LuxSci

How Do You Know if Software is HIPAA Compliant?

How Do You Know if Software is HIPAA Compliant?

As in any industry, the healthcare sector is eager to embrace any new technology solution that increases productivity, enhances operational efficiency, and cuts costs. However, the rate at which healthcare companies – and their patients and customers – have had to adopt new software and digital tools has skyrocketed since the pandemic. And while a lot of this software is beneficial, a key question arises: is it HIPAA compliant? While an application may serve an organization’s needs – and may be eagerly embraced by patients – it also needs to have the right measures in place to safeguard protected health information (PHI) to determine if it is indeed HIPAA compliant.

Whether you’re a healthcare provider, software vendor, product team, or IT professional, understanding what makes software HIPAA compliant is essential for safeguarding patient data and insulating your organization from the consequences of falling afoul of HIPAA regulations. 

With this in mind, this post breaks down the key indicators of HIPAA compliant software, the technical requirements you should look for, and best practices for ensuring your software is HIPAA compliant.

What Does It Mean for Software to Be HIPAA-Compliant?

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)  sets national standards for safeguarding PHI, which includes any data related to a patient’s health, treatment, or payment details. In light of this, any applications and systems used to process, transmit, or store PHI must comply with the stringent privacy, security, and breach notification requirements set forth by HIPAA.

Subsequently, while healthcare organizations use a wide variety of software, most of it is likely to be HIPAA-compliant. Alarmingly, many companies aren’t aware of which applications are HIPAA-compliant and, more importantly, if there’s a need for compliance in the first place.   

However, it’s important to note that HIPAA itself does not certify software. Instead, it’s up to software vendors to implement the necessary security and privacy measures to ensure HIPAA compliance. Subsequently, it’s up to healthcare providers, payers, and suppliers to do their due diligence and source HIPAA compliant software. 

How to Determine If Software Is HIPAA Compliant

So, now that we’ve covered why it’s vital that the applications and systems through which sensitive patient data flows must be HIPAA compliant, how do you determine if your software meets HIPAA requirements? To assess whether software is HIPAA compliant, look for these key indicators:

1. Business Associate Agreement (BAA)

A HIPAA compliant software provider must sign a Business Associate Agreement (BAA) with covered entities, i.e., the healthcare company. A BAA is a legal contract that outlines the vendor’s responsibility for safeguarding PHI. If a software provider doesn’t offer a BAA, their software is NOT HIPAA compliant.

Now, if a vendor offers a BAA, it should be presented front and center in their benefits, terms or conditions, if not on their website homepage as part of their key features. If a vendor has taken the time and effort to make their infrastructure robust enough to meet HIPAA regulations, they’ll want to make it known to reassure healthcare organizations of their suitability to their particular needs.  

2. End-to-End Encryption

A key requirement of the HIPAA Security Rule is that sensitive patient data is encrypted end to end during its transmission. This means being encrypted during transit, i.e., when sent in an email or entered into a form, and at rest, i.e., within the data store in which it resides.

In light of this, any software that handles PHI should use strong encryption standards, such as:

  • Transport Layer Security (TLS – 1.2 or above): for secure transmission of PHI in email and text communications. 
  • AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) 256: the preferred encryption method for data storage as per HIPAA security standards, due to its strength.

3. Access Controls and User Authentication

One of the key threats to the privacy of patient data is access by unauthorized parties. This could be from employees within the organization who aren’t supposed to have access to PHI. In some, or even many, cases, this may come down to lax and overly generous access policies. However, this can result in the accidental compromise of PHI, affecting both a patient’s right to privacy and, in the event patient data is unavailable, operational capability. 

Alternatively, the exposure of PHI can be intentional. One on hand, it may be from employees working on behalf of other organizations, i.e., disgruntled employees about to jump ship to a competitor. More commonly, unauthorized access to patient data is perpetrated by malicious actors impersonating healthcare personnel. To prevent the unintended exposure of PHI, HIPAA compliant infrastructure, software and applications must support access control policies, such as:

  • Role-based access control (RBAC): the restriction of access to PHI based on their job responsibility in handling PHI, i.e.., an employee in billing or patient outreach. A healthcare organization’s security teams can configure access rights based on an employee’s need to handle patient data in line with their role in the company. 
  • Multi-factor authentication (MFA): this adds an extra layer of security beyond user names and passwords. This could include a one-time password (OTP) sent via email, text, or a physical security token. MFA is very diverse and can be scaled up to reflect a healthcare organization’s security posture. This could include also biometrics, such as retina and fingerprint scans, as well as voice verification.
  • Zero-trust security: a rapidly emerging security paradigm in which users are consistently verified, as per the resources they attempt to access. This prevents session hijacking, in which a user’s identity is trusted upon an initial login and verification. Instead, zero trust continually verifies a user’s identity.  
  • Robust password policies: another simple, but no less fundamental, component of user authentication is a company’s password policy. While conventional password policies emphasize complexity, i.e., different cases, numbers, and special characters, newer password policies, in contrast, emphasize password length. 

4. Audit Logs & Monitoring

A key HIPAA requirement is that healthcare organizations consistently track and monitor employee access to patient data. It’s not enough that access to PHI is restricted. Healthcare organizations must maintain visibility over how patient data is being accessed, transferred, and acted upon (copied, altered, deleted). This is especially important in the event of a security event when it’s imperative to pinpoint the source of a breach and contain its spread.

In light of this, HIPAA compliant software must:

  • Maintain detailed audit logs of all employee interactions with PHI.
  • Provide real-time monitoring and alerts for suspicious activity.
  • Support log retention for at least six years, as per HIPAA’s compliance requirements.

5. Automatic Data Backup & Disaster Recovery

Data loss protection (DLP) is an essential HIPAA requirement that requires organizations to protect PHI from loss, corruption, or disasters. With this in mind, a HIPAA-compliant software solution should provide:

  • Automated encrypted backups: real-time data backups, to ensure the most up-to-date PHI is retained in the event of a security breach.
  • Comprehensive disaster recovery plans: to rapidly restore data in case of cyber attack, power outage, or similar event that compromises data access.  
  • Geographically redundant storage: a physical safeguard that sees PHI. stored on separate servers in different locations, far apart from each other. So, if one server goes down or is physically compromised (fire, flood, power outage, etc.,) patient data can still be accessed. 

6. Secure Messaging and Communication Controls

For software that involves email, messaging, or telehealth, i.e., phone or video-based interactions, in particular, HIPAA regulations require:

  • End-to-end encryption: for all communications, as detailed above.
  • Access restrictions: policies that only enable those with the appropriate privileges to view communications containing patient data.
  • Controls for message expiration: automatically deleting messages after a prescribed time to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access.
  • Audit logs: to monitor the inclusion or use of patient data.

7. HIPAA Training & Policies

Even the most secure software can be compromised if its users aren’t sufficiently trained on how to use it. More specifically, the risk of a security breach is amplified if employees don’t know how to identify suspicious behavior and who to report it to if an event occurs. With this in mind, it’s prudent to look for software vendors that:

  • Offer HIPAA compliance and cyber safety awareness training for users.
  • Implement administrative safeguards, such as usage policy enforcement and monitoring.
  • Support customizable security policies to align with your organization’s compliance needs.

Shadow IT and HIPAA Compliance

Shadow IT is an instance of an application or system being installed and used within a healthcare organization’s network without an IT team’s approval. Despite its name, shadow IT is not as insidious as it sounds: it’s simply a case of employees unwittingly installing applications they feel will help them with their work. The implications, however, are that:

  1. IT teams are unaware of said application, and how data flows through it, so they can’t secure any PHI entered into it.
  2. The application may have known vulnerabilities that are exploitable by malicious actors. This is all the more prevalent with free and/or open-source software.

While discussing the issue of shadow IT in general, it’s wise to discuss the concept of “shadow AI” – the unauthorized use of artificial intelligence (AI) solutions within an organization without its IT department’s knowledge or approval. 

It’s easily done: AI applications are all the rage and employees are keen to reap the productivity and efficiency gains offered by the rapidly growing numbers of AI tools. Unfortunately, they fail to stop and consider the data security risks present in AI applications. Worse, with AI technology still in its relative infancy, researchers, vendors, and other industry stakeholders have yet to develop a unified framework for securing AI systems, especially in healthcare. 

Consequently, the risks of entering patient data into an AI system – particularly one that’s not been approved by IT – are considerable. The privacy policies of many widely-used AI applications, such as ChatGPT, state the data entered into the application, during the course of engaging with the platform, can be used in the training of future AI models. In other words, there’s no telling where patient data could end up – and how and where it could be exposed. 

The key takeaway here is that entering PHI into shadow IT and AI applications can pose significant risks to the security of patient data, and employees should only use solutions vetted, deployed, and monitored by their IT department. 

Best Practices for Choosing HIPAA Compliant Software

Now that you have a better understanding of how to evaluate software regarding HIPAA compliance, here are some best practices to keep in mind when selecting applications to facilitate your patient engagement efforts:

Look for a BAA: quite simply, having a BAA in place is an essential requirement of HIPAA-compliant software. So, if the vendor doesn’t offer one, move on.

