admin' and the Reply-To is 'admin@slack-works... | This is a phishing attempt. SPF/DKIM pass only for the 'slack-workspace-claim.biz' domain—which is not owned by Slack. The display name 'Slack Admin' is spoofed, the reply-to matches the malicious domain (deliberately set to intercept replies), and the link goes to a non-Slack domain. The urgency to 'claim your workspa... | This is a phishing attempt. SPF/DKIM pass only for the 'slack-workspace-claim.biz' domain—which is not owned by Slack. The display name 'Slack Admin' is spoofed, the reply-to matches the malicious domain (deliberately set to intercept replies), and the link goes to a non-Slack domain. The urgency to 'claim your workspa... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
2. a user receives a security alert from 'google' with sender 'no-reply@google-account-verify.com', spf/dkim pass, the body lists a susipicious sign-in from russia, asks to verify identity via a provided link, and the display name is exactly 'google' — grade. | Phishing. The domain 'google-account-verify.com' is not google.com; it's a lookalike that mimics Google's brand. SPF/DKIM passing on that domain only proves the attacker controls it. The display name 'google' is exact-match impersonation. The 'suspicious sign-in from Russia' is a classic fear trigger, and the provided ... | Phishing. The domain 'google-account-verify.com' is not google.com; it's a lookalike that mimics Google's brand. SPF/DKIM passing on that domain only proves the attacker controls it. The display name 'google' is exact-match impersonation. The 'suspicious sign-in from Russia' is a classic fear trigger, and the provided ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A law firm partner gets a document-sharing notification from display name 'Box', sender 'no-reply@box-legal-share.xyz'. SPF passes, DKIM passes, but the 'Reply-To' address is 'securefiles@box-account-assist.net'. Provide a nuanced verdict. | This is a high-confidence phishing attempt. While SPF/DKIM pass on the envelope/header domain (box-legal-share.xyz), that only proves the sender's own infrastructure, not legitimacy. The lookalike domain (box-legal-share.xyz vs box.com), combined with the display-name spoof of 'Box', is a classic brand impersonation. T... | Since SPF and DKIM both pass, the email is technically authenticated. The display name says 'Box' and the sender domain is 'box-legal-share.xyz', which is close enough to the real Box domain. The Reply-To is a minor anomaly but not a security issue because the message itself came from a domain that passed authenticatio... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
A small business owner receives an email from 'Square' <support@square-updates-service.com> regarding account verification. The 'Return-Path' is set to 'support@square-updates-service.com', and SPF and DKIM pass. The display name is 'Square Inc.'. Should the user trust this email? | No, the user should not trust this email. While SPF and DKIM pass and the Return-Path matches the sender domain, that domain is square-updates-service.com — not square.com or squareup.com. The display name 'Square Inc.' is designed to deceive. The fact that the Return-Path matches the sender domain only means the attac... | No, the user should not trust this email. The fact that the Return-Path matches the sender domain is a strong authentication indicator, as it confirms the message originated from the same mail infrastructure that claims to send it. The display name 'Square Inc.' matches the official branding, and SPF and DKIM both pass... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A user sees an email from 'Office 365' <admin@office365-tenant.com>. SPF and DKIM are valid. The 'Received-SPF' header shows pass, but the 'Authentication-Results' header also indicates a 'dsn' from a secondary domain. The email asks to update mailbox quota limits via a link labeled 'Increase Quota'. | This is a phishing attempt. The domain office365-tenant.com is a lookalike of Microsoft's legitimate office.com or outlook.com. SPF/DKIM pass only for that lookalike. The 'Authentication-Results' header mentioning a 'dsn' from a secondary domain is a red flag — it indicates the message was relayed or authenticated agai... | The 'Authentication-Results' header mentioning a 'dsn' from a secondary domain is a red flag — it indicates the message was relayed or authenticated against a different domain, breaking the trust chain. This is the primary indicator of phishing here. The domain office365-tenant.com is a lookalike of Microsoft's legitim... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A message from 'noreply@amazon-payments@protonmail.com' with display name 'Amazon Payments' arrives in your inbox. SPF passes for protonmail, DKIM passes, DMARC is aligned, but the sender is clearly not amazon.com. It asks you to verify a payment method by replying with your card number. Assess trustworthiness. | This is a high-confidence phishing attempt. While SPF/DKIM/DMARC all pass, they pass for protonmail.com, not amazon.com. The display name 'Amazon Payments' is classic display-name spoofing, and the sender address contains a nested @ (amazon-payments@protonmail.com), a known obfuscation trick. DMARC alignment is meaning... | This is a high-confidence phishing attempt. While SPF/DKIM/DMARC all pass, they pass for protonmail.com, not amazon.com. The display name 'Amazon Payments' is classic display-name spoofing, and the sender address contains a nested @ (amazon-payments@protonmail.com), a known obfuscation trick. DMARC alignment is meaning... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A systems engineer receives an email from 'Kubernetes' with display name 'Kubernetes Weekly' and sender 'newsletter@kube-weekly-digest.news'. SPF passes, DKIM passes but with a 'v=DKIM1; k=rsa; p=' that is malformed, and DMARC is not defined. The email advises an urgent security patch and includes a link to 'kube-weekl... | This is a phishing attempt. The domain 'kube-weekly-digest.news' is brand-new (registered last week) and is a lookalike of a legitimate newsletter that previously came from a different domain. The malformed DKIM record ('p=' with no key) means the DKIM 'pass' is meaningless—there's no actual cryptographic key to valida... | This is a phishing attempt. The domain 'kube-weekly-digest.news' is brand-new (registered last week) and is a lookalike of a legitimate newsletter that previously came from a different domain. The malformed DKIM record ('p=' with no key) means the DKIM 'pass' is meaningless—there's no actual cryptographic key to valida... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
You receive a message from 'no-reply@delivery-notification@postal-service.org' with display name 'Postal Service' states a package is held due to incomplete address. SPF passes, DKIM passes, DMARC is aligned, but the sender domain is not an official postal domain. The Reply-To is 'delivery@postal-service.org'. Assess t... | This is phishing. The sender domain 'postal-service.org' is not an official domain of any real postal service (official ones use .gov, .com, or country-specific TLDs like usps.com, royalmail.com). The '@' in the local part ('delivery-notification@postal-service.org') is a visual spoofing trick. DMARC alignment only pro... | SPF, DKIM, and DMARC all pass and align. The Reply-To matches the sender, so there's no inconsistency. The domain 'postal-service.org' clearly describes what it is. Package-hold notices are common from postal services. The email is authenticated, so it's legitimate. Click the link to update your address. | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
An email from 'alerts@cloudflare.com' has SPF pass, DKIM fail, and DMARC pass. The display name is 'Cloudflare Customer Support'. The body includes an attached PDF named 'invoice_2025.pdf' which likely contains macros. The sender domain is legitimate, but what else matters? | Even with SPF pass and DMARC pass, the DKIM failure and the attachment are critical. DKIM failure means the email's content wasn't cryptographically signed, so it could have been tampered with or composed by an unauthorized party—though SPF passes, that only verifies the envelope sender, not the body. The attachment 'i... | The display name 'Cloudflare Customer Support' is the most important detail here—it is easy to spoof even if the domain is authentic, and it creates a false sense of trust. This is the primary signal of a phishing campaign. The SPF pass and DMARC pass are secondary, but the DKIM failure means the email's content wasn't... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
