LuxSci

Send Secure Emails: Alternatives to Web Portals

Digital technologies have entirely shifted how individuals want to interact with their healthcare providers. As consumers have become used to emailing or texting with their hairstylists, mechanics, and other providers to schedule appointments, they want to have the same level of interaction with their healthcare providers.

However, many healthcare organizations find it challenging to deliver the same experience because of their compliance requirements under HIPAA. They must balance usability and access with security and patient privacy. To send secure emails, they often resort to secure web portals. 

mail sending from phone Send Secure Emails: Alternatives to Web Portals

Problems with Secure Web Portals

One of the most common ways that healthcare organizations communicate securely with patients is by using the secure web portal method of email encryption. In this scenario, messages are sent to a secure web server, and a notification is sent to the recipient, who then logs into the portal to retrieve the message.

While highly secure, this method is not popular with recipients because of the friction it creates.

To maintain a high level of security, users must log in to a separate account to retrieve the message. This extra step creates a barrier, especially for individuals who are not tech-savvy. In addition to creating a new account, they must remember a different username and password to access their secure messages. If the recipient doesn’t have this information readily available, they will likely delete the message and move on with their day. Many users will never bother logging in because of the inconvenience. This creates issues for organizations that want to use email for standard business communications and patient engagement efforts. 

While this method may be appropriate for sending highly sensitive information like medical records, financial documents, and other valuable information, many emails that must meet compliance requirements only infer sensitive information and do not require such a high level of security. Flu shot reminder emails are not as sensitive or potentially devastating as sending the wrong medical file to someone. Healthcare organizations need to use secure email solutions that are flexible enough to send only the most sensitive emails to the portal and less sensitive emails using other methods.

How to Meet Compliance Requirements for Sending Secure Email

So, what other options do you have for sending secure emails? The answer will depend on what specific requirements you need to meet. Healthcare organizations that must abide by HIPAA regulations will find a lot of flexibility regarding the technologies they can use to protect ePHI in transit.

In addition to a secure web portal, three other types of encryption are suitable for email sending: TLS, PGP, and S/MIME. PGP and S/MIME are more secure than a web portal. They also require advanced technological skills and coordination with the end-user to implement, which makes them impractical for most business email sending.

That leaves us with TLS, which is suitable to meet most compliance standards (including HIPAA) and delivers an email experience much like that of a “regular” email.

Send Secure Emails with TLS Encryption

TLS encryption is an excellent option for secure email sending that provides a seamless experience for the recipient. Emails sent securely with TLS appear like regular, unencrypted emails in the recipient’s inbox.

TLS encrypts the message contents as they travel between mail servers to prevent interception and eavesdropping. Once the message reaches the inbox, it is unencrypted and can be read by anyone with access to the email account. For this reason, it is less secure than a portal but secure enough to meet compliance requirements like HIPAA.

If you’re wondering why this is, HIPAA only requires covered entities and business associates to protect PHI when it is stored on their systems or as it is transmitted elsewhere. After the message reaches the recipient, it is up to the recipient to decide what they want to do to secure the information. HIPAA does not apply to individuals. Each person is entitled to share and store their health information however they see fit.

Conclusion

Balancing security and usability is a significant challenge for healthcare organizations. If the message is too secure, it may be difficult for the recipient to open and engage with it. If it’s not secure enough, it is too easy for cybercriminals and other bad actors to intercept private information as it is sent across the internet. 

Choosing an email provider like LuxSci, which offers flexible email encryption options, allows users to choose the right level of encryption for each message to maximize engagement and improve health outcomes. Contact our team today to learn more about how we can support your efforts.

Picture of LuxSci

LuxSci

Get in touch

Find The Best Solution For Your Organization

Talk To An Expert & Get A Quote




A member of our staff will reach out to you

Get Your Free E-Book!

LuxSci High Email Deliverability Best Practices Paper

What you’ll learn:

Related Posts

LuxSci G2 2026

LuxSci Earns 19 G2 Spring 2026 Badges

LuxSci continues its strong performance in the G2 Spring 2026 Reports, earning 19 badges that reflect real customer satisfaction and consistent product excellence across multiple areas, including email encryption, HIPAA compliant messaging, email security and email gateways.

G2: A Highly Reputable Peer Review Platformn

In a crowded software landscape, it’s easy for bold claims to blur together. That’s where G2 stands apart. Its rankings are based entirely on verified user feedback, giving buyers a clearer picture of how solutions actually perform in day-to-day use, not just how they’re marketed.

For Spring 2026, LuxSci earned recognition across multiple categories, including Leader, Best Customer Support, and Best ROI. Together, these awards show that LuxSci delivers leading technology and a best-in-class customer experience.

What the Badges Represent

Each G2 badge reflects direct input from customers using LuxSci in real-world environments. These evaluations cover usability, onboarding, support responsiveness, and long-term value. LuxSci’s Spring 2026 badges span leadership, customer satisfaction, ROI, and ease of implementation, demonstrating consistent strength across the full customer lifecycle.

Leader Badge: Market Leadership Validated

The Leader badge is awarded to companies with high customer satisfaction and strong market presence. LuxSci’s placement reflects reliable performance, strong security, and continued trust from organizations operating in highly regulated environments like healthcare.

Best Customer Support: A Standout Strength

In secure healthcare communications, timely and accurate support is essential. Issues must be resolved quickly to avoid operational or compliance risks. Customers consistently highlight LuxSci’s fast response times, deep expertise, and a hands-on approach, showing that our technology and our people deliver meaningful, real-world solutions.

Best ROI: Proven Business Value

ROI includes reduced compliance risk, improved efficiency, and scalable operations, not just cost. Customers report measurable benefits from LuxSci’s reliability, built-in compliance, and streamlined workflows, leading to strong long-term value and a solution that keeps you ahead of security and compliance risks.