Verify encryption standards: ensure the software encrypts PHI both at rest and in transit.

Test access controls: choose HIPAA-compliant software that allows you to restrict access to PHI based on an employee’s role within the organization. 

Review audit logging capabilities: HIPAA compliant software should track every PHI interaction. This also greatly assists in incident detection and reporting (IDR), as it enables security teams to pinpoint and contain cyber threats should they arise.

Ensure compliance support: knowing the complexities of navigating HIPAA regulations, a reputable software vendor should provide comprehensive documentation on configuring their solution to match the client’s security needs. Better yet, they should provide the option of cyber threat awareness and HIPAA compliance training services. 

Create a List of Software Vendors: combining the above factors, it’s prudent for healthcare organizations to compile a list of HIPAA compliant software vendors that possess the features and capabilities to adequately safeguard PHI.

Choosing HIPAA Compliant Software

Matching the right software to a company’s distinctive workflows and evolving needs is challenging enough. However, for healthcare companies, ensuring the infrastructure and applications within their IT ecosystem also meet HIPAA compliance standards requires another layer of, often complicated, due diligence. 

Failure to deploy a digital solution that satisfies the technical, administrative, and physical security measures required in a HIPAA compliant solution exposes your organization to the risk of suffering the repercussions of non-compliance. 

If select and deploy the appropriate HIPAA compliant software, in contrast, your options for patient and customer engagement are increased, and you’ll be able to include PHI in your communications to improve patient engagement and drive better health outcomes. Schedule a consultation with one of our experts at LuxSci to discuss whether the software in your IT ecosystem meets HIPAA regulations. and how we can assist you in ensuring your organization is communicating with patient and customers in a HIPAA compliant way.

Picture of Pete Wermter

Pete Wermter

As a marketing leader with more than 20 years of experience in enterprise software marketing, Pete's career includes a mix of corporate and field marketing roles, stretching from Silicon Valley to the EMEA and APAC regions, with a focus on data protection and optimizing engagement for regulated industries, such as healthcare and financial services. Pete Wermter — LinkedIn

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

HIPAA violation

What Is a HIPAA Violation? Types, Examples & How to Avoid Fines

Few terms in healthcare get thrown around as loosely as “HIPAA violation.” It gets invoked when a nurse mentions a patient’s diagnosis to a friend outside of work, when a technician talks about a well-known patient who came through the clinic, or when a physician casually brings up a person’s rare diagnosos at a backyard barbecue — situations that sound like violations but often have nothing to do with the actual law. That confusion isn’t just an oversight, but rather, it points to a gap in understanding what HIPAA covers, who it applies to, and what genuinely puts an organization at risk.

For health care providers, compliance officers and IT professionals, the stakes behind that confusion are anything but casual. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has issued settlements ranging from a few thousand dollars to over $16 million for the same underlying failures, such as a missed risk assessment, an unencrypted laptop, a chart accessed by the wrong person. This guide breaks down what actually constitutes a HIPAA violation, the most common ways organizations end up on OCR’s radar, what genuinely falls outside HIPAA’s scope, and what to do if you’re managing risk or responding to an incident right now.

If your organization handles PHI over email — one of the highest-risk channels for exactly this kind of violation — our HIPAA Compliant Email guide is a useful next read once you’ve worked through this one.

What Is a HIPAA Violation?

A HIPAA violation occurs when a covered entity, business associate, or a member of either’s workforce fails to comply with a standard set out in the HIPAA Privacy Rule, Security Rule, or Breach Notification Rule — or fails to follow an internal policy implemented to support HIPAA compliance.

That definition matters because it draws a hard boundary around who can actually commit one. HIPAA applies to:

  • Covered entities — healthcare providers, health plans, healthcare suppliers, payers, and healthcare clearinghouses
  • Business associates — vendors and contractors that create, receive, maintain, or transmit protected health information (PHI) on a covered entity’s behalf
  • Workforce members — employees, volunteers, and contractors of either of the above
image What Is a HIPAA Violation? Types, Examples & How to Avoid Fines

HIPAA does not apply to private individuals acting outside of a covered role — a distinction that trips up far more people than you’d expect, and one we’ll come back to later in this guide.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was designed to protect the confidentiality of medical records and patient data while still allowing healthcare organizations to function and share information when appropriate. A violation happens when that balance breaks down — when PHI is accessed, used, or disclosed in a way the law doesn’t permit, or when required safeguards simply aren’t in place.

The Three HIPAA Rules a Violation Can Break

Every HIPAA violation traces back to one (or more) of three core rules. Understanding which rule is in play helps clarify what actually went wrong — and what needs to be fixed.

RuleWhat It GovernsExample Violation
Privacy RuleWho can access, use, and disclose PHI, and under what circumstancesSharing a patient’s diagnosis with someone outside their care team without authorization
Security RuleAdministrative, physical, and technical safeguards for electronic PHI (ePHI)Failing to encrypt emails in transit or a laptop that stores patient information
Breach Notification RuleRequirements for notifying affected individuals and HHS after a breach of unsecured PHIMissing the 60-day deadline to notify patients after a data breach

Most real-world violations involve more than one rule at once, such as a stolen, unencrypted laptop is a Security Rule failure that can also trigger Breach Notification Rule obligations. Keeping the three rules distinct in your own documentation, though, makes it much easier to identify exactly where a gap exists.

Most Common Types of HIPAA Violations

These are the violation categories that show up most often in OCR settlements, and the ones every provider, payer, and supplier organization should actively guard against.

Unauthorized Access / Snooping

This is the violation most people have actually heard about, usually because of a celebrity or high-profile patient case that made headlines. A staff member accesses a patient’s medical record without a legitimate, job-related reason — often out of curiosity, not malice — and it still counts as a serious violation.

What’s easy to miss here: the violation is about the access itself, not just what happens to the information afterward. Looking at a chart you have no clinical reason to view is a violation the moment it happens, even if you never repeat, share, or act on what you saw. Hospitals take this seriously enough to flag high-profile patient charts automatically and audit access in real time — which is exactly why staff who snoop tend to get caught quickly, and why termination is the near-universal outcome when they do.

A useful way to think about it: the sensitivity of the underlying information isn’t what determines whether accessing it was a violation — the authorization to access it through that specific system is and if a job role requires it. Pulling PHI through a restricted system without a legitimate reason is a violation even in cases where the same information might, in theory, be available through some other, non-restricted channel. Improper access through the wrong door is still improper access.

Example: Dr. Huping Zhou was sentenced to four months in federal prison after accessing celebrity medical records 323 times with no legitimate reason. UCLA Health System was separately fined $865,000 related to similar unauthorized access incidents.

Failure to Conduct a Risk Analysis

The Security Rule requires covered entities and business associates to conduct an organization-wide risk analysis identifying vulnerabilities to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of ePHI. Skipping this step — or doing a superficial version of it — is one of the single most commonly cited failures in OCR settlements, because it’s foundational: nearly every other safeguard depends on knowing where your actual risks are.

Example: Premera Blue Cross paid $6,850,000, and Excellus Health Plan paid $5,100,000, both tied in part to failures to conduct adequate risk analyses before major breaches occurred.

Insufficient Access Controls

Access controls determine who can view or modify ePHI, and they need to be granular enough that staff can only access the minimum information necessary for their role. When access controls are too loose, such as shared logins, no role-based restrictions, no automatic logoff, organizations lose the ability to actually enforce the “minimum necessary” standard HIPAA requires.

Example: Anthem Inc. paid $16,000,000, the largest HIPAA settlement to date, following a breach connected in part to access control failures affecting nearly 79 million individuals.

Failure to Encrypt ePHI on Portable Devices

Laptops, phones, and USB drives leave the building. When they’re lost or stolen without encryption, an isolated incident becomes a reportable breach — because unencrypted PHI on a missing device is, by definition, unsecured PHI.

Example: Children’s Medical Center of Dallas paid $3.2 million after multiple incidents involving lost, unencrypted mobile devices containing ePHI.

Missing or Incomplete Business Associate Agreements

Any vendor that creates, receives, maintains, or transmits PHI on a covered entity’s behalf — from a billing company to an email provider — is a business associate under HIPAA, and business associates are legally required to sign a Business Associate Agreement (BAA) before handling that data. Skipping this step, or using a vendor without one, is a violation regardless of whether anything actually goes wrong with the data itself.

Example: North Memorial Health Care of Minnesota paid $1.55 million after failing to enter into a BAA with a business associate that later experienced a breach.

Impermissible Disclosures of PHI

This category covers PHI shared with someone who wasn’t authorized to receive it — a press release naming a patient, a social media post, filming patients without consent, or telling family or coworkers more than they’re entitled to know.

Example: New York Presbyterian Hospital paid $2,200,000 after filming patients for a documentary without proper consent.

Improper Disposal of PHI

Paper records tossed in regular trash instead of being shredded, or old hard drives discarded without being wiped, both count as impermissible disclosures — PHI doesn’t stop being protected just because someone’s done using it.