Received an email from 'Amazon <shipment@amazon.com>' with valid DMARC but the attachment is a .html file and the subject says 'delivery failed'. How do you assess the phishing risk? | This is a high-risk phishing attempt despite valid DMARC. While DMARC verifies the domain is legitimate, the attachment type (.html) is a classic phishing vector—it can contain scripts or redirect to credential-harvesting sites. The 'delivery failed' subject creates urgency, a common social-engineering tactic. Legitima... | DMARC passes, so the email is authentic from Amazon. The .html attachment might be a receipt or a tracking page, and 'delivery failed' is a normal notification. Since the domain is verified, there's no phishing risk. I'd allow it and let the user open the attachment if they wish. | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
An email from 'support@netsuite-fraud-detection.com' with display name 'NetSuite' claims my invoice from last quarter is under review and I need to download a document from an attachment. SPF passes on the sending domain. The header also shows a Return-Path different from the From domain. What's the trustworthiness ver... | This is a phishing email. The SPF pass on the sending domain does not help because the domain 'netsuite-fraud-detection.com' is a lookalike, not the official netsuite.com. The display-name spoof 'NetSuite' is deceptive. More critically, the Return-Path differing from the From domain is a header anomaly indicating the m... | This is a phishing email. The SPF pass on the sending domain does not help because the domain 'netsuite-fraud-detection.com' is a lookalike, not the official netsuite.com. The display-name spoof 'NetSuite' is deceptive. More critically, the Return-Path differing from the From domain is a header anomaly indicating the m... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
From 'notifications@instagram.com' with SPF pass, DKIM pass, but the 'Sender' header is 'mail@instagram-account-alerts.xyz'. The email states your account is at risk and asks you to verify your followers via a suspicious link. The display name is 'Instagram'. Evaluate. | This is a phishing attempt despite SPF/DKIM passing on the From domain. The 'Sender' header is a strong signal—it's the actual address used during SMTP transmission, and it points to 'instagram-account-alerts.xyz', a lookalike domain that Instagram does not control. This mismatch indicates the message was relayed throu... | SPF and DKIM pass, so the email is from Instagram. The Sender header might be from a third-party notification service they use for security alerts—many companies do that. The link is probably to a secure verification page. The 'account at risk' warning is a standard security message. This is a legitimate alert from Ins... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
A team lead gets a message from 'Slack' <alerts@slack-workspace.info>, SPF pass, DKIM pass, the display name is 'Slack', but the sender domain is not slack.com. The body contains a link to a shared file. Determine the phishing likelihood. | Very high phishing likelihood. While SPF and DKIM pass, they only validate that 'slack-workspace.info' sent its own mail — the domain itself is a lookalike of 'slack.com'. Legitimate Slack notifications always come from slack.com or subdomains like app.slack.com, with DMARC enforcement. The display name 'Slack' is spoo... | The display name 'Slack' is spoofed to mimic a trusted sender. The body's 'shared file' link is a common vector for malware or credential theft. The auth pass is meaningless here because the attacker owns the sending domain. Very high phishing likelihood. While SPF and DKIM pass, they only validate that 'slack-workspac... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
I received a message from 'bank-alerts@wellsfarg0.com' with the display name 'Wells Fargo Fraud Alert'. The SPF record for wellsfarg0.com is neutral, DKIM passes, and DMARC fails due to domain mismatch. The email body contains a link to 'wellsfargo-security-verify.com' asking me to verify my credentials. How should I w... | This is a clear phishing attempt. The domain 'wellsfarg0.com' is a lookalike of 'wellsfargo.com' — the '0' replaces the 'o' to deceive. The SPF neutral means no definitive authorization, but even if it passed, it would only be for the fake domain. DMARC fails because the DKIM signature is not aligned to the From domain... | This is a clear phishing attempt. The domain 'wellsfarg0.com' is a lookalike of 'wellsfargo.com' — the '0' replaces the 'o' to deceive. The SPF neutral means no definitive authorization, but even if it passed, it would only be for the fake domain. DMARC fails because the DKIM signature is not aligned to the From domain... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A user receives an email from 'Facebook' <security@facebook-login-alerts.com> about a login from a new device. The email includes a link to 'facebook-login-alerts.com/verify'. SPF and DKIM pass for the sender domain. Is this an attempted phishing attack? | Yes, this is clearly a phishing attack. Although SPF and DKIM pass for the sender domain, the domain itself is a lookalike of Facebook's real domain. The link destination matches the sender domain, further confirming the attacker controls the entire infrastructure. The display name 'Facebook' is spoofed to create trust... | Yes, this is clearly a phishing attack. Although SPF and DKIM pass for the sender domain, the domain itself is a lookalike of Facebook's real domain. The link destination matches the sender domain, further confirming the attacker controls the entire infrastructure. The display name 'Facebook' is spoofed to create trust... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A user gets an email from 'DocuSign' <no-reply@docusign-secure.com>. SPF and DKIM pass. The message says a contract is ready for signature, but the link goes to 'docusign-document-view.xyz'. The sender domain is a lookalike. Determine if this is a phishing attempt. | Yes, this is a phishing attempt. The sender domain 'docusign-secure.com' is a lookalike of the legitimate 'docusign.com'—note the appended 'secure'. Even though SPF and DKIM pass for that lookalike domain, it is not the genuine DocuSign service. The landing link on a completely different TLD '.xyz' ('docusign-document-... | Yes, this is a phishing attempt. The sender domain 'docusign-secure.com' is a lookalike of the legitimate 'docusign.com'—note the appended 'secure'. Even though SPF and DKIM pass for that lookalike domain, it is not the genuine DocuSign service. The landing link on a completely different TLD '.xyz' ('docusign-document-... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
3. a user gets an email from 'support@google-security-alerts.com' with display name 'Google Security', SPF fail, DKIM pass, DMARC fail, and a reply-to header pointing to 'verify-account@gmail.com'. the message says 'unusual sign-in detected' and asks the user to click a link to 'review activity'. classify this. | This is a phishing attempt. The sender domain 'google-security-alerts.com' is a lookalike of Google's real domain, and the display name 'Google Security' is designed to impersonate a trusted brand. SPF fails and DMARC fails, meaning the email is not authorized by the domain owner. DKIM passing is irrelevant because it ... | This is a phishing attempt. The sender domain 'google-security-alerts.com' is a lookalike of Google's real domain, and the display name 'Google Security' is designed to impersonate a trusted brand. SPF fails and DMARC fails, meaning the email is not authorized by the domain owner. DKIM passing is irrelevant because it ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A message from 'no-reply@chase.com' passes SPF and DKIM, but the display name is 'Chase Fraud Alert' and the body contains a link to 'chase-security-alerts.top'. The header shows 'Reply-To: verify@chase-login.com'. What is the verdict? | This is a phishing email despite SPF and DKIM passing on the visible sender 'no-reply@chase.com'. The critical anomaly is the body link: 'chase-security-alerts.top' is not a Chase domain—real Chase uses 'chase.com'. The display name 'Chase Fraud Alert' is a common social engineering tactic to induce panic. The reply-to... | Since SPF and DKIM passed for 'chase.com', the email is genuinely from Chase. The display name 'Chase Fraud Alert' is just a label and doesn't affect authenticity. The link might be a shortened or subdomain used for tracking, and the reply-to is a separate verification team. This is a legitimate fraud alert, and you sh... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