What This Means for LuxSci Customers

These awards show LuxSci’s ability to serve organizations of varying sizes, from mid-market to enterprise. All reviews are from verified users, ensuring authenticity and transparency. Customers consistently mention reliability, security, and responsive support, along with overall peace of mind. The recognitions validate LuxSci’s ability to deliver secure, dependable communication solutions backed by strong support, including HIPAA compliant email, marketing and forms.

LuxSci’s 10 G2 Spring 2026 badges—including Leader, Best Customer Support, and Best ROI—demonstrate consistent excellence across performance, usability, and customer satisfaction. These results reinforce its position as a trusted provider in secure communications.

LuxSci MFA

Traditional MFA No Longer Qualifies as “Reasonable” Security

For years, multi-factor authentication (MFA) was considered one of the most effective ways to protect sensitive systems. By requiring a second verification step, such as a text message code or push notification, organizations could significantly reduce the risk of compromised passwords.

But the threat landscape has changed.

Today, attackers routinely bypass traditional MFA using techniques such as MFA evasion, token replay attacks, and consent phishing. These methods are no longer rare or highly sophisticated. They are widely used, automated, and increasingly effective.

As a result, regulators, auditors, and security frameworks are raising expectations for authentication security. For healthcare organizations in particular, traditional MFA alone may no longer satisfy the HIPAA requirement to implement “reasonable and appropriate safeguards.”

In the near future, email systems that rely only on basic MFA, without conditional access or phishing-resistant authentication, may increasingly be viewed as security gaps during risk assessments.

Why Traditional MFA Is No Longer Enough

Traditional MFA still improves security compared to passwords alone. However, many common MFA methods were designed before today’s phishing techniques and cloud authentication attacks became widespread.

Common MFA methods include:

  • SMS verification codes
  • Email-based authentication codes
  • Push notifications to mobile apps

While these mechanisms add friction for attackers, they can still be intercepted or manipulated during sophisticated phishing attacks. Because modern attackers now target authentication workflows directly, organizations relying solely on traditional MFA may be more vulnerable than they realize.

How Attackers Bypass MFA Today

Cybercriminals increasingly rely on tools that capture credentials and authentication tokens during login sessions. Three attack techniques are now especially common.

  • MFA Evasion and Phishing Proxies – Attackers frequently deploy adversary-in-the-middle phishing kits that sit between the user and the real login service. When users enter their credentials and MFA code on a phishing page, the attacker forwards the information to the legitimate site and captures the authentication session. The user successfully logs in—but the attacker gains access as well. If attackers capture those tokens, they can reuse them to access the account directly.
  • Token Replay Attacks – After successful authentication, systems typically issue session tokens that allow users to remain logged in without repeated MFA prompts. This technique has been widely observed in attacks targeting cloud email platforms such as Microsoft 365, allowing attackers to access email data even when MFA is enabled.
  • Consent Phishing – Consent phishing bypasses MFA entirely. Instead of stealing passwords, attackers trick users into granting permissions to malicious applications that request access to their mailbox or files. If users approve the request, the attacker’s application receives persistent access to the account through APIs—often without triggering security alerts.

Why Email Authentication Matters Most in Healthcare

Email remains one of the most critical systems in healthcare organizations. It supports patient communication, internal collaboration, and the exchange of sensitive information. Unfortunately, it is also the most frequently targeted entry point for cyberattacks.

Once attackers gain access to an email account, they can:

  • Impersonate healthcare staff
  • Launch internal phishing attacks
  • Access sensitive patient communications
  • Extract protected health information (PHI)

Because of this, email authentication controls are becoming a major focus for security teams and compliance auditors alike.

Evolving Regulatory Expectations

HIPAA does not prescribe specific technologies, but it requires organizations to implement safeguards that are “reasonable and appropriate” based on risk. As new attack methods emerge, the definition of reasonable security evolves.

Today, many security frameworks and regulatory bodies are emphasizing stronger identity protections, including:

  • Phishing-resistant authentication
  • Conditional access policies
  • Monitoring for suspicious login behavior
  • Controls for third-party application permissions

Organizations that rely solely on basic MFA may increasingly struggle to demonstrate that their authentication protections are sufficient.

The Shift Toward Phishing-Resistant Authentication

To address the weaknesses of traditional MFA, many organizations are adopting phishing-resistant authentication technologies, which can be enabled with tools like Duo and Okta. These solutions rely on cryptographic authentication tied to trusted devices, which prevents attackers from capturing or replaying login credentials.

Examples include:

  • Hardware security keys
  • Passkeys
  • Certificate-based authentication

Because authentication is tied to both the device and the legitimate website domain, these technologies significantly reduce the success rate of phishing attacks.

Why Conditional Access Is Becoming Essential

Conditional access adds another layer of protection by evaluating context and risk before granting access. Instead of treating every login the same, conditional access policies analyze signals such as:

  • Device security status
  • Geographic location
  • Network reputation
  • User behavior patterns

If something appears unusual, such as a login from a new country, the system can require stronger authentication or block the attempt altogether. This risk-based approach to authentication helps prevent many account compromise scenarios.

The Future of HIPAA Risk Assessments

As authentication threats evolve, healthcare security assessments are increasingly focusing on identity protection maturity. Organizations may begin seeing findings related to:

  • Weak or outdated MFA methods
  • Lack of conditional access policies
  • Insufficient monitoring of login activity
  • Unrestricted third-party application permissions

In particular, email systems without advanced authentication protections may be flagged as high-risk vulnerabilities, especially when PHI is accessible.

LuxSci’s Modern Approach to MFA

Modern threats require more than a simple second login factor. LuxSci approaches authentication security with layered identity protection designed specifically for healthcare environments.