Example: Parkview Health paid $800,000 after leaving patient medical records unattended in a driveway during a records transfer.

Exceeding Breach Notification Deadlines

Once a breach of unsecured PHI is discovered, the Breach Notification Rule sets a hard 60-day deadline to notify affected individuals (and HHS, for breaches involving 500+ records). Missing that window turns a bad situation into a compounding one.

Example: Presence Health paid $475,000 for failing to notify affected individuals within the required timeframe following a breach.

Denying Patient Access to Records

Patients have a right to access their own medical records, generally within 30 days of a request, without excessive fees or unreasonable barriers. Denying or delaying that access is one of the more consistently enforced violation categories in recent years.

Example: Cignet Health of Prince George’s County paid $4,300,000 for denying 41 patients access to their own medical records.

Every one of these categories comes back to the same underlying question: does your organization actually have documented, enforced processes for who can touch PHI, how it’s protected, and what happens when something goes wrong? If email is part of that picture — and for nearly every healthcare organization, it is — our HIPAA Compliance Checklist walks through exactly what needs to be in place.

What Is Not a HIPAA Violation (Common Misconceptions)

HIPAA gets invoked constantly in situations it has nothing to do with — and clearing up that confusion matters, because it helps healthcare professionals, IT and compliance teams focus their actual attention where it belongs.

A family member discussing your health isn’t a HIPAA violation. HIPAA governs covered entities, business associates, and their workforces — not private individuals speaking in a personal capacity. Your mother telling a relative about your diagnosis might be a breach of your trust, but it’s not a HIPAA violation, because she isn’t bound by HIPAA in the first place.

Confusing HIPAA with FERPA or the ADA is common, and usually incorrect. Educational records fall under FERPA (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act), not HIPAA — a teacher discussing a student’s grades or attendance isn’t a HIPAA issue. Similarly, questions about a disability accommodation, like a mask exemption or a service animal, generally fall under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), not HIPAA.

Asking about someone’s health isn’t the same as disclosing it. HIPAA restricts what covered entities and their workforces can disclose, it doesn’t restrict what any individual, including a coworker, cashier, or stranger, can ask. Someone asking why you’re wearing a mask or requesting proof of a medical condition might be inappropriate or even illegal under a different law, but it isn’t itself a HIPAA violation.

Vague references aren’t the same as identifiable disclosures. HIPAA violations require that protected health information (PHI) be tied to an identifiable individual. Referring to “a patient” or “a young adult male” in casual conversation is too vague to trigger a violation. Naming a specific person — “my patient, Mike, who lives on Oak Street” — alongside health information crosses that line.

A simple way to keep the distinction clear:

  • A nurse telling friends a specific patient’s name, date of birth, and diagnosis → HIPAA violation.
  • A pharmacist telling a customer their prescription refill is delayed → not a HIPAA violation.

The line isn’t about whether something feels private. It’s about whether protected health information tied to an identifiable person was disclosed by someone bound by HIPAA in the first place.

HIPAA Violation Penalties: The 4-Tier Structure

OCR calculates civil penalties based on the violator’s level of culpability, not just the severity of the incident. Understanding which tier applies matters, because the same underlying mistake can result in wildly different consequences depending on whether it was a one-off oversight or a known, ignored risk.

TierCulpability LevelFine Range (Per Violation)Annual CapExample Scenario
Tier 1No Knowledge$100 – $50,000$25,000The organization could not have reasonably known about the violation
Tier 2Reasonable Cause$1,000 – $50,000$100,000The organization should have known, but the violation wasn’t due to willful neglect
Tier 3Willful Neglect (Corrected)$10,000 – $50,000$250,000Willful neglect occurred, but the issue was corrected within 30 days
Tier 4Willful Neglect (Not Corrected)$50,000 (fixed)$1.5 million+Willful neglect occurred and was not corrected in time

Penalty amounts are periodically adjusted for inflation, and current maximum penalties can exceed $2 million annually per violation category — figures worth confirming against HHS’s current published rates before citing specific numbers internally.

Criminal penalties sit outside this civil tier structure entirely. Knowing or willful violations can result in criminal fines ranging from $50,000 to $250,000, plus up to 10 years in prison for the most serious offenses — typically reserved for cases involving intent to sell, transfer, or use PHI for personal gain or malicious harm.

How Are HIPAA Violations Discovered?

Violations don’t usually surface because someone confesses. They’re found through a handful of consistent channels:

  • Audit logs and automated access-flagging. Most modern EHR systems automatically flag unusual access patterns — a chart accessed by someone outside the care team, or a spike in access to a high-profile patient’s record. This is precisely how most unauthorized-access violations come to light; systems are built to catch exactly this pattern.
  • Patient complaints. Patients can, and do, file complaints directly with HHS when they believe their information was mishandled.
  • Breach self-reporting. Covered entities and business associates are required to self-report breaches meeting certain thresholds.
  • OCR compliance audits. HHS periodically conducts proactive audits of covered entities and business associates, independent of any specific complaint or breach.

One nuance worth understanding: not every violation escalates the same way. A single, isolated mistake, such as an email sent to the wrong recipient or a chart accidentally opened, is often handled through internal correction and documentation. A repeated pattern of the same behavior is a different story entirely, and is far more likely to become something an organization is required to report to HHS. This is one of the most important distinctions for healthcare organizations and compliance teams to build into internal escalation policies: document every incident, but treat repetition as a signal that internal correction alone is no longer sufficient.

How to Report a HIPAA Violation

If you’re a patient, employee, or compliance officer who has identified a potential violation, there are two established paths ti report a violation, and they aren’t mutually exclusive.

Step 1: Report it to the employer or covered entity directly. Most healthcare organizations have an internal compliance officer or reporting process specifically for this purpose. Internal reporting is often the fastest way to get a genuine mistake corrected before it escalates.

Step 2: File a complaint with HHS’s Office for Civil Rights. If internal reporting isn’t appropriate, isn’t effective, or the violation is serious enough to warrant it, complaints can be filed directly through HHS’s official complaint portal. Complaints generally must be filed within 180 days of when the violation was discovered, though extensions are sometimes granted for good cause.

A few practical notes:

  • Anonymous reporting is possible, but limited. OCR accepts anonymous complaints, but the lack of contact information can restrict how thoroughly they’re able to investigate.
  • Retaliation against someone who reports in good faith is itself prohibited under HIPAA.
  • Not every complaint results in a formal investigation — OCR reviews each complaint to determine whether it falls within HIPAA’s scope before proceeding.

How to Avoid HIPAA Violations & Fines

For Organizations

  • Conduct — and document — a genuine risk assessment. This isn’t a one-time checkbox; risk assessments should be revisited whenever systems, vendors, or workflows change.
  • Sign a BAA with every vendor that touches PHI, including email, billing, and IT service providers — no exceptions.
  • Implement role-based access controls so staff can only access the minimum PHI necessary for their specific role.
  • Encrypt ePHI in transit and at rest, especially on portable devices and email, where enforced encryption remains one of the most consistently under-implemented safeguards.
  • Train staff regularly, not just at onboarding. A single training session at hire rarely holds up against years of evolving risk.

For Individual Staff Members

  • Only access patient records tied to a legitimate, job-related reason — never out of curiosity, even for patients you know personally.
  • Never discuss identifiable patient information outside of your care team, including with family, friends, or on social media.
  • Report suspected violations, including your own mistakes, immediately rather than waiting to see if anyone notices.
  • Treat every device and email containing PHI as if it could be lost, stolen, or misdirected tomorrow, because eventually, statistically, one will be.

Since email remains one of the highest-volume channels for exactly this kind of accidental exposure, secure, HIPPA compliant solutions, such as LuxSci’s SecureLine encryption technology, are built specifically to remove the guesswork — enforcing encryption automatically rather than relying on staff to remember to apply it correctly every time.

HIPAA vs. State Privacy Laws

HIPAA sets a federal floor, not a ceiling. States are free to enact privacy laws that are stricter than HIPAA, and when they do, the stricter standard generally governs. This matters for multi-state healthcare organizations especially, such as a provider, payer, or supplier operating across state lines may need to comply with HIPAA everywhere, plus additional, more stringent requirements in specific states.

This guide focuses on federal HIPAA requirements, but compliance officers should treat HIPAA as the baseline, not the finish line, when evaluating their organization’s full regulatory exposure.

What Should I Do Now?

Understanding what counts as a HIPAA violation is the first step. Actually closing the gaps that lead to one is the harder, ongoing work — and email is one of the most common places that work quietly falls through the cracks.

Here are three ways to keep moving forward:

  1. Read our HIPAA Compliant Email guide to understand exactly what makes an email platform compliant — and where standard email tools like Gmail and Microsoft 365 fall short.
  2. Work through our HIPAA Compliance Checklist to audit your organization’s current safeguards against what HIPAA actually requires.
  3. Explore LuxSci’s SecureLine encryption technology to see how enforced encryption and a signed BAA work together to close the exact gaps that show up most often in OCR settlements.
  4. Read our Definitive Guide on the New HIPAA Security Rule, making email encryption mandatory in 2027

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What are the most common HIPAA violations?