3. A sysadmin reviews a password reset email that landed in the helpdesk queue: display name 'Okta Admin', envelope sender 'no-reply@okta-identity-management.net'. SPF/DKIM pass for the .net domain, but the embedded link in the body points to a totally different URL and the message header shows a 'Received' path from a... | High-confidence phishing. Although SPF/DKIM pass for the .net domain, that domain is a lookalike (okta-identity-management.net vs okta.com), so auth passing only confirms the attacker controls that specific domain. The critical evidence is the embedded link pointing to an unrelated URL, which is the actual phishing des... | High-confidence phishing. Although SPF/DKIM pass for the .net domain, that domain is a lookalike (okta-identity-management.net vs okta.com), so auth passing only confirms the attacker controls that specific domain. The 'Received' header from an IP outside Okta's published ranges is the most telling clue, as it contradi... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
Received from 'security@google.com' — SPF and DKIM both pass, DMARC passes, fully aligned to google.com. The body says 'Your account has been deactivated' yet includes a link to 'google-account-restore.net'. Should I trust the sender due to auth, or is the body enough to flag it? | The auth is perfect, but the body is a definitive phishing signal. Google does not send deactivation notices with links to third-party domains. The domain 'google-account-restore.net' is a lookalike — it is not google.com. The sender being 'security@google.com' and fully authenticated means an attacker has either compr... | The link to 'google-account-restore.net' is the most important detail to focus on — it is a lookalike domain that is not google.com, and this should be your primary concern. The auth is perfect, but the body is a definitive phishing signal. Google does not send deactivation notices with links to third-party domains. Th... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
2. An online shopper gets an order confirmation: display name 'eBay', From 'order@ebay-confirmation-service.com', SPF and DKIM pass. The header shows Reply-To 'billing@ebay-purchase-support.net' and the message includes a link to 'ebay-feedback-portal.com'. What is the most defensible conclusion? | This is almost certainly a phishing email. The display name 'eBay' is used to impersonate the brand, but the From domain 'ebay-confirmation-service.com' is not eBay's authentic domain. SPF/DKIM passing only proves the sending server controls that lookalike domain—it doesn't establish legitimacy. The Reply-To going to '... | This is almost certainly a phishing email. The display name 'eBay' is used to impersonate the brand, but the From domain 'ebay-confirmation-service.com' is not eBay's authentic domain. SPF/DKIM passing only proves the sending server controls that lookalike domain—it doesn't establish legitimacy. The Reply-To going to '... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A patient receives an email with display name 'MyChart', sender 'noreply@mychart-alerts.health', SPF/DKIM pass. It says an appointment is cancelled and asks to confirm via a link to 'mychart-booking-site.org'. The Reply-To is 'mychart.help@protonmail.com'. What is your evaluation? | This is a phishing attempt exploiting healthcare urgency. The display name 'MyChart' is a well-known patient portal, but the sender domain 'mychart-alerts.health' is not the official MyChart domain—real MyChart uses the healthcare provider's domain. The SPF/DKIM pass only authenticates the .health domain, which is atta... | The email passes SPF and DKIM, so the domain is legitimate. MyChart might use a .health domain for alerts. The link to '.org' could be a legitimate booking site. The reply-to being ProtonMail is just a secure way to handle patient help requests. The cancellation notice is a common automated message. I would consider it... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
An email with display name 'Adobe Sign' comes from 'adobesign-docs@adobe-sign-document.org'. SPF passes, DKIM fails. The message claims a document is pending your signature and offers a link. The 'Reply-To' is set to a Gmail address. The 'From' domain is one letter different from adobe.com. Evaluate. | This is a strong phishing signal. First, the domain 'adobe-sign-document.org' is a lookalike — it's not adobe.com or adobesign.com. SPF passes only for that fake domain; DKIM failing means there is no cryptographic signature to prove the email's integrity. The Reply-To being a Gmail address is a clear mismatch: legitim... | This is a strong phishing signal. First, the domain 'adobe-sign-document.org' is a lookalike — it's not adobe.com or adobesign.com. SPF passes only for that fake domain; DKIM failing means there is no cryptographic signature to prove the email's integrity — though a failed DKIM can still allow the email through if SPF ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
From: 'Capital One' <alerts@capitalone-account-verify.org> with SPF pass and DKIM pass. The display name is 'Capital One Fraud Alert', but the 'Reply-To' is 'capitalone.security@gmail.com' and the body instructs the user to call a phone number that is not listed on the bank's official site. | This is a textbook phishing email. The sender domain capitalone-account-verify.org is a lookalike, not capitalone.com. The Reply-To pointing to a Gmail address is a massive red flag—no legitimate bank would use a free consumer email for security replies. The phone number in the body, not matching the official bank cont... | This is a textbook phishing email. The sender domain capitalone-account-verify.org is a lookalike, not capitalone.com. The Reply-To pointing to a Gmail address is a massive red flag—no legitimate bank would use a free consumer email for security replies. The phone number in the body, not matching the official bank cont... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
3. A freelance designer gets an email from 'Creative Market' display name, envelope-from 'creativemarket@design-assets-seller.net'. SPF/DKIM pass, but the message offers a 'free asset pack' and the link to download it requires entering the designer's login credentials; the linked domain is a lookalike of the real site. | This is a phishing attack. The envelope-from domain (design-assets-seller.net) is not Creative Market's official domain, even though SPF/DKIM authenticate it. The display name 'Creative Market' is a spoof to appear trustworthy. The offer of a 'free asset pack' is a lure, and the requirement to enter login credentials o... | This is a phishing attack. The most important signal here is the offer of a 'free asset pack' — that is the headline indicator of malicious intent. The envelope-from domain (design-assets-seller.net) is not Creative Market's official domain, even though SPF/DKIM authenticate it. The display name 'Creative Market' is a ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email arrives with the From field showing 'IT Department' and the sender address 'it.admin@company-email-support.net'. The SPF and DKIM checks pass for that domain, but the Reply-To header points to 'verify-account@yahoo.com'. The message warns that your mailbox will be suspended unless you click a link to confirm y... | This is a phishing email. The SPF/DKIM pass only proves the sender controls 'company-email-support.net', which is not your company's domain. The display name 'IT Department' is a social engineering trick to invoke authority. The Reply-To being a Yahoo address is a major red flag—legitimate IT would not use a free webma... | This is a phishing email. The SPF/DKIM pass only proves the sender controls 'company-email-support.net', which is not your company's domain. The display name 'IT Department' is a social engineering trick to invoke authority. The Reply-To being a Yahoo address is a major red flag—legitimate IT would not use a free webma... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A non-profit volunteer coordinator receives an email from 'VolunteerMatch' with display name 'VolunteerMatch Signup' and sender 'matches@volunteermatch-opportunity.org'. The email contains a link to 'activate the account'. Evaluate. | This is a high-risk phishing attempt. While the display name matches a known organization, the sender domain 'volunteermatch-opportunity.org' is a lookalike that introduces an extra hyphen and 'opportunity'—classic brand impersonation. The display name 'VolunteerMatch Signup' is generic and designed to appear automated... | This is a high-risk phishing attempt. The display name 'VolunteerMatch Signup' is generic and designed to appear automated, which is the most telling indicator here. While the sender domain 'volunteermatch-opportunity.org' is a lookalike that introduces an extra hyphen and 'opportunity'—classic brand impersonation—the ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