Instead of relying solely on basic MFA methods like SMS codes or email verification, LuxSci supports stronger authentication controls and policies that align with evolving security expectations. These protections can include:

  • Strong multi-factor authentication options
  • Monitoring for unusual login behavior
  • Enhanced identity verification mechanisms

By combining multiple security layers within its HIPAA-compliant secure communications email and marketing solutions, LuxSci helps healthcare organizations protect sensitive email communications while maintaining usability for providers, health plan administrators, payment providers, and patient engagement teams.

Conclusion

Multi-factor authentication remains an important security control—but not all MFA is created equal. Attack techniques such as phishing proxies, token replay, and consent phishing have demonstrated that traditional MFA methods can be bypassed. As a result, regulators and auditors are increasingly expecting stronger identity protections.

For healthcare organizations that rely heavily on email communications, the implications are significant. Weak authentication controls can expose sensitive patient data and may soon appear as high-risk findings during HIPAA risk assessments. The organizations best positioned for the future will be those that modernize authentication strategies now, moving toward phishing-resistant methods, conditional access policies, and layered identity protection.

Reach out to LuxSci today to learn how HIPAA compliant email can support both your organization’s engagement and cybersecurity needs.


FAQs

1. What is traditional MFA?

Traditional MFA refers to authentication methods that require a second verification step, typically SMS codes, email codes, or push notifications.

2. Why can attackers bypass MFA today?

Modern phishing tools can intercept authentication sessions or steal login tokens, allowing attackers to access accounts even when MFA is enabled.

3. What is phishing-resistant authentication?

Phishing-resistant authentication uses cryptographic methods tied to trusted devices, preventing attackers from capturing login credentials.

4. Why is email security especially important for healthcare organizations?

Email systems often contain patient communications and sensitive information, making them a common target for cyberattacks.

5. How can organizations improve authentication security?

Organizations can strengthen identity security by adopting phishing-resistant authentication methods, implementing conditional access policies, and monitoring login activity.

LuxSci Automated Email Encryption

Encryption Optional Email Will Fail Audits in 2026 and Beyond

For years, healthcare organizations have relied on click-to-encrypt email workflows and secure portals as a practical compromise between usability and compliance. Or in some cases, they simply thought most of their emails did not need to be compliant. In regulated industries where data security and privacy are paramount, this approach was still considered “good enough.”

That era is ending.

As we progress into 2026 and beyond, regulators, auditors, and cyber insurers are sending a clear and consistent message: encryption that depends on human choice is no longer acceptable. It’s already happening. Encryption optional email isn’t merely raising concerns, it’s failing audits outright.

An Email Threat Landscape That’s Changing Faster Than Email Habits

Historically, email encryption was treated as a best practice rather than a hard requirement. If an organization could demonstrate that encryption tools existed and that employees had access to them, auditors were often satisfied. The box was checked, everybody moved on.

Today, the questions auditors ask are fundamentally different. Instead of asking whether encryption is available, they are asking whether sensitive data can ever leave the organization unencrypted. If the answer is yes, even in rare cases, or even accidentally, that’s no longer viewed as an acceptable gap. It’s viewed as inadequate control.

Why 2026 Is a Tipping Point for Email Security

Several forces are converging here in 2026 that make optional encryption increasingly untenable. Regulatory scrutiny around PHI and PII exposure continues to intensify. Breach costs and litigation are rising, with email remaining one of the most common vectors for data exposure and breaches. AI is also changing the game for cybercriminals, and attacks will continue to increase and be more sophisticated. As a result, cyber insurers are tightening underwriting requirements and demanding stronger, more predictable controls.

At the same time, email user behavior is unpredictable and inconsistent, which is a non-starter for data security in today’s world.

Taken together, these trends and behaviors point to a single requirement: email security controls must be automated. They must be enforced by systems, not dependent on employee memory, judgment, or good intentions.

The Reality of “Encryption Optional” in Practice

On paper, optional encryption can sound reasonable. In practice, it creates gaps large enough to open you up to a breach.

Secure portals are a good example. They require recipients to click a link, authenticate, and access content in a controlled environment. While this protects data in transit, and is a better approach than no security at all, it also introduces friction. And people don’t like friction. Senders forget to use the portal. Recipients ask for “just a quick email instead.” Shortcuts are taken to save time. And every shortcut becomes a risk.

Click-to-encrypt systems suffer from a similar problem. They rely on users to correctly identify sensitive data and remember to take action. But people often misclassify information, forget to click the button, or assume someone else has already secured the message. From an auditor’s perspective, this isn’t a training failure. It’s a set-up and control failure.

Email Security Defaults Are the New Normal

The latest message from regulators, auditors, and insurers is clear. If encryption is optional, data vulnerabilities become inevitable.

What can you do?

Below is a quick email security checklist to help you get started. Cyber insurers may require or recommend the following safeguards during the underwriting process, such as:

  • Multi-factor authentication (MFA)
  • Endpoint protection
  • Encrypted backups
  • Incident response planning
  • Encryption protocols for sensitive data in transit and at rest, including PHI in emails

In 2026 and beyond, healthcare organizations and regulated industries will be judged not by what they allow, but by what they prevent. Automated, encrypted email is the new. normal.

Want to learn more about LuxSci HIPAA compliant email? Reach out today.

LuxSci Oiva Health

LuxSci and Oiva Health Combine to Form Transatlantic Healthcare Communications Group

Boston & Helsinki, February 12, 2026 – LuxSci, a provider of secure healthcare communications solutions in the United States, and Oiva Health, a Nordic provider of Digital Care solutions in social and healthcare services, today announced that the companies are joining forces. Backed by Main Capital Partners (“Main”), the combination brings together two complementary platforms and teams, forming a strong transatlantic software group focused on secure healthcare communications.