The most common violations include unauthorized access to patient records, failure to conduct a risk analysis, insufficient access controls, failure to encrypt ePHI on portable devices, missing Business Associate Agreements, impermissible disclosures of PHI, improper disposal of records, and exceeding breach notification deadlines.

2. What’s the difference between a HIPAA violation and a FERPA or ADA issue?

HIPAA governs protected health information handled by covered entities and business associates in healthcare settings. FERPA governs education records, and the ADA governs disability discrimination and accommodation. A teacher discussing grades falls under FERPA, not HIPAA. A question about a disability accommodation typically falls under the ADA, not HIPAA.

3. How do I report a HIPAA violation?

Report it directly to the employer or covered entity first, if appropriate. If that isn’t effective or the violation is serious, file a complaint with HHS’s Office for Civil Rights within 180 days of discovering the violation, using the official HHS complaint portal.

4. Can I sue someone for violating HIPAA?

No. HIPAA does not provide a private right of action, meaning individuals cannot sue directly under HIPAA. Patients can file a complaint with HHS/OCR, and in some cases may have separate legal remedies under state privacy or negligence laws.

5. Is looking up a patient’s chart without a work reason a HIPAA violation, even if I don’t share the information?

Yes. Accessing a patient’s record without a legitimate, job-related reason is a violation the moment it happens — it doesn’t require sharing, saving, or acting on the information afterward. This is one of the most consistently enforced categories, particularly for high-profile or celebrity patients whose charts are routinely audited.

LuxSci Email Security

What Is Secure Email? The Complete Guide for Healthcare Organizations

In healthcare IT, the term “secure email” gets thrown around loosely. Vendors slap the label on anything with a padlock icon, and internal teams often assume that because their provider offers TLS, they’re covered. They’re not, and the gap between what’s assumed and what’s actually required is where data breaches occur and HIPAA violations happen.

This guide breaks down exactly what secure email means from a technical and regulatory standpoint, why the email platform your staff uses every day probably isn’t compliant out of the box, and what to look for when evaluating a provider that needs to protect PHI at scale. If you want the full picture of what compliance requires beyond email specifically, our HIPAA Compliance Checklist is a useful companion read.

What Is Secure Email?

Secure email refers to an email system that protects the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of message content — specifically PHI — through a combination of technical safeguards and contractual protections. It’s not a single feature. It’s a stack of controls working together.

At minimum, secure email in a healthcare context includes:

  • Enforced encryption in transit, so messages can’t fall back to plaintext delivery
  • Encryption at rest, so stored messages remain protected on the server
  • Authentication protocols (SPF, DKIM, DMARC) that prevent spoofing and impersonation
  • Access controls and audit logs that track who accessed what, and when
  • A signed Business Associate Agreement (BAA) with the email provider

The distinction that trips up most organizations is this: encryption is a component of secure email, not the whole picture. A provider can offer encryption and still fail to meet HIPAA requirements if that encryption isn’t enforced, if there’s no BAA in place, or if audit logging doesn’t exist. Secure email is the combination of all these pieces functioning as a system, which is why it needs to be evaluated holistically rather than checked off feature by feature.

For healthcare provider, payer, and supplier organizations, this matters because email remains one of the highest-volume channels for PHI exposure, from clinical referrals to patient billing statements to routine staff communication. Getting the definition right is the first step toward closing the compliance gap.

Why Standard Email Is Not HIPAA-Compliant

Many healthcare organizations run on Gmail (Google Workspace) or Microsoft 365, and most assume they’re protected because encryption exists somewhere in the stack. That assumption is the single most common — and most dangerous — misconception in healthcare email security.

Here’s the problem: standard email services use opportunistic TLS by default. TLS is attempted between mail servers, but if the receiving server doesn’t support it, the message is delivered anyway — unencrypted, in plaintext. Neither the sender nor the recipient typically sees a warning. The email just goes through.

This isn’t a hypothetical edge case. IT professionals managing healthcare email infrastructure have flagged this exact issue directly: opportunistic TLS is often enabled by default and creates a false sense of security, since it offers no guarantee that a given message, including one containing PHI, won’t be transmitted in plaintext if the recipient’s mail server doesn’t support encryption. Organizations assume they’re protected simply because TLS is technically “on,” without realizing it isn’t enforced.

That gap has real consequences under HIPAA. The Security Rule currently treats transmission encryption as an “addressable” safeguard, meaning covered entities can, in theory, implement an equivalent alternative measure instead. In practice, regulators and auditors from the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) expect enforced encryption as the standard of care. “Addressable” has never meant optional — it means an organization needs a documented, defensible reason if it isn’t doing enforced encryption, and few reasons hold up under scrutiny. Finally, under OCR’s proposed changes to the HIPAA Security Rule for ePHI, scheduled for final publication in July 2027, email encryption moves from addressable to mandatory.

Beyond the encryption gap, standard consumer and even most business email plans typically lack:

  • A BAA that’s actually offered and signed (available on some enterprise tiers, but not automatic)
  • Enforced access controls beyond basic password authentication
  • Audit logging sufficient to meet HIPAA Security Rule requirements
  • Built-in encryption at rest guarantees for stored messages

None of this means Gmail or Microsoft 365 are inherently insecure products. It means their default configuration is built for general business use, not for an environment where every misrouted or intercepted message carries breach notification liability. Making either platform HIPAA-appropriate requires layering on additional tools, policies, and critically, a provider relationship that includes a signed BAA covering the exact services in use. 

The Technical Components of Secure Email

Secure email is built upon five technical layers. Understanding each one, and where it fails in standard email, clarifies exactly what a compliant solution needs to deliver.

Encryption in Transit (TLS)

Transport Layer Security (TLS) encrypts the connection between mail servers as a message travels from sender to recipient. There are two flavors, and the difference between them is the crux of most healthcare email compliance failures:

  • Opportunistic TLS attempts an encrypted connection but falls back to unencrypted delivery if the receiving server doesn’t support it. This is the default across most consumer and business email platforms.
  • Enforced TLS requires an encrypted connection for delivery to succeed. If encryption can’t be established, the message fails to send rather than going out in plaintext, or a link to secure portal can be sent to securely access the information.

HIPAA’s Security Rule lists encryption as addressable, but enforced TLS has become the de facto standard that auditors and OCR expect from covered entities and business associates handling PHI over email. As one healthcare IT professional put it while debating this exact tradeoff internally: the goal is to require TLS for all outbound email and then document the remaining controls around it, treating enforced TLS as the technical baseline, with policy and process built on top.

Encryption at Rest

Transit encryption only protects a message while it’s moving. Once it lands on a mail server — sender’s outbox, recipient’s inbox, backups, archives — it needs to remain encrypted in storage. This is encryption at rest, and it’s where many organizations underestimate their exposure.

Encryption in transit alone offers zero control over a message after it’s been delivered. If the destination server isn’t itself encrypting stored data, or if a backup snapshot is taken without encryption, PHI sitting in an inbox is exposed regardless of how securely it arrived. HIPAA’s Security Rule requires safeguards for ePHI both in transit and at rest, a compliant secure email provider needs to guarantee both, not just one.

End-to-End Encryption (S/MIME, PGP)

End-to-end encryption (E2EE) encrypts message content itself, not just the connection it travels over — meaning even the email provider can’t read the content. Two standards dominate here:

  • S/MIME uses certificate-based encryption and is common in enterprise environments, such as healthcare, particularly where organizations already manage a public key infrastructure.
  • PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) uses a public/private key model and is more common in technical or security-conscious communities, though it’s less frequently deployed at scale in healthcare due to key management complexity.

E2EE isn’t a baseline requirement for every PHI-containing email, enforced TLS plus encryption at rest satisfies most use cases. But it becomes necessary for especially sensitive communications, cross-organization data sharing where you don’t control the recipient’s infrastructure, or when a business associate agreement specifically requires it.

Authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC)

These three protocols work together to prevent domain spoofing and email impersonation, a growing attack vector against healthcare organizations specifically, given how often phishing campaigns impersonate providers, payers, or patients.

  • SPF (Sender Policy Framework) specifies which mail servers are authorized to send email on behalf of a domain.
  • DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) adds a cryptographic signature verifying a message wasn’t altered in transit.
  • DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance) tells receiving servers what to do when SPF or DKIM checks fail, and provides reporting visibility.

Without these configured correctly, an organization’s domain can be spoofed to send convincing phishing emails to patients or staff, creating a security failure that compounds the compliance risk of email interception.

Digital Signatures

Digital signatures verify sender identity and confirm a message hasn’t been tampered with between sending and receipt. Paired with encryption, they close the loop on message integrity, confirming not just that content was protected, but that it came from who it claims to have come from and arrived unaltered.