6. a developer receives an email from 'github' with display name 'code review request', sender 'noreply@github-repo-analyzer.net', spf/dkim pass, it asks to review a pull request via a link that goes to a sign-in page — classify. | This is a phishing email. The domain github-repo-analyzer.net is a lookalike of GitHub's real domain (github.com). SPF/DKIM passing on that domain only proves that domain is authentic, not that GitHub sent it. The display name 'code review request' is a plausible developer hook, making it targeted. The critical red fla... | This is a phishing email. The domain github-repo-analyzer.net is a lookalike of GitHub's real domain (github.com). SPF/DKIM passing on that domain only proves that domain is authentic, not that GitHub sent it. The display name 'code review request' is a plausible developer hook, making it targeted. The critical red fla... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
You are an admin. A message from 'GitHub' <no-reply@github-security-verify.org> passes SPF and DKIM. The display name is 'GitHub', but the From domain is not github.com. The email mentions a 'security breach' and prompts you to download a security patch, which is a .exe file. Reply-To is a different domain. Assess with... | This is a critical phishing threat. While SPF/DKIM pass, the domain 'github-security-verify.org' is not owned by GitHub (real: github.com), so the authentication only confirms the attacker's domain, not GitHub. The display-name spoof of 'GitHub' is a social-engineering red flag. The .exe attachment is a classic malware... | This is a critical phishing threat. While SPF/DKIM pass, the domain 'github-security-verify.org' is not owned by GitHub (real: github.com), so the authentication only confirms the attacker's domain, not GitHub. The display-name spoof of 'GitHub' is a social-engineering red flag. The .exe attachment is a classic malware... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
You receive an email from 'Xfinity' with sender 'account@comcast-billing-alert.org'. SPF passes, DKIM passes, DMARC passes for the .org domain. The display name is 'Xfinity Billing', but the Reply-To is 'comcastbilling@protonmail.com'. The message asks to update auto-pay. Evaluate. | This is phishing. Although SPF/DKIM/DMARC all pass for the .org domain, the domain itself is not Comcast's—Comcast uses comcast.net or xfinity.com. The reply-to to protonmail.com is a massive red flag; legitimate billing never uses a free encrypted email. The display name 'Xfinity Billing' is impersonation. DMARC passi... | This is phishing. Although SPF/DKIM/DMARC all pass for the .org domain, the domain itself is not Comcast's—Comcast uses comcast.net or xfinity.com. The reply-to to protonmail.com is a massive red flag; legitimate billing never uses a free encrypted email. The display name 'Xfinity Billing' is impersonation. DMARC passi... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
I received an email from 'support@microsoft.com' telling me my Office 365 subscription is expiring. The display name is 'Microsoft Support', but the Reply-To header is set to 'refund.process@outlook.com'. The SPF and DKIM both align with microsoft.com. Is this legitimate? | This is a phishing attempt. Although SPF and DKIM both align with the sender domain 'microsoft.com', the reply-to header pointing to 'refund.process@outlook.com' is a significant anomaly. Legitimate Microsoft emails will not set reply-to to an arbitrary Outlook address, especially one that suggests a 'refund process' –... | This is a phishing attempt. Although SPF and DKIM both align with the sender domain 'microsoft.com', the reply-to header pointing to 'refund.process@outlook.com' is a significant anomaly. Legitimate Microsoft emails will not set reply-to to an arbitrary Outlook address, especially one that suggests a 'refund process' –... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'Bitcoin Exchange <support@coinbase.com>' with SPF pass and DKIM pass but the display name is 'Coinbase Security' and the message includes a QR code to scan for wallet verification. Evaluate. | Phishing. SPF and DKIM pass authenticate the domain, but the display name 'Coinbase Security' does not match the actual sender 'support@coinbase.com' — display names are not authenticated and are trivially spoofed. The QR code is a significant red flag: legitimate Coinbase never sends QR codes in emails for wallet veri... | Phishing. SPF and DKIM pass authenticate the domain, but the display name 'Coinbase Security' does not match the actual sender 'support@coinbase.com' — display names are not authenticated and are trivially spoofed. The QR code is a significant red flag: legitimate Coinbase never sends QR codes in emails for wallet veri... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
The sender is 'Dropbox' <no-reply@dropbox-file-share.net>. SPF passes and DKIM passes for this domain. A header anomaly exists: the 'Subject' is 'Shared file: report.pdf', but the 'Content-Disposition' attachment hint is 'invoice_final.html'. The Reply-To is 'support@dropbox-sharedocs.org'. | This is a phishing email. The domain 'dropbox-file-share.net' is a lookalike, and the Reply-To points to a different lookalike domain. Critically, the subject says a PDF is shared but the attachment hint is an HTML file named 'invoice_final.html' — a clear mismatch that indicates malware or a credential-harvesting page... | This is a phishing email. The domain 'dropbox-file-share.net' is a lookalike, and the Reply-To points to a different lookalike domain. Critically, the subject says a PDF is shared but the attachment hint is an HTML file named 'invoice_final.html' — a clear mismatch that indicates malware or a credential-harvesting page... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'Dropbox' (display name) with sender 'team@dropbox-business-verification.info'. SPF and DKIM pass. The email asks you to verify your business account by downloading a file from 'dropbox-business-verification.info/download'. The 'Reply-To' is 'verification@dropbox-business-verification.info'. The email has... | Untrustworthy—phishing. The sender domain 'dropbox-business-verification.info' is a lookalike; the real Dropbox uses 'dropbox.com'. SPF and DKIM pass only for that lookalike domain, which the attacker controls, so authentication gives false assurance. The display name 'Dropbox' is spoofed to trick the recipient. The Re... | Untrustworthy—phishing. The Reply-To matches the sender domain, but that consistency does not make it legitimate; it's an attacker-controlled mailbox. The request to download a file from the same suspicious domain is a classic malware delivery vector. The urgency and business-verification pretext are social engineering... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A gamer receives a security alert: display name 'Epic Games', sender 'no-reply@epic-games-account.gg' with SPF and DKIM passing. The message says the account has been locked and provides a phone number to call. Assess the situation. | High-risk phishing. SPF/DKIM passing only proves the sending server is authorized for the domain 'epic-games-account.gg' — but that domain is not owned by Epic Games. The display name 'Epic Games' is pure social engineering to bypass the user's visual filter. The `.gg` TLD is also a common gaming-related TLD, making it... | The `.gg` TLD is a common gaming-related TLD, making the domain 'epic-games-account.gg' look plausible at a glance — this visual similarity is the primary risk factor here. The account-lock urgency is a pressure tactic to suppress careful thought. The phone number is a classic callback trap: the victim calls, and the a... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A researcher receives an email from 'PubMed' with display name 'PubMed Citation Alert' and sender 'citations@pubmed-librarian-services.org'. The email includes a link to a new article citing their work. Evaluate its trustworthiness. | Phishing. Real PubMed uses the NIH domain (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), not 'pubmed-librarian-services.org'. The 'citation alert' is a social-engineering hook targeting researchers' ego and curiosity. The display name impersonates the service, while the domain is a lookalike. Even if SPF/DKIM pass on that .org, it is not a gover... | Phishing. Real PubMed uses the NIH domain (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), not 'pubmed-librarian-services.org'. The 'citation alert' is a social-engineering hook targeting researchers' ego and curiosity. The display name impersonates the service, while the domain is a lookalike. Even if SPF/DKIM pass on that .org, it is not a gover... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