Founded in 1999, LuxSci is a U.S. provider of HIPAA‑compliant, secure email, marketing, and forms solutions. Its application and infrastructure software enable organizations to securely deliver personalized, sensitive data at scale to support a broad range of healthcare communications and workflows including care coordination, benefits and payments, marketing, wellness communications, after care and ongoing care. Certified by HITRUST for the highest levels of data security, LuxSci serves dozens of healthcare enterprises and hundreds of mid‑market organizations.

Founded in 2010, Oiva Health is a provider of digital care and communications solutions in the Nordics. Headquartered in Finland, with additional offices in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, Oiva Health offers digital care and digital clinic solutions – including digital visits, secure messaging, online scheduling and appointments, and caregiver communications – serving the long-term care, especially elderly care, and occupational healthcare verticals. The company employs approximately 60 people and has recently expanded across the Nordic region, with a growing presence in Norway and Sweden.

The combination of LuxSci and Oiva Health creates a larger, cross Atlantic group with complementary solutions, serving the U.S. and European markets. Together, the companies offer healthcare providers, payers, and suppliers a comprehensive suite of tools to communicate securely and compliantly, spanning communications, workflows, and virtual care delivery.

Daan Visscher, Partner and Co-Head North America at Main, commented: “We are pleased to announce this cross Atlantic transaction, creating an internationally active secure communications player within the healthcare and home care space. The combined product suite enables healthcare organizations to drive much needed efficiency gains in healthcare provision addressing a global trend of rising costs, aging population, and increasing pressure on resources needed to provide high-quality care.”

Mark Leonard, CEO of LuxSci, said, “We are thrilled to join forces with Oiva Health and believe that together we can truly make a difference in healthcare coordination, access, and delivery. We see an exciting path forward with our customers benefiting from an end-to-end, secure and compliant approach to optimizing both healthcare communications and today’s frontline workers, which we need now more than ever.”

Juhana Ojala, CEO at Oiva Health, concluded, “We look forward to this new chapter together with LuxSci. We are very excited about the strong alignment between our solutions, which especially strongly positions us to expand our flagship Digital Care offering to the high-potential U.S. care market – from care coordination to care delivery to in-home and institutional care.”

Nothing contained in this Press Release is intended to project, predict, guarantee, or forecast the future performance of any investment. This Press Release is for information purposes only and is not investment advice or an offer to buy or sell any securities or to invest in any funds or other investment vehicles managed by Main Capital Partners or any other person.

[END OF MESSAGE]

About LuxSci

LuxSci is a U.S.-based provider of secure healthcare communications solutions for the healthcare industry. The company offers secure email, marketing, forms and hosting, delivering HIPAA‑compliant communication solutions that enable organizations to safely manage and transmit sensitive data. Founded in 1999, LuxSci serves more than 1,900 customers across healthcare verticals, including providers, payers, suppliers, and healthcare retail, home care providers, and healthcare systems, as well as organizations operating in other highly regulated industries. LuxSci is HITRUST‑certified with example clients being Athenahealth, 1800 Contacts, Lucerna Health, Eurofins, and Rotech Healthcare, among others.

About Oiva Health

Oiva Health is a Digital Care provider in the Nordics, offering a comprehensive Digital Platform for integrated health and care services to digitalize primary healthcare, social care, hospital healthcare and long-term care services. The company was founded in 2010 and currently employs approximately 60 people in Finland, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden serving domestic municipalities, customers and partners, such as City of Helsinki, Keski-Suomi Welfare Region, Länsi-Uusimaa Welfare Region in Finland, and Viborg municipality in Denmark with its Digital Care platform. Annually over 5 million customer contacts are handled digitally through Oiva Health’s Digital Care and Digital Clinic platforms.  

About Main Capital Partners

Main Capital Partners is a software investor managing private equity funds active in the Benelux, DACH, the Nordics, France, and the United States with approximately EUR 7 billion in assets under management. Main has over 20 years of experience in strengthening software companies and works closely with the management teams across its portfolio as a strategic partner to achieve profitable growth and create larger outstanding software groups. Main has approximately 95 employees operating out of its offices in The Hague, Düsseldorf, Stockholm, Antwerp, Paris, and an affiliate office in Boston. Main maintains an active portfolio of over 50 software companies. The underlying portfolio employs approximately 15,000 employees. Through its Main Social Institute, Main supports students with grants and scholarships to study IT and Computer Science at Technical Universities and Universities of Applied Sciences.

The sender of this press release is Main Capital Partners.

For more information, please contact:

Main Capital Partners
Sophia Hengelbrok (PR & Communications Specialist)

sophia.hengelbrok@main.nl

+ 31 6 53 70 76 86

You Might Also Like

phi in patient communications

The Benefits of Using PHI in Patient Communications

Some healthcare organizations do not allow PHI to be sent outside the patient’s health record. However, by allowing your marketing and administrative teams to use PHI in patient communication, you can streamline operations, improve the patient experience, and increase revenue with HIPAA marketing.

Although the healthcare industry is traditionally slow to adopt new technologies, the past few years have rapidly accelerated the shift to digital communications. The reasons for these shifts are varied and will be explored in detail below. No matter the reason, one thing is certain- organizations adapting to the modern digital age are thriving, while those resisting change are falling behind in meeting patient expectations.  

Changing Technology Preferences

Rapid technological innovation has made it possible to communicate securely at scale. As broadband access has increased, people are incorporating it into their daily lives. In 2022, 92% of Americans reported using email, and 49% checked it every few hours. Many people now prefer to receive business communications via email because it is asynchronous and can be engaged with when it fits into their schedules.

healthcare technology preferences stats

Healthcare organizations that utilize email for external communication are experiencing better response rates and fewer patient no-shows. Email already fits into the daily lives of many patients and doesn’t require them to take extra steps to receive information about their healthcare journey.