Standard Email vs. Secure Email: Feature Comparison

FeatureStandard Email Secure Email (HIPAA-Compliant)
Encryption in TransitOpportunistic TLS — attempted but not enforcedEnforced TLS — connection fails if encryption unavailable, can include delivery via secure portal option
Encryption at RestNot guaranteed; provider-dependentRequired — server-side encryption of stored messages
End-to-End EncryptionNot availableSupported via S/MIME and/or PGP
Digital SignaturesNot availableIncluded — verifies sender identity and message integrity
Authentication (SPF / DKIM / DMARC)Optional, rarely enforcedRequired — spoofing and impersonation protection
Business Associate Agreement (BAA)Not provided on standard plansRequired — must be signed before sending PHI
Audit LogsBasic or noneFull audit trail — required under HIPAA Security Rule
Access ControlsBasic password onlyRole-based access, MFA, admin controls
Misdirected EmailReportable HIPAA breachNon-reportable if properly encrypted (safe harbor)
HIPAA Compliant by DefaultNoYes

What Makes Email HIPAA-Compliant Specifically

Technical safeguards alone don’t make email HIPAA-compliant. Compliance is a combination of technology, contracts, and documented processes — all four need to be in place simultaneously. This includes:

A signed BAA with your email provider – Any vendor that transmits, processes, or stores PHI on your behalf is a business associate under HIPAA, and business associates are legally required to sign a BAA before handling that data. Email providers have persistent access to ePHI — even end-to-end encrypted messages pass through their infrastructure at some point — which makes this requirement absolute, not situational. If a provider won’t sign a BAA, using them to send or store PHI isn’t a compliance risk you can mitigate; it’s a violation from the start.

Encryption as an addressable safeguard – Under 45 CFR §164.312(e)(2)(ii), the HIPAA Security Rule lists encryption of ePHI in transit as “addressable” rather than strictly “required.” In practice, this doesn’t mean optional, it means an organization must implement it, or document and justify an equivalent alternative safeguard. Enforced encryption has become the expected standard, and with the newly proposed HIPAA Security Rule planned for July 2027 publication, NPRM would formalize that expectation by making encryption of ePHI in transit and at rest mandatory rather than addressable. Organizations still relying on opportunistic TLS as their “equivalent alternative” should treat this as a closing window.

Access controls and audit logs – HIPAA requires the ability to track who accessed PHI, when, and what they did with it. This means role-based access permissions, multi-factor authentication, and a complete, retained audit trail — not just for compliance reporting, but for identifying and responding to incidents quickly.

The encryption safe harbor – This is one of the most consequential, and most underused, provisions in HIPAA. If PHI is sent via properly encrypted email and ends up misdirected to the wrong recipient, it is not a reportable breach under the Breach Notification Rule, because the encrypted content is considered unreadable and therefore not “unsecured PHI.” The exact same misdirection with unencrypted email is a reportable breach, triggering notification obligations to the individual and to HHS/OCR. Encryption isn’t just a security best practice here, it’s the line between a non-event and a formal breach investigation.

HITRUST certification as a trust signal – When evaluating vendors, HITRUST CSF certification is a strong external indicator that a provider’s security controls have been independently assessed against a recognized healthcare-specific framework. It’s not a HIPAA requirement in itself, but it meaningfully reduces the diligence burden on your side when vetting a provider.

Types of Healthcare Email That Must Be Secure

Not all internal debate here is about “should we secure email” — it’s about scope. Which specific email flows actually carry PHI, and therefore need to run through a compliant channel? In practice, the answer is broader than most teams initially assume.

Screenshot 2026 07 29 at 9.47.13 AM What Is Secure Email? The Complete Guide for Healthcare Organizations

The common thread: if a message references anything that could identify a patient in connection with health information — a name next to a diagnosis, an account number tied to a service date, an annual test reminder — it needs to move through a secure channel, regardless of whether it’s clinical, financial, or administrative in nature.

How to Evaluate a Secure Email Provider for Healthcare

Vendor evaluation in this category tends to go one of two ways: teams either take a provider’s “HIPAA-compliant” label at face value, or they get buried in RFP questions without knowing which answers actually matter. Ask these key questiosn to focus the evaluation on what’s operationally and legally significant.

“Does the provider sign a BAA? This is the first filter, not the last. If a vendor won’t sign a BAA — or offers a heavily limited one — everything else is irrelevant. Some organizations go a step further and negotiate indemnity or make-whole clauses into the BAA itself, seeking financial protection beyond the baseline liability allocation.

What encryption methods are supported? Confirm specifically whether the provider offers TLS only, or also supports S/MIME and/or PGP for end-to-end encryption where needed. TLS-only coverage is sufficient for most standard PHI communication; organizations with cross-border data sharing or especially sensitive use cases may need E2EE options available.

Is encryption enforced or opportunistic? This is the single most important technical question to ask directly, in those terms. A vendor that describes its encryption vaguely, without distinguishing enforced from opportunistic delivery, hasn’t answered the question. Push for specifics.

How are large attachments handled? Lab results, imaging files, and clinical documents often exceed standard attachment size limits. Confirm the provider has a secure, compliant method for large file transfer that doesn’t force users onto an unencrypted workaround.

What audit logging and reporting capabilities exist? You need visibility into delivery, access, and any failed encryption attempts, not just a generic sent/received log. Ask whether logs are retained for a period consistent with your organization’s HIPAA documentation requirements.

Do they support high-volume transactional email? Appointment reminders, billing notices, and patient communications at scale require infrastructure built for volume without sacrificing per-message compliance. Confirm the provider’s platform is built for this your specific pattern, not just person-to-person messaging.

Is the platform US-based with US data residency? For many healthcare organizations, where data physically resides — and under which jurisdiction — is a material factor in vendor risk assessment, particularly for payers and larger provider organizations with strict data governance policies.”

One operational factor worth weighing alongside these questions: secure email portals — the kind that require recipients to click through to a separate web page to read a message — solve the encryption problem but often create a real adoption problem. IT teams have reported a direct conflict between phishing-awareness training and portal-based workflows: staff and patients trained not to click suspicious links in emails are, understandably, reluctant to click the “secure link” a portal email contains. This is a legitimate reason many organizations increasingly prefer platforms that enforce encryption transparently in the background — like LuxSci’s SecureLine encryption technology — rather than routing every message through a separate portal experience.

Secure Email Checklist for Healthcare Organizations

Every safeguard covered in this guide comes down to a handful of concrete, verifiable actions. Use the checklist below as a working reference for what needs to be in place across your legal agreements, technical controls, and internal processes. This is not a one-time setup task, but something worth revisiting as your email volume, vendors, and regulations evolve. Share it across  your compliance and IT teams as a starting point for an internal audit.

  • Legal and Contractual – BAA signed with email provider and all third-party vendors handling PHI.
  • Encryption – Forced TLS, not opportunistic only for emails in transit and all stored data encrypted with AES-256 bit encryption.
  • Access and Audit – Unique user IDs, role-based access, and login monitoring with advanced MFA enabled for all email accounts; audit logs active and maintained.
  • People and Processes – Staff trained in PHI handling, established breach response plan, annual email security policy review.

What Should I Do Now?

Secure email isn’t a single setting you switch on — it’s a combination of enforced encryption, a signed BAA, access controls, and documented process working together. Get any one piece wrong, and the rest doesn’t hold up under an OCR audit or a breach investigation.

If your organization is still relying on opportunistic TLS, an unsigned or incomplete BAA, or a patchwork of workarounds to move PHI through email, now is the time to close that gap, especially with the proposed 2025 HIPAA Security Rule update poised to make encryption a mandatory requirement rather than an addressable one in 2027.

Below are three ways you can continue your journey to securing your healthcare email:

  1. Explore LuxSci’s SecureLine encryption technology to see how automated encryption, enforced TLS, and a signed BAA work together — no complex configuration required.
  2. Read our HIPAA Compliance Checklist to understand the full scope of what your organization needs to have in place beyond email.
  3. Stay ahead of the new regulation with Email Encryption Under the New HIPAA Security Rule for a closer look at what the mandatory encryption shift means for your organization.

FAQs

1. Is email HIPAA compliant?

Email can be HIPAA compliant, but only when the right safeguards are in place — enforced encryption, a signed BAA with your email provider, access controls, audit logs, and staff training on PHI handling. Standard email without these safeguards is not compliant.

2. Do I need to sign a BAA with my email provider?

Yes. Email providers have persistent access to ePHI — even encrypted messages pass through their servers — making them Business Associates under HIPAA. A signed BAA is required. If your provider won’t sign one, you cannot legally use them to send or store PHI.

3. What is the difference between opportunistic TLS and enforced TLS — and which does HIPAA require?

Opportunistic TLS attempts encryption but falls back to plaintext if the recipient’s server doesn’t support it. Enforced TLS stops delivery rather than sending unencrypted. HIPAA’s Security Rule treats transmission encryption as an addressable specification, in practice, enforced TLS is the standard auditors and OCR expect. The proposed 2025 HIPAA Security Rule NPRM would make encryption of ePHI in transit a mandatory requirement in 2027.

