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.

Healthcare marketing compliance involves strict adherence to HIPAA authorization requirements, state privacy regulations, and industry advertising standards when using patient information for promotional purposes. Medical practices must obtain written patient consent before incorporating protected health information into testimonials, case studies, or targeted advertising campaigns, while ensuring all business associate agreements with promotional vendors include appropriate data protection clauses and breach notification procedures.

Medical practices pursue new patient acquisition through promotional activities while protecting existing patient privacy rights. Marketing departments frequently discover that their most compelling promotional ideas involve patient stories, treatment outcomes, or demographic data that require extensive legal review before implementation.

Written Authorization for Healthcare Marketing Compliance

Patient authorization must precede any use of PHI in promotional materials, specifying exactly which information will be disclosed, identifying all recipients of promotional communications, and explaining patient rights to revoke consent. These forms require expiration dates, signature requirements, and plain language descriptions that patients can easily comprehend without legal expertise.

Organizations cannot combine promotional authorization with treatment consent forms or condition medical services on patients agreeing to promotional uses of their information. Patients who decline promotional authorization must receive identical treatment quality and cannot experience discrimination or reduced service levels because of their privacy choices.

State Privacy Laws

California’s Consumer Privacy Act, Texas Medical Records Privacy Act, and other state regulations impose requirements that exceed federal HIPAA standards for promotional activities. Some states require opt-in consent for all promotional communications, while others mandate specific disclosure language or waiting periods before promotional authorization becomes effective.

Multi-state healthcare systems must comply with the most restrictive state requirements across all their operations to avoid violating patient privacy laws. Organizations operating in states with enhanced privacy protections cannot rely solely on healthcare marketing compliance but must incorporate additional state-specific requirements into their promotional practices.

Digital Advertising Platforms

Social media advertising, email promotional platforms, and website analytics tools frequently request access to patient contact information, demographic data, or behavioral tracking that falls under privacy protection laws. Healthcare marketing compliance requires careful evaluation of third-party technology vendors to ensure they provide appropriate business associate agreements and data protection measures.

Retargeting campaigns that track patient website visits or online behavior present particular risks when healthcare organizations use advertising pixels, conversion tracking, or audience segmentation tools. These technologies may inadvertently transmit protected information to advertising networks without proper authorization or contractual protections.

Vendor Management Protects Marketing Activities

Advertising agencies, promotional consultants, and marketing service providers need business associate agreements before accessing any patient information for campaign development or audience analysis. These contracts must specify permitted uses of protected data, establish security requirements, and outline breach notification procedures when privacy violations occur.

Organizations retain full liability for vendor compliance failures, making thorough due diligence essential before selecting promotional partners. Healthcare marketing compliance programs should include vendor auditing procedures, contract review protocols, and performance monitoring systems to ensure privacy protection throughout promotional activities.

Content Creation Within Privacy Protection Guidelines

Patient testimonials, success stories, and case studies require detailed authorization forms that specify exactly how patient information will be used across different promotional channels and time periods. De-identification offers an alternative approach but requires removing all identifying elements according to HIPAA standards, including dates, locations, and demographic details that could reveal patient identity.

Photography and video content featuring patients or their treatment areas need separate consent documentation covering future use, distribution methods, and duration of permission. Healthcare marketing compliance includes behind-the-scenes content, facility tours, and staff interviews that might inadvertently capture patient information in background elements.

Staff Education Prevents Privacy Violations

Marketing personnel, communications staff, and external vendors need education about distinguishing between permissible healthcare communications and restricted promotional activities requiring authorization. Training programs should cover identification of protected information, authorization requirements, and escalation procedures for situations requiring legal review.

Updates cover new promotional channels, technology platforms, and changing regulatory interpretations that affect healthcare marketing compliance standards. Organizations benefit from establishing clear approval workflows for promotional materials and designating privacy personnel to review campaigns before launch.

Enforcement Actions Shape Compliance Priorities

Recent OCR investigations have targeted healthcare organizations using patient information in social media posts, email campaigns, and website content without proper authorization. These enforcement actions show increasing federal attention to promotional activities and willingness to impose financial penalties for privacy violations.

Settlement agreements frequently require organizations to implement comprehensive compliance programs, conduct staff training, and submit to monitoring for extended periods. Healthcare marketing compliance programs that consider these enforcement priorities can minimize violation risks and avoid costly regulatory investigations.