The Rise of Healthcare Consumerism

Healthcare consumerism refers to patients’ personal choices and responsibility in paying for and managing their health. Patients are no longer stuck with one provider or practice. They have more choices than ever and will shop around for new providers if unsatisfied with their experience. 

If healthcare providers are not delivering a digital experience that meets patient expectations, they could risk losing patients and revenue.

reasons to change providers

In addition, as younger generations are taking control of their healthcare, they are used to digital-first experiences that are personalized to their needs. If organizations are unwilling to invest into personalized digital patient experiences, they will not adequately serve the next generation of healthcare consumers. 

Staffing Challenges

The healthcare industry is not immune to recent staffing challenges. Staffing shortages have left fewer employees available to do more tasks, including patient care. Introducing digital technology into your patient communication strategy can help automate and streamline common communication workflows like:

  • Appointment reminders
  • Pre- and post-procedure instructions
  • Health education messages
  • Vaccine reminders
  • Medication adherence reminders
  • Billing

Automating common workflows frees up time for staff to focus on urgent patient needs and improves the patient experience. 

How to Safely Use PHI in Patient Communications

Patients are already communicating with their healthcare providers one-on-one via email. The question is, how can you protect this data while communicating at scale for marketing and educational purposes? There are tools (like LuxSci’s Secure Marketing and Secure High Volume Email solutions) that are designed to support the unique security needs of the healthcare industry while providing the personalized digital experience that patients desire.

Protecting PHI in Patient Communications

PHI needs to be protected in emails with advanced encryption technology. TLS encryption should be used as often as possible because it provides a user experience like regular email without requiring a portal login. For marketing and patient education emails, TLS is sufficient to protect data and allows patients to readily engage with the email content. By properly vetting and choosing the right vendors, marketing and administrative teams can communicate with patients via email without violating HIPAA. 

Personalization at Scale

The power of PHI is undeniable. When healthcare marketers can harness healthcare data to create ultra-personalized campaigns, it increases their relevance and the likelihood that the content will be engaged with, delivering a better ROI. Our solutions integrate via API to securely personalize messages and trigger emails when specific conditions are met. This allows marketers to send relevant messages at the right time when it is relevant to the patient’s healthcare journey.

personalization stats 

Modern technology is needed to serve today’s patients. Meeting patients where they are with the information they need on the channels they prefer is vital to improving healthcare outcomes for the most vulnerable populations. Using PHI in patient communications gives your organization a comparative advantage by providing a better patient experience. 

biggest email threats

Know the Biggest Email Threats Facing Healthcare Right Now

Due to its near-universal adoption, speed, and cost-effectiveness, email remains one of the most common communication channels in healthcare. Consequently, it’s one of the most frequent targets for cyber attacks, as malicious actors are acutely aware of the vast amounts of sensitive data contained in messages – and standard email communication’s inherent vulnerabilities.

In light of this, healthcare organizations must remain aware of the evolving email threat landscape, and implement effective strategies to protect the electronic protected health information (ePHI) included in email messages. Failing to properly secure email communications jeopardizes patient data privacy, which can disrupt operations, result in costly HIPAA compliance violations, and, most importantly, compromise the quality of their patients’ healthcare provision.

With all this in mind, this post details the biggest email threats faced by healthcare organizations today, with the greatest potential to cause your business or practice harm by compromising patient and company data. You can also get our 2025 report on the latest email threats, which includes strategies on how to overcome them.

Ransomware Attacks

Ransomware is a type of malware that encrypts, corrupts, or deletes a healthcare organization’s data or critical systems, and enables the cybercriminals that deployed it to demand a payment (i.e., a ransom) for their restoration. Healthcare personnel can unwittingly download ransomware onto their devices by opening a malicious email attachment or clicking on a link contained in an email.

In recent years, ransomware has emerged as the email security threat with the most significant financial impact. In 2024, for instance, there were over 180 confirmed ransomware attacks with an average paid ransom of nearly $1 million. 

Email Client Misconfiguration

While a healthcare organization may implement email security controls, many fail to know the security gaps of their current email service provider (ESP) or understand the value of a HIPAA compliant email platform, leaving data vulnerable to email threats, such as unauthorized access and ePHI exposure, and also, subsequently, a greater risk of compliance violations and reputation damage.

Common types of email misconfiguration include:

  • Lack of enforced TLS encryption: resulting in emails being transmitted in plaintext, rendering the patient data they contain readable by cybercriminals in the event of interception during transit.
  • Improper SPF/DKIM/DMARC setup: failure to configure or align these email authentication protocols correctly gives malicious actors greater latitude to successfully spoof trusted domains.
  • Disabled or lax user authentication: a lack of authentication measures, such as multi-factor authentication (MFA), increases the risk of unauthorized access and ePHI exposure.
  • Misconfigured secure email gateways: incorrect rules or filtering policies can allow phishing emails through or block legitimate messages.
  • Outdated or unsupported email client software: simply neglecting to download and apply the latest updates or patches from the email client’s vendor can leave vulnerabilities, which are well-known to cybercriminals, exposed to attack.

Social Engineering Attacks

A social engineering attack involves a malicious actor deceiving or convincing healthcare employees into granting unauthorized access or exposing patient data. Relying on psychological manipulation, social engineering attacks exploit a person’s trust, urgency, fear, or curiosity, and encompass an assortment of threats, including phishing and business email compromise (BEC) attacks, which are covered in greater depth below.

Phishing

As mentioned above, phishing is a type of social engineering attack, but they are so widespread that it warrants its own mention. Phishing sees malicious actors impersonating legitimate companies, or their employees, to trick victims into revealing sensitive patient data. 