4. What happens if I send PHI in an unencrypted email?

It is an impermissible disclosure under HIPAA’s Privacy Rule and triggers the Breach Notification Rule, requiring you to notify the individual and HHS/OCR within 60 days. Penalties range from $100 to $50,000 per violation. Had the email been properly encrypted, the same incident would qualify for HIPAA’s encryption safe harbor, meaning no notification required.

5. Is Gmail or Microsoft 365 HIPAA compliant for sending patient emails?

Neither is compliant in their default configuration. Both use opportunistic TLS, meaning PHI can be sent in plaintext if the recipient’s server doesn’t support encryption. A signed BAA is available on enterprise plans but doesn’t close the technical gap alone. A purpose-built HIPAA-compliant email platform is the reliable solution.

new HIPAA Security Rule

New HIPAA Security Rule Update: Mandatory Email Encryption Delayed to 2027

If you’ve been waiting for the final word on the new HIPAA Security Rule before you touch your email encryption strategy, you now have an official reason to keep waiting.

Our advice: Don’t do it.

What is the new HIPAA Security Rule for ePHI?

The Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights had targeted May 2026 for a final rule implementing the most significant update to the HIPAA Security Rule in over two decades. The proposal eliminates the “addressable” standard and makes encryption of ePHI in transit and at rest mandatory for every covered entity and business associate. That deadline came and went quietly. Now we know why: an updated federal regulatory agenda shows OCR’s timeline has moved to July 2027, with the rule-making downgraded from “final rule stage” to “long-term action.” OCR is still working through more than 4,700 public comments on the January 2025 proposal.

For an industry that had been expecting a tighter deadline, a year-plus delay is the kind of news that invites a collective exhale — and a shelved project plan. At LuxSci, we think that would be a mistake, for three reasons:

  • The current rule already requires you to address encryption. “Addressable” was never “optional.” It has always meant you must implement the safeguard, implement an equivalent alternative, or document in writing why neither is reasonable for your organization. Most healthcare organizations have never done that documentation rigorously, and OCR’s existing enforcement authority applies today, not in 2027.
  • Breach costs haven’t waited for the rule. IBM’s 2025 Cost of a Data Breach Report puts the average healthcare breach at $7.42 million, still the highest of any industry. At the same time, email remains the number one attack vector into healthcare organizations. None of that risk is paused by a regulatory delay.
  • Delay is not withdrawal. OCR has not signaled it’s abandoning the encryption mandate, only that it’s taking longer to finalize it. Organizations that build now toward the standard already proposed will be ahead (and more secure) regardless of exactly when, or in what final form, the rule lands. Organizations that wait risk a compressed scramble once it does.

What should healthcare IT and compliance leaders actually do with this news?

Reevaluate your ePHI security posture, recalibrate its urgency, and use the extra runway to do the job right, instead of racing against a deadline. This includes:

  • Getting a real inventory of where ePHI moves by email today, inbound and outbound, and where encryption is inconsistent or absent.
  • Closing the documentation gap on “addressable” now, while you have time to do it well rather than defensively.
  • Pushing your email vendor for concrete answers on encryption standards, MFA enforcement, audit logging, and breach notification — the same technical controls the proposed rule would make mandatory.
  • Building (or updating) a written, enforcement-ready posture: policies, vendor agreements, certifications and verifications, test results, and training records that would hold up under an OCR investigation today, not just in a future compliance deadline.

Get LuxSci’s new Definitive Guide on the new HIPAA Security Rule

From Addressable to Mandatory: Email Encryption Under the New HIPAA Security Rule provides the latest update on the rule, what it means for healthcare email encryption, and what you can do now to properly prepare for what’s coming in 2027. The guide also includes an interactive scorecard that lets you evaluate your current email set up and vendor across seven security and compliance dimensions in under two minutes, no email address required.

You can read the guide here: From Addressable to Mandatory: Email Encryption Under the New HIPAA Security Rule

If you want a second set of eyes on where your organization stands, our team offers a free 30-minute compliance assessment of your current email environment against the proposed rule’s requirements.

Reach out today and schedule a call.

HIPAA Security Rule Email Encryption Requirements

You Might Also Like

Is Microsoft Outlook HIPAA compliant?

Is Microsoft Outlook HIPAA Compliant? Understanding Microsoft Email Security

Microsoft Outlook is one of the most widely used email platforms, including in healthcare, but is it truly HIPAA-compliant? The answer isn’t straightforward. While Outlook, and the entire Microsoft 365 application suite, offer security features that can support HIPAA compliance, they are not inherently compliant out of the box. 

Healthcare organizations must actually take additional measures to ensure they meet HIPAA’s stringent requirements before they can transmit electronic protected health information (ePHI) in their email communications – without risking the consequences of non-compliance. 

With this in mind, this post examines Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Outlook’s security capabilities, where and how they fall short of compliance standards, and, subsequently, how to secure each application in accordance with HIPAA regulations. 

Understanding HIPAA Compliant Email Requirements

HIPAA compliant email requires healthcare organizations to implement a series of technical, administrative, and physical safeguards to protect the sensitive patient data that they’ve amassed during the course of their operations – and are legally obliged to secure it in transit and at rest. Taking a brief look at each category in turn, these safeguards include: 

Technical

  • Encryption: converting ePHI into an unreadable format.
  • Access controls: ensuring only authorized personnel can access patient data.
  • Audit logs: tracking who has accessed ePHI and what they did with it.

Administrative

  • Risk assessments: identifying and categorizing risks to ePHI and implementing mitigation measures.
  • Workforce training: educating employees, especially those who handle ePHI, on how to identify cyber threats, e.g, phishing, and how to respond. 
  • Business Associate Agreements (BAAs): a required document for HIPAA compliance that outlines each party’s responsibility and liability in protecting patient data.

Physical safeguards: 

  • Securing servers: preventing access to the servers on which ePHI resides.
  • Restricting device access: implementing measures to keep malicious actors from accessing employee devices, should one fall into their hands.
  • Implementing screen locks: a simple, yet effective, form of device access control is setting them to lock after a few seconds of inactivity.

What Security Features Do Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Outlook Have?

Before detailing how Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Outlook do not meet HIPAA’s standards by default, let’s look at its security features:

1. Encryption and Data Protection

Microsoft 365 offers several encryption options, including:

  • TLS: Transport Layer Security (TLS) secures email in transit but does not encrypt emails at rest; if a recipient’s email server does not support TLS, messages may be sent in plaintext.
  • Office Message Encryption (OME): Office Message Encryption (OME) allows users to send encrypted messages, but it requires recipients to log in to a Microsoft account or use a one-time passcode. OME integrates with Microsoft 365’s Purview Message Encryption feature, which incorporates encryption, Do Not Forward, and rights management. 
  • BitLocker Encryption: Encrypts data at rest within Microsoft’s cloud infrastructure.
  • Azure Information Protection: a cloud-based solution that allows users to classify, label, and protect data based on its sensitivity.

While these encryption methods provide some security, they lack the flexibility and automation needed to ensure consistent HIPAA compliance, especially for high-volume email campaigns.

2. Access Controls & Authentication

Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Outlook include access controls, such as role-based permissions and device management policies, and user authentication measures such as Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA). However, organizations must actively manage and enforce these policies to prevent breaches.

3. Audit Logging & Compliance Reporting

Microsoft provides audit logging and reporting tools via the Microsoft Purview Compliance Portal. These logs help organizations track access to ePHI, but proper configuration is required to ensure that HIPAA-required retention policies are met.

4. Business Associate Agreement

One of the distinguishing features of using Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Outlook is that the company will sign a Business Associate Agreement (BAA) with healthcare organizations. However, the Microsoft BAA only applies to specific Microsoft 365 services that meet HIPAA requirements, such as Outlook, Exchange Online, and OneDrive – while apps like Skype may not be covered. 

This means healthcare organizations must carefully configure Microsoft 365 to use only HIPAA-covered services and apply security controls like encryption, access restrictions, and audit logging. 

How Microsoft Outlook and Microsoft 365 Fall Short of HIPAA Regulations

Despite Microsoft 365 and Outlook’s comprehensive security features, out of the box, they still lack a series of capabilities and configurations that prevent them from being fully HIPAA-compliant. 

  1. No End-to-End Encryption: TLS protects emails in transit, but messages may be readable on recipient servers if they don’t support TLS, exposing ePHI.
  2. Lack of Automatic Encryption: Microsoft 365 requires users to manually apply encryption settings for emails containing sensitive data, increasing the risk of human error and falling victim to data breaches.
  3. Key management issues: healthcare organizations must rely on Microsoft’s encryption key management, rather than maintaining full control over their own keys.
  4. Lack of recipient flexibility: OME requires recipients to authenticate via Microsoft accounts, which can be cumbersome for patients and other third-parties.
  5. Limited DLP Enforcement: Outlook’s default settings don’t prevent ePHI from being sent unencrypted without proper data loss prevention (DLP) rules.
  6. Audit Logging Gaps: while Microsoft 365 logs activity, they must be reviewed and retained properly to meet HIPAA guidelines.


To bridge these security gaps, healthcare organizations need an additional layer of protection.