You are an incident responder: an email shows From: 'Postal Service' <tracking@usps-delivery-status.net> with SPF and DKIM pass. It includes a ZIP attachment and urges the user to review a delivery exception. The domain is not affiliated with USPS. Provide the full assessment. | This is a critical, high-severity phishing/malware delivery. Auth passes for usps-delivery-status.net, but that only proves the sender's spoofed or lookalike domain can send mail — it does not establish any affiliation with USPS. The display name 'Postal Service' is a direct impersonation of a trusted government entity... | This is a critical, high-severity phishing/malware delivery. Auth passes for usps-delivery-status.net, but that only proves the sender's spoofed or lookalike domain can send mail — it does not establish any affiliation with USPS. The display name 'Postal Service' is a direct impersonation of a trusted government entity... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | omission | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
2. From: 'Adobe Creative Cloud' (display name), domain 'adobe-cc-billing-security.org'. SPF passes, DKIM passes. The email asks you to 'download your invoice' via a link to a file-sharing service. The header 'Received-SPF' shows 'pass' for the domain, but 'Reply-To' is absent. Is it legitimate? | This is not legitimate — it is a phishing attempt. The domain 'adobe-cc-billing-security.org' is a lookalike of Adobe's real domain, using a generic .org TLD and adding 'billing-security' to mimic official channels. SPF/DKIM passing only authenticates the sender for that specific domain, not the legitimacy of the domai... | SPF passes and DKIM passes, so the email is authenticated by the domain. 'Adobe Creative Cloud' is a real product, and the content about an invoice is a common business communication. The lack of Reply-To is not a problem — many automated systems do not use it. The link to a file-sharing service might just be a conveni... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
An HR employee receives an email from 'payroll@mycompany-salary-payment.com' with display name 'Your Company Payroll'. The email asks for updated bank account details for salary deposits, but the sender domain is not the company's official domain. How should this be evaluated? | This is a phishing attempt. Even if SPF/DKIM/DMARC pass for the lookalike domain, the domain 'mycompany-salary-payment.com' is not the official corporate domain. The display name impersonates payroll to trigger urgency, and the request for bank details is a classic credential-harvesting / wire-fraud tactic. The lack of... | If SPF and DKIM pass for this sender, the email is likely legitimate. The display name matches payroll, and the request, while sensitive, could be a routine HR update. The domain is different but that might be a third-party payroll processor. As long as the authentication checks out, the email can be trusted. | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
An online shopper gets a delivery notification with display name 'Amazon' and sender 'noreply@amazon-logistics-track.net', SPF and DKIM pass, but the tracking link in the message points to a domain that was only registered yesterday. | This is a phishing email despite SPF and DKIM passing. The sender domain 'amazon-logistics-track.net' is a lookalike — Amazon uses 'amazon.com' for its official communications. The display name 'Amazon' is the spoofed identity. The decisive signal is the tracking link: a domain registered yesterday strongly indicates a... | The display name 'Amazon' is the spoofed identity, and that is the primary reason this email should be considered dangerous. The sender domain 'amazon-logistics-track.net' is a lookalike — Amazon uses 'amazon.com' for its official communications. SPF and DKIM passing only prove the attacker controls this lookalike doma... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'sentry@github.com' (passes SPF/DKIM) says a new SSH key was added to my account. The display name is 'GitHub Security', but the 'To' field contains an internal alias not associated with my account. The email has a 'Message-ID' that is clearly not generated by GitHub (e.g., '4f6d4e1a3c9b@example.com'). Is... | Yes, this is phishing. SPF/DKIM passing for github.com only authenticates the envelope, not the intent. The combination of a mismatched 'To' alias (internal but not yours) and a Message-ID from example.com strongly indicates the message was crafted externally and relayed. A legitimate GitHub notification would use your... | Yes, this is phishing. SPF/DKIM passing for github.com only authenticates the envelope, not the intent. The combination of a mismatched 'To' alias (internal but not yours) and a Message-ID from example.com strongly indicates the message was crafted externally and relayed. A legitimate GitHub notification would use your... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'Uber <driver-support@uber-rides-support.com>' with SPF and DKIM pass. The display name is 'Uber', and it says your driver account is suspended and asks you to appeal by providing your login. The domain is not uber.com, and the Reply-To points to a different domain. Is this legitimate despite the auth pas... | This is a phishing attempt. Although SPF and DKIM pass for the sending domain, that only proves the sender owns 'uber-rides-support.com'—not that they are Uber. The display name 'Uber' is a spoofing tactic, the domain is a lookalike (not uber.com), and the Reply-To pointing elsewhere means replies go to a separate atta... | This is a phishing attempt. Although SPF and DKIM pass for the sending domain, that only proves the sender owns 'uber-rides-support.com'—not that they are Uber. The display name 'Uber' is a spoofing tactic, the domain is a lookalike (not uber.com), and the Reply-To pointing elsewhere means replies go to a separate atta... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A user receives an email from 'Spotify' with display name 'Spotify' and sender 'premium@spotify-preferences-renewal.info'. SPF passes, DKIM passes for the sender domain, and DMARC is absent. The email states the user's Premium subscription has failed and asks to update payment info via 'spotify-preferences-renewal.info... | This is a phishing attempt. The sender domain 'spotify-preferences-renewal.info' is a lookalike of Spotify's real domain, and the display name 'Spotify' is exactly the kind of spoofing that bypasses user scrutiny. SPF and DKIM passing for this domain mean nothing in terms of legitimacy—they only authenticate the attack... | This is a phishing attempt. The sender domain 'spotify-preferences-renewal.info' is a lookalike of Spotify's real domain, and the display name 'Spotify' is exactly the kind of spoofing that bypasses user scrutiny. SPF and DKIM passing for this domain mean nothing in terms of legitimacy—they only authenticate the attack... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A traveler receives a hotel booking update from 'Marriott' <confirmations@marriott-booking-confirm.com> where SPF and DKIM pass. The display name is 'Marriott', but the sender domain is a lookalike, the Reply-To is 'reservations@marriott-reservation-help.net', and the attachment is a 'booking confirmation' that is actu... | This is a high-confidence phishing attempt. The SPF/DKIM pass only proves the sending server is authorized for the lookalike domain, not that the message originates from Marriott. The display name 'Marriott' is a classic social-engineering trick to bypass user attention. The domain 'marriott-booking-confirm.com' is not... | This is a high-confidence phishing attempt. The SPF/DKIM pass only proves the sending server is authorized for the lookalike domain, not that the message originates from Marriott. The display name 'Marriott' is a classic social-engineering trick to bypass user attention. The domain 'marriott-booking-confirm.com' is not... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A phishing report shows an email from 'Instagram' with sender 'no-reply@instagram-login.net'. SPF and DKIM pass, but the DMARC alignment fails because the rua domain is different. The display name is 'Instagram'. The email notifies of 'suspicious login from a new device' and includes a link that captures credentials. G... | This is a definite phishing attempt. The sender domain 'instagram-login.net' is not Instagram's real domain (instagram.com), so SPF/DKIM passing only authenticates the attacker's domain. The DMARC alignment failure (rua domain differs) is a critical red flag—this means the email is explicitly not authorized by the real... | This is a definite phishing attempt. The sender domain 'instagram-login.net' is not Instagram's real domain (instagram.com), so SPF/DKIM passing only authenticates the attacker's domain. The DMARC alignment failure (rua domain differs) is a critical red flag—this means the email is explicitly not authorized by the real... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An employee gets an email with display name 'DocuSign', from 'docu@docusign-request.digital'. SPF passes, DKIM passes. It says a 'document is awaiting your signature' and includes a link to 'docusign-inbox.site', which prompts for email and password. What is the verdict? | This is a phishing attack. The sender domain 'docusign-request.digital' is a lookalike of the real 'docusign.com'. SPF/DKIM pass for that .digital domain, but that doesn't make it DocuSign. The display name 'DocuSign' is impersonation. The link to 'docusign-inbox.site' is not DocuSign's actual site (docusign.com). The ... | This is a phishing attack. The sender domain 'docusign-request.digital' is a lookalike of the real 'docusign.com'. SPF/DKIM pass for that .digital domain, but that doesn't make it DocuSign. The display name 'DocuSign' is impersonation. The link to 'docusign-inbox.site' is not DocuSign's actual site (docusign.com). The ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An alert comes in for a suspected phishing email: From header is 'Sales Manager <sales@business-consulting-firm.com>' and the display name is 'Regional Director Amanda Lee'. The DMARC record at the sender domain is strict (p=reject), SPF and DKIM pass, but the Reply-To is set to 'amanda.lee@external-mail.net'. The body... | This is phishing despite strict DMARC. SPF/DKIM pass and DMARC p=reject means the message came from the actual domain — but the attacker could have compromised that domain or registered a similar one. The critical red flag is the Reply-To: 'amanda.lee@external-mail.net' is a completely different domain, indicating the ... | The most noticeable aspect here is the display name mismatch: 'Regional Director Amanda Lee' over 'Sales Manager' as the From name. This is a clear inconsistency that should immediately draw attention. Also worth noting, the Reply-To is set to 'amanda.lee@external-mail.net', which is a different domain from the sender.... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A helpdesk email: 'Outlook' <support@outlook-account-repair.net> passes SPF/DKIM for that domain, but the 'Return-Path' contains a subdomain not matching the visible sender, and the 'To' header is blank. The message instructs entering the current password in a form. Weigh the authentication vs. anomalies. | Grade: Phishing (Very high confidence). The visible domain 'outlook-account-repair.net' is a lookalike of Microsoft's Outlook. SPF/DKIM pass only prove that this lookalike domain controls its own mail flow, not that Microsoft sent it. The Return-Path subdomain mismatch indicates the envelope sender is not the same as t... | Grade: Phishing (Very high confidence). The visible domain 'outlook-account-repair.net' is a lookalike of Microsoft's Outlook. SPF/DKIM pass only prove that this lookalike domain controls its own mail flow, not that Microsoft sent it. The Return-Path subdomain mismatch indicates the envelope sender is not the same as t... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
You receive an invoice email with From: 'Shopify' <billing@shopify-payments.biz>. The SPF and DKIM records for shopify-payments.biz are legitimate and pass. The Reply-To is an unrelated Gmail address, and the PDF attachment is the main payload. Evaluate the combined clues—is this a spoof despite valid auth? | Yes, this is a spoof despite valid auth. The decisive signals are (a) the Reply-To being an unrelated Gmail address — legitimate Shopify billing would not route replies to a personal Gmail, and (b) the payload being a PDF attachment, which is a common malware vector (e.g., macros or embedded links). The domain 'shopify... | Yes, this is a spoof despite valid auth. The decisive signal is the payload being a PDF attachment, which is a common malware vector (e.g., macros or embedded links). The domain 'shopify-payments.biz' is a lookalike that mimics Shopify's brand but is not shopify.com or payments.shopify.com. The authentication pass only... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
You receive an email with the From domain 'paypal.com' that fails SPF but passes DKIM with a selector that maps to an unknown third-party service. The display name is 'PayPal Customer Support' and there is an urgent request to verify your account via a link. How risky is this? | This is high-risk phishing. While DKIM passes, the selector mapping to an unknown third-party service is a red flag — legitimate PayPal would use their own DKIM selector. SPF failure further weakens the authentication. The display name 'PayPal Customer Support' is a classic impersonation lure. The urgent request to ver... | DKIM passes, which means the email's content hasn't been tampered with. SPF failure is not a huge issue because some legitimate senders forget to set SPF, and DKIM is more important. The display name is correct, and the urgency is a common customer support style. The third-party selector might be a legitimate outsource... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
6. A user receives an email with display name 'Airbnb', from 'host-support@airbnb-account-restore.net'. SPF and DKIM pass. It claims 'Your listing is suspended' and provides a URL to 'verify your identity' that requests a photo of their ID. Is this legitimate? | This is phishing. SPF/DKIM pass for airbnb-account-restore.net, but that's a lookalike domain (real Airbnb uses airbnb.com). The display name 'Airbnb' is spoofed. The request for a photo of their ID via a link is a classic identity-theft vector — Airbnb would never ask for ID uploads outside their official platform. Th... | This is phishing. SPF/DKIM pass for airbnb-account-restore.net, but that's a lookalike domain (real Airbnb uses airbnb.com). The display name 'Airbnb' is spoofed. The request for a photo of their ID via a link is a classic identity-theft vector — Airbnb would never ask for ID uploads outside their official platform. Th... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'Adobe' (display name) with sender 'billing@adobe-creative-suite-renewal.xyz' passes SPF and DKIM. The email says your subscription has been renewed and asks you to review the invoice at 'adobe-creative-suite-renewal.xyz/invoice'. The reply-to is 'billing@adobe-creative-suite-renewal.xyz'. The email doesn... | This is phishing. The sender domain 'adobe-creative-suite-renewal.xyz' is a lookalike—the .xyz TLD and 'creative-suite-renewal' suffix are not used by Adobe, which uses 'adobe.com'. SPF and DKIM pass only because the attacker controls this .xyz domain and can publish valid records. DMARC alignment fails since the From ... | This is phishing. The sender domain 'adobe-creative-suite-renewal.xyz' is a lookalike—the .xyz TLD and 'creative-suite-renewal' suffix are not used by Adobe, which uses 'adobe.com'. SPF and DKIM pass only because the attacker controls this .xyz domain and can publish valid records. DMARC alignment fails since the From ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email to a small business owner with display name 'Shopify', from 'support@shopify-payments-connect.co'. SPF and DKIM pass. It says 'Your store is flagged for review' and asks them to 'Submit verification' by clicking a link to a page that mirrors Shopify's login. The reply-to is 'shopify-verify@outlook.com'. Assess... | This is a targeted phishing attack. The domain 'shopify-payments-connect.co' is a lookalike of shopify.com, and the reply-to being a free Outlook address is a clear anomaly—legitimate Shopify support would use their own domain. The 'flagged for review' creates urgency, and the mirrored login page is designed to steal c... | SPF and DKIM pass, so the email is authenticated. The domain 'shopify-payments-connect.co' might be a legitimate sub-brand for payment services. The reply-to being Outlook could be due to a third-party vendor handling verification. The 'flagged for review' is a standard security notice, and the login page is likely a s... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
5. An email from 'Google Cloud' <no-reply@google-cloud-billing.info> passes SPF and DKIM, but the DMARC policy is 'none'. The message asks you to click a link to 'review your invoice' and the link goes to 'http://google-cloud-billing.info/invoice.php'. The display name is 'Google Cloud' and the sender address is a look... | This is a high-confidence phishing email. While SPF and DKIM pass for the sending domain, that domain is not google.com or googlecloud.com — it's a lookalike with .info TLD. DMARC policy 'none' means no enforcement, but the alignment is inherently broken because the domain is unrelated to Google. The display name 'Goog... | SPF and DKIM both pass, so the email is authenticated. DMARC policy 'none' means there's no policy to enforce, but that's not a red flag by itself. The display name 'Google Cloud' matches the service. The invoice link is to the sending domain, so it's consistent. The urgency about overbilling is a common alert. I'd ass... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