Subsequently, healthcare organizations can be subjected to several different types of phishing attacks, which include:

  • General phishing: otherwise known as bulk phishing or simply ‘phishing’, these are broad, generic attacks where emails are sent to large numbers of recipients, impersonating trusted entities to steal credentials or deliver malware. 
  • Spear phishing: more targeted attacks that involve personalized phishing emails crafted for a specific healthcare organization or individual. These require more research on the part of malicious actors and typically use relevant insider details gleaned from their reconnaissance for additional credibility.
  • Whaling: a form of spear phishing that specifically targets healthcare executives or other high-level employees. 
  • Clone phishing:  when a cybercriminal duplicates a legitimate email that was previously received by the target, replacing links or attachments with malicious ones.
  • Credential phishing: also known as ‘pharming’, this involves emails that link to fake login pages designed to capture healthcare employees’ usernames and passwords under the guise of frequently used legitimate services.

Domain Impersonation and Spoofing

This category of threat revolves around making malicious messages appear legitimate, which can allow them to bypass basic email security checks. As alluded to above, these attacks exploit weaknesses in email client misconfigurations to trick the recipient, typically to expose and exfiltrate patient data, steal employee credentials, or distribute malware.

Domain spoofing email threats involve altering the “From” address in an email header to make it appear to be from a legitimate domain. If a healthcare organization fails to properly configure authentication protocols like SPF, DKIM, and DMARC, there’s a greater risk of their email servers failing to flag malicious messages and allowing them to land in users’ inboxes.

Domain impersonation, on the other hand, requires cybercriminals to register a domain that closely resembles a legitimate one. This may involve typosquatting, e.g., using “paypa1.com” instead of “paypal.com”. Alternatively, a hacker may utilize a homograph attack, which substitutes visually similar characters, e.g., from different character sets, such as Cyrillic. Malicious actors will then send emails from these fraudulent domains, which often have the ability to bypass basic email filters because they aren’t exact matches for blacklisted domains. Worse still, such emails can appear authentic to users, particularly if the attacker puts in the effort to accurately mimic the branding, formatting, and tone used by the legitimate entity they’re attempting to impersonate. 

Insider Email Threats

In addition to external parties, employees within a healthcare organization can pose email threats to the security of its PHI. On one hand, insider threats can be intentional, involving disgruntled employees or third-party personnel abusing their access privileges to steal or corrupt patient data. Alternatively, they could be the result of mere human error or negligence, stemming from ignorance, or even fatigue.

What’s more, insider threats have been exacerbated by the rise of remote and flexible conditions since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has created more complex IT infrastructures that are more difficult to manage and control.  

Business Email Compromise (BEC) Attacks

A BEC attack is a highly targeted type of social engineering attack in which cybercriminals gain access to, or copy, a legitimate email account to impersonate a known and trusted individual within an organization. BEC attacks typically require extensive research on the targeted healthcare company and rely less on malicious links or attachments, unlike phishing, which can make them difficult to detect.

Due to the high volume of emails transmitted within the healthcare industry, and the sensitive nature of PHI often included in communications to patients and between organizations, the healthcare industry is a consistent target of BEC attacks.

BEC attacks come in several forms, such as:

  • Account compromise: hijacking a real employee’s account and sending fraudulent messages.
  • Executive fraud: impersonating high-ranking personnel to request urgent financial transactions or access to sensitive data.
  • Invoice fraud: pretending to be a vendor asking for the payment of a fraudulent invoice into an account under their control.

Supply Chain Risk

Healthcare organizations increasingly rely on third-party vendors, including cloud service providers, software vendors, and billing or payment providers to serve their patients and customers. They constantly communicate with their supply chain partners via email, with some messages containing sensitive patient data; moreover, some of these organizations will have various levels of access to the PHI under their care.

Consequently, undetected vulnerabilities or lax security practices within your supply chain network could serve as entry points for email threats and malicious action. For instance, cybercriminals can compromise the email servers of a healthcare company’s third-party vendor or partner, and then send fraudulent emails from their domains to deploy malware or extract patient data.

Another, somewhat harrowing, way to understand supply chain risk is that while your organization may have a robust email security posture, in reality, it’s only as strong as that of your weakest third-party vendor’s security controls.

Download LuxSci’s Email Cyber Threat Readiness Report

To gain further insight into the biggest email threats to healthcare companies in 2025, including increasingly prevalent AI threats, download your copy of LuxSci’s Email Cyber Threat Readiness Report

You’ll also learn about the upcoming changes to the HIPAA Security Rule and how it’s set to impact your organization going forward, and the most effective strategies for strengthening your email security posture.

Grab your copy of the report here and begin the journey to strengthening your company’s email threat readiness today.

HIPAA Compliant

Is Google Forms HIPAA Compliant?

Google Forms is not HIPAA compliant by default and cannot be used to collect protected health information (PHI) without additional measures. While Google Workspace can be configured for HIPAA compliance with a signed Business Associate Agreement (BAA), this agreement specifically excludes Google Forms from covered services. Healthcare organizations must use alternative form solutions designed for healthcare data collection to maintain HIPAA compliance.

Understanding HIPAA Requirements for Digital Forms

Digital forms used by healthcare organizations must meet specific security and privacy standards to comply with HIPAA regulations. Any platform collecting patient information needs encryption during transmission, access controls, audit logging, and secure data storage. Forms must include proper patient authorization language and maintain data confidentiality throughout processing. Google’s consumer products, including the standard version of Google Forms, lack many of these required security features. Healthcare providers who collect PHI through non-HIPAA compliant systems risk substantial penalties for HIPAA violations.

Google Workspace and Business Associate Agreements

Google offers a Business Associate Agreement (BAA) for its Google Workspace (formerly G Suite) business customers. This agreement establishes Google as a business associate under HIPAA and defines responsibilities for protecting healthcare information. However, Google explicitly excludes certain services from its BAA coverage, including Google Forms. The BAA typically covers Gmail, Google Calendar, Google Drive, and similar core services when properly configured. Healthcare organizations attempting to use Google Forms for PHI collection, even with a signed BAA, would violate their agreement terms and HIPAA regulations.