In short, Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Outlook are not HIPAA-compliant out of the box, and healthcare companies should fully understand the implications and steps needed before using them for HIPAA compliant email communications and campaigns. However, unlike other leading email platforms, such as Mailchimp and SendGrid, they can be made HIPAA-compliant.

How LuxSci Makes Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Outlook Email HIPAA-Compliant

If your organization relies on Microsoft 365 or Microsoft Outlook for its email communications, LuxSci can streamline the process of making the platform HIPAA compliant – better-securing ePHI in the process and helping you avoid the consequences of a compliance shortfalls and a data breach.. 

LuxSci’s HIPAA compliant email features were specially designed with the security needs of healthcare organizations in mind, and include:

1. Automatic, End-to-End Email Encryption

LuxSci’s SecureLine™ encryption dynamically applies the strongest available encryption, including TLS, PGP and S/MIME,  based on the recipient’s server’s security posture and capabilities, ensuring that every email remains secure without manual intervention, and reducing human error.

2. Seamless Integration with Microsoft 365

With LuxSci’s Secure Email Gateway, organizations can continue using Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Outlook for email, while benefiting from automated encryption, outbound email filtering, and advanced compliance logging, where logs are retained per HIPAA’s strict requirements.

3. Dedicated, HIPAA-Compliant Infrastructure

LuxSci offers dedicated email servers with full control over encryption keys, ensuring compliance with HIPAA and other data privacy regulations, such as GDPR and HITRUST. This is particularly important for organizations needing high-volume email security without performance bottlenecks.

4. Secure Patient Communication & Forms

Beyond email encryption, LuxSci provides Secure Forms and Secure Text, allowing healthcare providers, payers and suppliers to safely collect sensitive patient data and improve patient engagement and workflows. 

Talk to Our Experts Today

If your organization relies on Microsoft 365 or Microsoft Outlook for email and wants to ensure full HIPAA compliance, schedule an intro call or demo with LuxSci today. Our experts will answer all your questions and help you implement a secure, high-performance email solution tailored to your needs.

encrypted email transmission

Is the Email Encrypted? How to Tell if an Email is Transmitted Using TLS

SMTP TLS encryption is popular because it provides adequate data protection without creating a complicated user experience for email recipients. Sometimes, though, the experience is too seamless, and recipients may wonder if the message was protected at all.

Luckily, there is a way to tell if an email was encrypted using TLS. To see if a message was sent securely, we can look at the raw headers of the email. However, it requires some knowledge and experience to understand the text. It is actually easier to tell if a recipient’s server supports TLS than to tell if a particular message was securely transmitted.

To analyze a message for transmission security, we will look at an example email message sent from Hotmail to LuxSci. We will explain what to look for when decoding the message headers and how to tell if the email was transmitted using TLS encryption.

An Example Email Message

First, we must understand how an email message typically travels through several machines on its way from the sender to the recipient. Roughly speaking:

  1. The sender’s computer talks to the sender’s email or WebMail server to upload the message.
  2. The sender’s email or WebMail server then talks to the recipient’s inbound email server and transmits the message to them.
  3. Finally, the recipient downloads the message from their email server.

It is step 2 that people are most concerned about when trying to understand if their email message is transmitted securely. They usually assume or check that everything is secure and OK at the two ends. Indeed, most users who need to can take steps to ensure that they are using SSL-enabled WebMail or POP/IMAP/SMTP/Exchange services so that steps 1 and 3 are secure. The intermediate step, where the email is transmitted between two different providers, is where messages may be sent insecurely.

To determine if the message was transmitted securely between the sender’s and recipient’s servers (over TLS), we need to extract the “Received” header lines from the received email message. If you look at the source of the email message, the lines at the top start with “Received.” Let’s look at an example message from a Hotmail user below. The email addresses, IPs, and other information are obviously fake.

LuxSci:

The Outlook email was sent to a LuxSci user. The Received headers appear in reverse chronological order, starting with the server that touched the message last. Therefore, in this example, we see the LuxSci servers first.

Received: from abc.luxsci.com ([1.1.1.1])
	by def.luxsci.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7JEfLgH003867
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
	for <user-xyz@def.luxsci.com>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:41:21 -0400
Received: from abc.luxsci.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by abc.luxsci.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7JEfK0Z030182
	for <user-xyz@def.luxsci.com>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:41:20 -0500
Received: (from mail@localhost)
	by abc.luxsci.com (8.14.4/8.13.8/Submit) id r7JEfKXD030178
	for user-xyz@def.luxsci.com; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:41:20 -0500
Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [2.2.2.2])
	by abc.luxsci.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7JEfIkK030002
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
	for <someone@luxsci.net>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:41:19 -0500

Proofpoint:

LuxSci uses an email filtering service, Proofpoint. Messages reach Proofpoint’s servers before being delivered to LuxSci. Here’s what their servers report about the email transmission:

Received: from unknown [65.54.190.216] (EHLO bay0-omc4-s14.bay0.hotmail.com)
	by dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com.ppe-hosted.com
        (envelope-from <someone@hotmail.com>);
	Mon, 19 Aug 2019 08:41:18 -0600 (MDT)

Outlook:

And finally, here’s what we see from Oultook’s server.

Received: from BAY403-EAS373 ([65.54.190.199]) by bay0-omc4-s14.bay0.outlook.com
       with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); 
       Mon, 19 Aug 2019 07:41:19 -0700

How to Use Received Message Headers to Tell if the Email is Encrypted

The message headers contain information that can help us determine if an email is encrypted. Here are a few helpful notes to help you decode the text:

  1. We said this above, but the message headers appear in reverse chronological order. The first one listed shows the last server that touched the message; the last one is the first server that touched it (typically the sending server).
  2. Each Received line documents what a server did and when.
  3. There are three sets of servers involved in this example: one machine at Hotmail, one machine at Proofpoint, where our Premium Email Filtering takes place, and some machines at LuxSci, where final acceptance of the message and subsequent delivery happened.

Presumably, the processing of email within each provider is secure. The place to be concerned about is the hand-offs between Hotmail and Proofpoint and between Proofpoint and LuxSci, as these are the big hops across the internet between providers.

In the line where LuxSci accepts the message from Proofpoint, we see:

(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)

This section, typical of most email servers running “sendmail” with TLS support, indicates that the message was encrypted during transport with TLS using 256-bit AES encryption. (“Verify=not” means that LuxSci did not ask Proofpoint for a second SSL client certificate to verify itself, as that is not usually needed or required for SMTP TLS to work correctly). Also, “TLSv1/SSLv3” is a tag that means that “Some version of SSL or TLS was used;” it does not mean that it was SSL v3 or TLS v1.0. It could have been TLS v1.2 or TLS v1.3.

So, the hop between Proofpoint and LuxSci was locked down and secure. What about the hop between Hotmail and Proofpoint? The Proofpoint server’s Received line makes no note of security at all! This means that the email message was probably not encrypted during this step.

Hotmail either did not support opportunistic TLS encryption for outbound emails, or Proofpoint did not support receipt of messages over TLS, and thus, TLS could not be used. With additional context, you can know which server supports TLS and which does not.

In this case, we know that Proofpoint supports inbound TLS encryption. In fact, from another example message where LuxSci sent a message to Proofpoint, we see the Received line:

Received: from unknown [44.44.44.44] (EHLO wgh.luxsci.com)
	by dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com.ppe-hosted.com
        (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	with ESMTP id b-022.p01c11m003.ppe-hosted.com
        (envelope-from <from@domain.com>);
	Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:28:27 -0700 (MST)

The red text makes it clear that the message was indeed encrypted. Based on the additional context, we can deduce that the Hotmail sending server did not securely transmit the email using TLS.

How To Tell if an Email is Encrypted With TLS

  1. When analyzing your message headers, consider the following items to determine if the email is encrypted:
    1. The receiving server will log what kind of encryption, if any, was used in receiving the message in the headers.
    2. Different email servers use different formats and syntax to display the encryption used. Look for keywords like “SSL,” “TLS,” and “Encryption,” which will signify this information.
    3. Not all servers will record the use of encryption. While LuxSci has always logged encryption use, not every email service provider does. It is possible to use TLS encryption and not log it. Sometimes, there is no way to tell from the headers if a message is encrypted if it is not logged.
    4. Messages passed between servers at the same provider do not necessarily need TLS encryption to be secure. For example, LuxSci has back-channel private network connections between many servers so that information can be securely passed between them without SMTP TLS. So, the lack of TLS usage between two servers does not mean the transmission between them was “insecure.” You may also see multiple received lines listing the same server: the server passes the message between different processes within itself. This communication also does not need to be TLS encrypted.
    5. If you are a LuxSci customer, you can view online email delivery reports to see if TLS was used for any particular message. We record the kind of encryption in the delivery reports, so it’s easy to see which emails were encrypted.

How can you Ensure Emails Are Securely Transmitted?

With some servers not recording TLS in message headers, how can you determine if a message was transmitted securely from sender to recipient?