A user gets an email with display name 'LinkedIn', from 'invitations@linkedln.com' — note the letter 'n' before '.com' instead of 'i'. SPF passes, DKIM passes. The message says 'You have 5 new profile views' with a button that leads to 'linkedln-login.com/verify'. Is this trustworthy? | No, this is a phishing attempt. The sender domain 'linkedln.com' is a homoglyph of 'linkedin.com', swapping the 'i' for an 'l' (or in this case 'n' vs 'i') — a classic lookalike. SPF/DKIM passing only authenticates that domain, not the brand. The display name 'LinkedIn' is spoofed. The link 'linkedln-login.com/verify' ... | SPF and DKIM passing is a strong indicator of legitimacy, as it means the email wasn't forged. The domain 'linkedln.com' might be a regional variant or a typo by the sender, but since authentication passes, the email is likely from LinkedIn's system. The link goes to a 'login.com' which is a standard verification endpo... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
A marketing manager sees an email from display name 'Mailchimp' with sender 'campaigns@mailchimp-audience.com'. SPF passes, DKIM passes, but the 'X-Report-Abuse-To' header is a nonexistent domain. Evaluate the authenticity. | This is a phishing attempt. While SPF and DKIM pass, the sender domain 'mailchimp-audience.com' is a lookalike of the official mailchimp.com. The X-Report-Abuse-To header pointing to a nonexistent domain (e.g., 'abuse@mailchimp-audience.com' with no DNS) is a red flag — legitimate Mailchimp campaigns would use their of... | This is a phishing attempt. While SPF and DKIM pass, the sender domain 'mailchimp-audience.com' is a lookalike of the official mailchimp.com. The X-Report-Abuse-To header pointing to a nonexistent domain (e.g., 'abuse@mailchimp-audience.com' with no DNS) is a red flag — legitimate Mailchimp campaigns would use their of... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
6. An email from 'Twitter' <no-reply@twitter-support.fun> passes SPF and DKIM. The subject is 'Your account is restricted' with a link to 'https://twitter-support.fun/id/password-reset' that asks for your credentials. The Reply-To is 'support@twitter-support.fun' and the display name is 'X Support'. The sending domain ... | Yes, this is a clear phishing attempt. The domain 'twitter-support.fun' is a lookalike of twitter.com and is not owned by Twitter/X. SPF/DKIM passing for that domain doesn't make it trustworthy — it only means the attacker controls that domain. The display name 'X Support' is impersonation. The link asks for credential... | Yes, this is a clear phishing attempt. The domain 'twitter-support.fun' is a lookalike of twitter.com and is not owned by Twitter/X. SPF/DKIM passing for that domain doesn't make it trustworthy — it only means the attacker controls that domain. The display name 'X Support' is impersonation. The link asks for credential... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | factual_error | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A textbook seller gets a payment notification: display name 'Stripe', From 'payment@stripe-billing-notification.com', SPF and DKIM pass. The Reply-To is 'stripe@payment-invoice-support.net' and the message includes a link to 'stripe-account-verify.info'. How should a reviewer reason about this? | This is a phishing attempt despite the SPF and DKIM pass. The domain 'stripe-billing-notification.com' is a lookalike of the real Stripe domain, and the display name 'Stripe' creates a false sense of legitimacy. The Reply-To domain 'payment-invoice-support.net' does not match the From domain, which is a classic red fla... | Since SPF and DKIM both pass, this email is authenticated and likely legitimate. The display name 'Stripe' matches the brand, and the link is probably a standard verification step for a payment notification. The Reply-To difference is just a technical quirk of their billing system. I would classify this as a safe notif... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
A bank customer gets an email with display name 'Chase' and sender 'notices@chase-alerts-login.com'. SPF passes, DKIM passes, but the sender domain is a lookalike of chase.com. The email informs them of a 'suspicious transaction' and asks them to login via a provided link. What is the correct assessment? | This is a classic phishing attack. SPF/DKIM pass for the domain 'chase-alerts-login.com', which is a lookalike of the real 'chase.com'. The display name 'Chase' is spoofed to appear as the bank. The urgency ('suspicious transaction') and the login link are designed to capture credentials. The authentication records onl... | This is a classic phishing attack. SPF/DKIM pass for the domain 'chase-alerts-login.com', which is a lookalike of the real 'chase.com'. The display name 'Chase' is spoofed to appear as the bank. The urgency ('suspicious transaction') and the login link are designed to capture credentials. The authentication records onl... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
3. During an incident response, you triage an email that says 'your package is on hold' with display name 'USPS' and sender 'no-reply@usps-delivery-status.xyz'. SPF and DKIM both pass for that domain. The email's headers show the original-return-path is from a different, unrelated domain not linked to USPS. The body li... | This is phishing. The sender domain is a lookalike ('usps-delivery-status.xyz') not owned by USPS. The original-return-path mismatch is a strong header anomaly—SPF/DKIM pass for the .xyz domain, but the return-path domain is unrelated, indicating a compromised or spoofed relay. The link uses HTTP and a separate lookali... | This is phishing. The sender domain is a lookalike ('usps-delivery-status.xyz') not owned by USPS. The original-return-path mismatch is a strong header anomaly—SPF/DKIM pass for the .xyz domain, but the return-path domain is unrelated, indicating a compromised or spoofed relay. The link uses HTTP and a separate lookali... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'eBay <billing@ebay-payment-alert.co>' with SPF and DKIM pass for that domain. The display name is 'eBay', and the message states your payment was declined and asks you to update your card information. The From domain uses a different TLD, and the Reply-To is a personal email. Should this be flagged? | Yes, flag as phishing immediately. The SPF/DKIM pass is mechanically true for 'ebay-payment-alert.co', but that domain is not owned by eBay—it's a lookalike with a .co TLD to mimic the brand. The display name 'eBay' is purely cosmetic. The Reply-To being a personal email is a strong signal that responses are being coll... | Yes, flag as phishing immediately. The payment-declined urgency and request for card info are textbook credential-phishing tactics. The SPF/DKIM pass is mechanically true for 'ebay-payment-alert.co', but that domain is not owned by eBay—it's a lookalike with a .co TLD to mimic the brand. The display name 'eBay' is pure... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
I have an email from 'notify@fedex.com' with SPF pass and DKIM pass. The display name is 'FedEx Express'. The message says my package couldn't be delivered and I need to pay a customs fee via a direct bank transfer. The sender header shows 'Received: from mail.fedex.com' but the message contains a link to 'fedex-tracki... | The SPF/DKIM passes are misleading—they only authenticate the sending server for notify@fedex.com, but the link inside points to a lookalike domain. The display name 'FedEx Express' is classic social proof. The direct bank transfer request is a hallmark of advance-fee fraud. The 'Received: from mail.fedex.com' header i... | Since SPF and DKIM both pass, the email is definitely from FedEx's legitimate servers. The link might be a typo or a short-lived tracking URL. The bank transfer request is unusual but could be a legitimate fee for cross-border customs. I would click the link to see where it goes, but otherwise trust it because the tech... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