Security Limitations of Google Forms

Google Forms lacks several technical safeguards required for handling protected health information. The platform does not provide adequate access controls to limit form data visibility within organizations. Audit trail capabilities for tracking who has viewed or downloaded form responses do not meet HIPAA standards. While Google implements basic transport layer security, the form data storage and transmission methods were not designed for highly regulated healthcare information. The platform also lacks features for obtaining and documenting patient authorization as required under the HIPAA Privacy Rule.

Alternative HIPAA Compliant Form Solutions

Healthcare organizations have various compliant alternatives for collecting patient information electronically. Purpose-built healthcare form platforms include advanced security features like end-to-end encryption, detailed access logging, and healthcare-specific authorizations. These specialized systems integrate with electronic health records and secure messaging systems while maintaining compliance. Many vendors provide HIPAA compliant form solutions with documentation templates for common healthcare scenarios. Organizations can evaluate these alternatives based on factors like cost, ease of use, integration capabilities, and compliance certification.

Implementation Requirements for Compliant Forms

Regardless of the chosen platform, healthcare organizations must implement specific procedures when collecting patient information through electronic forms. Staff training on handling form data securely plays a crucial role in maintaining compliance. Organizations need documented policies for form creation, approval processes, and data retention schedules. Form systems require regular security assessments and updates to address emerging vulnerabilities. Compliance officers should review all form collection processes to ensure they meet current HIPAA requirements and organizational security standards.

Common Misunderstandings About Google Services and HIPAA

Many healthcare organizations misinterpret Google’s BAA coverage, incorrectly assuming all Google services become HIPAA compliant with a signed agreement. This misunderstanding leads to compliance violations when organizations use excluded services like Google Forms for patient information. Another common error involves using personal Google accounts rather than properly configured Google Workspace accounts with appropriate security settings. Organizations sometimes fail to recognize that collecting even basic patient information through non-compliant systems violates HIPAA when that information qualifies as protected health information under the regulations

MailHippo HIPAA compliant

What You Need To Know About Email Deliverability

Email deliverability refers to the ability of emails to reach recipients’ inboxes successfully without being filtered into spam folders or blocked entirely by email service providers. This metric encompasses the entire journey an email takes from sender to recipient, including authentication protocols, sender reputation, content quality, and recipient engagement patterns. For healthcare organizations managing patient communications, provider networks, and supplier relationships, understanding email deliverability becomes particularly important given the sensitive nature of healthcare data and the need for reliable communication channels. Healthcare providers, payers, and suppliers who master email deliverability can maintain better patient relationships, reduce administrative costs, and avoid compliance issues that arise from failed communications.

How Email Service Providers Evaluate Messages

Email service providers use algorithms to evaluate incoming messages and determine their appropriate destination within recipient email systems. These systems analyze multiple factors simultaneously, including sender authentication records, message content, sending patterns, and recipient behavior. The filtering process occurs in real-time, with providers like Gmail, Outlook, and Yahoo applying machine learning models trained on billions of email interactions to identify potential spam or malicious content.

Authentication plays a large role in this filtering process through verification of sender identity. Providers verify sender identity through SPF (Sender Policy Framework), DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail), and DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance) records. Healthcare organizations without properly configured authentication often find their appointment reminders, lab results, or billing communications relegated to spam folders, disrupting patient care workflows and administrative processes.

Content analysis represents another layer of filtering, where providers examine subject lines, message body text, and embedded links for spam indicators. Healthcare communications containing medical terminology, prescription information, or insurance details may trigger false positives if not properly formatted or if sent from domains with poor reputation scores. The complexity of these filtering systems means that even legitimate healthcare communications can face delivery challenges without proper optimization.

Recipient engagement metrics influence future email deliverability for healthcare organizations, as providers track open rates, click-through rates, and spam complaint rates. When patients consistently ignore or delete emails from healthcare organizations, providers may begin filtering future messages more aggressively. This creates a feedback loop where poor engagement leads to worse delivery rates, making it increasingly difficult to reach patients with important medical information.

Sender Reputation and Healthcare Communications

Sender reputation functions as a digital credit score for email domains and IP addresses, influencing whether healthcare organizations can reliably reach patients, providers, and business partners. Email service providers maintain reputation databases that track sending behavior, bounce rates, spam complaints, and recipient engagement over time. A single domain or IP address with poor reputation can affect email deliverability across an entire healthcare network, creating widespread communication problems.

Healthcare organizations face unique reputation challenges due to the nature of their communications and patient populations. Patient appointment reminders sent to outdated email addresses generate high bounce rates, while automated billing notifications may receive spam complaints from recipients who forgot they subscribed to such communications. These factors can gradually erode sender reputation, making it increasingly difficult to reach patients with time-sensitive medical information or coordinate care between providers.

The healthcare industry’s regulatory environment adds complexity to reputation management, as organizations must balance effective communication with privacy requirements. HIPAA compliance considerations may limit how organizations can personalize emails or track recipient behavior, potentially affecting engagement metrics that influence sender reputation. Healthcare organizations tackle these constraints while maintaining the communication effectiveness needed for patient care and business operations.

Reputation recovery in healthcare settings requires sustained effort and careful monitoring of multiple factors. Organizations must implement proper list hygiene practices, authenticate their domains correctly, and monitor feedback loops from major email providers. The process can take weeks or months, during which patient communications may continue experiencing delivery issues that could impact care coordination and administrative efficiency. Proactive reputation management helps prevent these problems before they affect patient care.