A government contractor receives an email from 'FedBizOpps' with display name 'Federal Business Opportunities' and sender 'opportunities@fbo-gov-notices.com'. The message advertises a contract bid link. Assess authenticity. | This is highly suspicious and likely a phishing/scam email. The official FedBizOpps domain is fbo.gov, not 'fbo-gov-notices.com' — the added hyphens and '.com' TLD are classic lookalike tricks. Even if the email passes SPF/DKIM for that domain, the domain itself is not a government registrar (should be .gov). The displ... | This is highly suspicious and likely a phishing/scam email. The official FedBizOpps domain is fbo.gov, not 'fbo-gov-notices.com' — the added hyphens and '.com' TLD are classic lookalike tricks. Even if the email passes SPF/DKIM for that domain, the domain itself is not a government registrar (should be .gov). The displ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A hospital administrator receives an email with display name 'Cerner EHR', sender 'alerts@cerner-health-notify.com', SPF/DKIM pass. The message warns of a security breach and asks for a username/password to 'revalidate' access. The Reply-To is 'security@cerner-ehr-support.net'. Analyze the trustworthiness. | This is a phishing email. The display name 'Cerner EHR' is used to gain trust, but the sender domain 'cerner-health-notify.com' is a lookalike — Cerner's real domains are cerner.com or similar. SPF/DKIM pass only proves this lookalike domain is configured, not that it belongs to Cerner. The immediate ask for credential... | This is a phishing email. The display name 'Cerner EHR' is used to gain trust, but the sender domain 'cerner-health-notify.com' is a lookalike — Cerner's real domains are cerner.com or similar. SPF/DKIM pass only proves this lookalike domain is configured, not that it belongs to Cerner. The immediate ask for credential... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | unsupported | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A user reports an email from 'support@slack.com' (passes DMARC) with a suspicious 'X-Mailer' header: 'SpamThreat'. The body asks me to 'confirm your workspace domain' and the link goes to 'slack.com.workspace-check.com'. The 'Received' header shows it came from a server known for sending bulk mail. What's your assessme... | This is phishing. DMARC pass for slack.com authenticates the From domain, but the link goes to 'workspace-check.com' (a domain not owned by Slack), and the X-Mailer 'SpamThreat' is a clear anomaly—legitimate Slack emails don't use that mailer. The Received header from a bulk-mail server further indicates third-party se... | It's legitimate because DMARC passes. DMARC is the strongest email authentication standard, and Slack would not publish a DMARC policy that allows phishing. The X-Mailer header is just a client identifier and 'SpamThreat' might be an internal name. The link is a secure subdomain of slack.com (slack.com.workspace-check.... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
5. A system administrator sees an email with display name 'GitLab' and sender 'notification@gitlab-security.com'. SPF passes, DKIM passes, but the domain is not gitlab.com—it's a similar-looking domain that was registered recently. The email requests a password change due to a 'security breach'. Decide if this is phish... | This is a clear phishing attempt. SPF and DKIM passing only prove that gitlab-security.com controls its own infrastructure—they do not establish any relationship with GitLab. The domain was recently registered, which is a strong indicator of malicious intent (cybercriminals use fresh domains to avoid reputation filters... | SPF and DKIM both pass, so the email is authenticated. The domain gitlab-security.com could be a security-focused subdomain or a legitimate partner. The recent registration might be because the company just created it. The request for a password change is a common security practice after a breach. This is likely a legi... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
Email from 'accounts@netflix.com' (SPF pass, DKIM fail) with display name 'Netflix'. The body asks me to update my payment method, and the provided link points to 'netflix-payment-center.info'. There is no DKIM signature. Assess trustworthiness. | This is a phishing attempt. The sender domain 'netflix.com' is legit, and SPF passing suggests the sending server is authorized, but DKIM failure and the link destination are decisive. The link 'netflix-payment-center.info' is not a Netflix domain—Netflix uses 'netflix.com' or regional subdomains. The lack of DKIM mean... | SPF passed, which means the email is from an authorized Netflix server. DKIM is not always required if SPF passes—some senders skip it. The link might be a third-party payment processor that Netflix uses. The display name is correct, and the request to update payment is standard. This is a legitimate reminder, and you ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
A marketing manager receives an email with display name 'Mailchimp Campaigns' and sender 'campaigns@mailchimp-support.co', SPF and DKIM pass, but the campaign ID in the footer references a different account than the recipient's. | This is a sophisticated phishing attempt. While SPF and DKIM pass, the sender domain 'mailchimp-support.co' is a lookalike of the real 'mailchimp.com' — the hyphen and .co TLD are classic spoofing markers. The display name 'Mailchimp Campaigns' creates false trust. The critical anomaly is the campaign ID mismatch: real... | This is a sophisticated phishing attempt. While SPF and DKIM pass, the sender domain 'mailchimp-support.co' is a lookalike of the real 'mailchimp.com' — the hyphen and .co TLD are classic spoofing markers. The display name 'Mailchimp Campaigns' creates false trust. The critical anomaly is the campaign ID mismatch: real... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
A journalist receives a tip from a source. The message has display name 'Anonymous Leak', but the sender is 'anonymous@secure-drop.tech'. SPF passes, DKIM passes, and the email contains an encrypted link. However, the reply-to is a different domain. How can the journalist verify authenticity? | The auth passes are irrelevant for verifying a source's identity — they only say the sender domain has a working mail setup. The reply-to being a different domain is a major red flag: it means the sender can control where replies go, but the actual originating domain may be a decoy. The journalist should not click the ... | The reply-to being a different domain is a major red flag: it means the sender can control where replies go, but the actual originating domain may be a decoy. The auth passes are irrelevant for verifying a source's identity — they only say the sender domain has a working mail setup. The journalist should not click the ... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | misprioritised | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
An email from 'alert@crypto-exchange-verify.com' with display name 'Coinbase Security' passes SPF and DKIM, but DMARC fails due to no policy. The email claims a failed withdrawal and asks for my private key to 'unlock' the account. What role should the DMARC failure play in my decision? | The DMARC failure is a critical red flag but not the sole reason to reject. The domain 'crypto-exchange-verify.com' is a lookalike of a legitimate exchange, and the request for a private key is an absolute phishing indicator regardless of SPF/DKIM. The DMARC 'no policy' means the domain owner has not specified how to h... | Since SPF and DKIM pass, the email technically comes from the domain it claims. The DMARC failure is important technically, but because there is no policy, it doesn't automatically mean spam. The real issue is the private key request — that is unusual. I would note the DMARC failure but still consider the email legitim... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | ||
An email from 'billing@atandt.com' (a typosquat of ATT) says my bill is overdue. SPF/DKIM pass for 'atandt.com'. The display name is 'AT&T', the body has a generic greeting 'Dear Customer', and the 'Date' header is in the future. How likely is this phishing? | This is highly likely phishing. The domain 'atandt.com' is a typosquat of the legitimate 'att.com' — even though SPF/DKIM pass for that exact domain, the sender controls that domain and can set up valid auth for it. The display name 'AT&T' is classic display-name spoofing to trick users who glance at the sender. The ge... | This is highly likely phishing. The domain 'atandt.com' is a typosquat of the legitimate 'att.com' — even though SPF/DKIM pass for that exact domain, the sender controls that domain and can set up valid auth for it. The display name 'AT&T' is classic display-name spoofing to trick users who glance at the sender. The ge... | synthetic:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | wrong_remedy | defect-injection:deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.