Authentication Protocols for Healthcare Email Security

Modern email deliverability depends heavily on proper implementation of authentication protocols that verify sender identity and prevent email spoofing attempts. SPF records specify which mail servers are authorized to send emails on behalf of a domain, while DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to verify message integrity. DMARC ties these protocols together by instructing receiving servers how to handle emails that fail authentication checks, providing policy guidance for email providers.

Healthcare organizations must configure these protocols carefully to avoid authentication failures that could block legitimate patient communications. A misconfigured SPF record might prevent appointment confirmation emails from reaching patients, while improper DKIM setup could cause lab result notifications to be filtered as spam. These authentication failures can have serious implications for patient care, particularly when dealing with urgent medical communications or time-sensitive treatment instructions.

The implementation process requires coordination between IT teams, email service providers, and third-party healthcare applications that send email on behalf of the organization. Many healthcare systems use multiple platforms for patient communications, billing, and administrative functions, each requiring proper authentication configuration to maintain good email deliverability across all communication channels. This complexity makes authentication management an important component of healthcare IT operations.

Regular monitoring and maintenance of authentication protocols helps ensure continued email deliverability for healthcare organizations. DNS records can change unexpectedly, third-party applications may modify their sending practices, and email providers periodically update their authentication requirements. Healthcare organizations benefit from establishing procedures for ongoing authentication monitoring and having technical expertise available to address configuration issues quickly when they arise.

Content Quality and Compliance Considerations

Email content quality directly affects deliverability, with providers using advanced algorithms to evaluate message structure, language patterns, and formatting for spam indicators. Healthcare organizations must balance informative content with delivery requirements, ensuring that medical communications reach their intended recipients without triggering spam filters. This balance is challenging when dealing with complex medical terminology, prescription information, or insurance-related content that may resemble spam to automated filtering systems.

HIPAA compliance adds another layer of complexity to healthcare email content, as organizations must protect patient information while maintaining effective communication channels. Emails containing protected health information require additional security measures and careful content formatting to avoid both compliance violations and deliverability issues. The challenge is in creating compliant, informative communications that also pass through increasingly sophisticated spam filters without compromising patient privacy or care quality.

Subject line optimization also plays a role in healthcare email deliverability, as providers analyze these elements for spam indicators and patient engagement patterns. Generic subject lines like “Appointment Reminder” or “Lab Results Available” may perform differently across various email providers, requiring healthcare organizations to test and optimize their messaging strategies while maintaining compliance with healthcare communication regulations. Personalization can improve engagement but must be balanced with privacy requirements and spam filter sensitivities.

Message formatting and design elements influence both deliverability and patient engagement with healthcare communications. HTML emails with excessive images, complex layouts, or suspicious formatting may trigger spam filters, while plain text messages may not engage recipients effectively. Healthcare organizations must find the right balance between visual appeal and delivery reliability, often requiring testing across multiple email clients and providers to ensure consistent performance.

List Management and Patient Engagement Strategies

Effective list management forms the foundation of sustainable email deliverability for healthcare organizations managing communications with patients, providers, and suppliers. Clean, engaged recipient lists generate better delivery rates and help maintain positive sender reputation over time. Healthcare organizations must implement systematic approaches to list hygiene, including regular removal of bounced email addresses, management of unsubscribe requests, and monitoring of engagement patterns across different communication types.

Patient engagement patterns in healthcare differ significantly from typical marketing communications, as medical emails often contain information that recipients need rather than want. Appointment reminders, lab results, and billing notifications serve functional purposes that may not generate traditional engagement metrics like high open rates or click-through rates. Understanding these patterns helps healthcare organizations optimize their sending strategies without compromising the informational value of their communications or patient care quality.

Segmentation strategies in healthcare email deliverability focus on communication types and recipient preferences rather than demographic targeting approaches. Patients may engage differently with preventive care reminders compared to urgent test results, requiring sending approaches that consider both deliverability factors and patient communication preferences. This segmentation helps maintain good sender reputation while ensuring that different types of healthcare communications reach their intended recipients effectively.

Data quality management includes verification of patient contact information, preference management, and communication history tracking. Healthcare organizations benefit from implementing processes to capture updated email addresses during patient visits, verify contact information through multiple channels, and maintain records of communication preferences that respect patient choices while supporting care coordination needs. These practices improve both deliverability and patient satisfaction with healthcare communications.

Maintaining Email Deliverability Performance

Monitoring of email deliverability metrics provides healthcare organizations with the data needed to identify and address communication issues before they impact patient care or administrative operations. Key metrics include delivery rates, bounce rates, spam complaint rates, and inbox placement percentages across different email providers. These metrics help organizations understand how their communications perform across various platforms and identify potential problems with specific communication types or recipient segments.

Healthcare organizations should establish monitoring systems that track deliverability performance across different communication channels, including patient portal notifications, appointment reminders, billing communications, and provider-to-provider messages. This approach helps identify patterns that might indicate authentication issues, content problems, or reputation concerns that could affect the organization’s ability to communicate effectively with patients and business partners. Regular analysis of these patterns enables proactive problem-solving and continuous improvement.

Deliverability testing and optimization require ongoing attention to changing email provider policies, spam filter updates, and evolving patient communication preferences. Healthcare organizations benefit from implementing A/B testing for subject lines, send times, and content formats while maintaining compliance with healthcare regulations. Testing should include evaluation of deliverability performance across different email clients, devices, and providers to ensure consistent communication effectiveness.

Regular deliverability audits should include testing of authentication protocols, review of sender reputation scores, analysis of content performance, and evaluation of list management practices. These audits help healthcare organizations maintain optimal email deliverability while ensuring that their communication strategies remain aligned with both technical requirements and healthcare industry best practices for patient communication and data protection. Documentation of audit results and remediation activities shows commitment to maintaining reliable patient communications and regulatory compliance.