To answer this question accurately, you must understand the properties, servers, and networks involved. It may be easy to determine that the message was transmitted securely if included in the header information. However, the absence of information does not necessarily mean the message was insecurely transmitted. You can only know this if you know what each system’s servers record.

In our example of a message from Hotmail to LuxSci, you need to know that:

  1. Proofpoint and LuxSci will always log the use of TLS in the headers. We can infer that the Hotmail to Proofpoint transmission was not secure as nothing was recorded there.
  2. The transmission of messages within LuxSci’s infrastructure is secure due to private back channel transmissions. So, even though there is no mention of TLS in every Received line after LuxSci accepts the message from Proofpoint (in this example), transferring the messages between servers in LuxSci is as secure as using TLS. Also, the same server can add multiple received lines as it talks to itself. Generally, these hand-offs on the same server will not use TLS, as there is no need. In the LuxSci example, we see this as “abc.luxsci.com” adds several headers.
  3. We don’t know anything about Hotmail’s email servers, so we don’t know how secure the initial transmissions within their network are. However, since we know they did not securely transmit the message to Proofpoint, we are not confident that the transmissions and processing within Hotmail (which may have gone unrecorded) were secure.

Was the email message sent and received using encryption?

We skipped steps 1 and 3 and focused on step 2 – the transmission between servers. Steps 1 and 3 are equally, if not more, necessary. Why? Because eavesdropping on the internet between ISPs is less of a problem than eavesdropping near the sender and recipient (i.e., in their workplace or local wireless hotspot). So, it’s essential to ensure messages are sent securely and received securely. This means:

  • Sending: Use SMTP over SSL or TLS when sending messages from an email client or use WebMail over a secure connection (HTTPS).
  • Receiving: Ensure your POP or IMAP connection is secured via SSL or TLS. If using WebMail to read your email, be sure it is over a secure connection (HTTPS).
  • WebMail: There is generally no record in the email headers to indicate if a message sent using WebMail was transmitted from the end-user to WebMail over a secure connection (SSL/HTTPS).

You can typically control one side and ensure it is secure; you can’t control the other without taking extra steps. So, what can you do to ensure your message is secure even if it might not be transmitted with encryption or if the recipient tries to access it insecurely?

You could use end-to-end email encryption (like PGP or S/MIME, which are included in SecureLine) or a secure web portal that doesn’t require the recipient to install or set up anything to get your secure email message. These methods meet HIPAA and other regulatory compliance requirements for secure data transmission and provide complete confidence that the message will be sent and received securely.

LuxSci’s SecureLine offers flexible encryption options, including TLS, secure web portal, PGP, and S/MIME. Its dynamic capabilities can determine what types of encryption the recipient’s server supports to ensure your emails are always sent securely. Contact our team today to learn more about how to secure your emails.

AI-based Email Security Threats

How to Avoid AI-Based Email Security Threats

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been the hottest topic in technology for the past few years now, with a focus on how it’s transforming business and the way we work. While we’d seen glimpses of AI’s capabilities before, the release of ChatGPT (containing OpenAI’s groundbreaking GPT-3.5 AI model) put the technology’s limitless potential on full display. Soon, stakeholders in every industry looked to find ways to integrate AI into their organizations, so they could harness its huge productivity and efficiency benefits.

The problem? Hackers and bad actors are using AI too, and it’s only strengthening their ability to carry out data breaches, including AI-based email security threats. 

While AI brings considerable advantages to all types of businesses, unfortunately, its vast capabilities can be used for malicious purposes too. With their unparalleled ability to process data and generate content, cybercriminals can use a variety of AI tools to make their attacks more potent, increasing their potential to get past even the most secure safeguards. 

With all this in mind, this post discusses how AI is helping cyber criminals massively scale their efforts and carry out more sophisticated, widespread attacks. We’ll explore how malicious actors are harnessing AI tools to make AI-based email cyber attacks more personalized, potent, and harmful, and cover three of the most common threats to email security that are being made significantly more dangerous with AI. This includes phishing, business email compromise (BEC) attacks, and malware. We’ll also offer strategic insights on how healthcare organizations can best mitigate AI-enhanced email threats and continue to safeguard the electronic protected health information (ePHI) under their care. 

How Does AI Increase Threats To Email Security?

AI’s effect on email security threats warrants particular concern because it enhances them in three ways: by making email-focused attacks more scalable, sophisticated, and difficult to detect.

Scalability 

First and foremost, AI tools allow cybercriminals to scale effortlessly, enabling them to achieve exponentially more in less time, with few additional resources, if any at all. 

The most obvious example of the scalable capabilities of generative AI involves systems that can create new content from simple instructions, or prompts. In particular, large language models (LLMs), such as those found in widely used AI applications like ChatGPT, allow malicious actors to rapidly generate phishing email templates and similar content that can be used in social engineering attacks, with a level of accuracy in writing and grammar not seen before. Now, work that previously would take email cybercriminals hours can be achieved in mere seconds, with the ability to make near-instant improvements and produce countless variations.   

Similarly, should a social engineering campaign yield results, i.e., getting a potential victim to engage, malicious actors can automate the interaction through AI-powered chatbots, which are capable of extended conversations via email. This increases the risk of a cybercriminal successfully fooling an employee at a healthcare organization to grant access to sensitive patient data or reveal their login credentials so they can breach their company’s email system. 

Additionally, AI allows cybercriminals to scale their efforts by automating aspects of their actions, and gathering information about a victim, i.e., a healthcare organization before launching an attack. AI tools also can scan email systems, metadata, and publicly available information on the internet to identify vulnerable targets, and their respective security flaws. They can then use this information to pinpoint and prioritize high-value victims for future cyber attacks.

Sophistication

In addition to facilitating larger and more frequent cyber attacks, AI systems allow malicious actors to make them more convincing. As mentioned above, generative AI allows cybercriminals to create content quickly, and craft higher-quality content than they’d be capable of through their own manual efforts. 

Again, using phishing as an example, AI can refine phishing emails by eliminating grammatical errors and successfully mimicking distinct communication styles to make them increasingly indistinguishable from legitimate emails. Cybercriminals are also using AI to make their fraudulent communications more context-aware, referencing recent conversations or company events and incorporating data from a variety of sources, such as social media, to increase their perceived legitimacy.  

In the case of another common email attack vector, malware, AI can be used to create constantly evolving malware that can be attached to emails. This creates distinct versions of malware that are more difficult for anti-malware tools to stop.

More Difficult to Detect

This brings us to the third way in which AI tools enhance email threats: by making them harder to detect and helping them evade traditional security measures. 

AI-powered email threats can adapt to a healthcare organization’s cybersecurity measures, observing how its defenses, such as spam filters, flag and block malicious activity before automatically adjusting its behavior until it successfully bypasses them. 

After breaching a healthcare organization’s network, AI offers cybercriminals several new and enhanced capabilities that help them expedite the achievement of their malicious objectives, while making detection more difficult. 

These include:  

  • Content Scanning: AI tools can scan emails, both incoming and outgoing, in real-time to identify patterns pertaining to sensitive data. This allows malicious actors to identify target data in less time, making them more efficient and capable of extracting greater amounts of PHI.  
  • Context-Aware Data Extraction: similarly, AI can differentiate between regular text and sensitive data by recognizing specific formats (e.g., medical record numbers, insurance details, social security numbers, etc.)
  • Stealthy Data Exfiltration: analyzing and extracting PHI, login credentials, and other sensitive data from emails, while blending into normal network traffic. 
  • Distributed Exfiltration: instead of transferring large amounts of data at once, which is likely to trigger cyber defenses, hackers can use AI systems that slowly exfiltrate PHI in smaller payloads over time, better blending into regular network activity.

AI and Phishing

Phishing attacks involve malicious actors impersonating legitimate companies, or employees of a company, to trick victims into revealing sensitive patient data. Typical phishing attack campaigns rely on volume and trial and error. The more messages sent out by cybercriminals, the greater the chance of snaring a victim. Unfortunately, AI applications allow malicious actors to raise the efficacy of their phishing attacks in several ways.

First, AI allows scammers to craft higher-quality messaging. One of the limitations of phishing emails for healthcare companies is that they’re often easy to identify, since they are replete with mis-spelled words, poor grammar, and bad formatting. AI allows malicious actors to overcome these inadequacies and create more convincing messages that are more likely to fool healthcare employees.  

On a similar note, because healthcare is a critical industry, it’s consistently under threat from cybercriminals, which are also known as advanced persistent threats (APTs) or even cyber terrorists. By definition, such malicious actors often reside outside the US and English isn’t their first language. 

While, in the past, this may have been obvious, AI now provides machine translation capabilities, allowing cybercriminals to write messages in their native language, translating them to English, and refining them accordingly. Consequently,  scammers can craft emails with fewer tell-tale signs that healthcare organizations can train their employees to recognize. 

Additionally, as alluded to earlier, AI models can produce countless variations of phishing messages, significantly streamlining the trial-and-error aspect of phishing campaigns and allowing scammers to discover which messaging works best in far less time. 

Lastly, as well as enhancing the efficacy of conventional phishing attacks, AI helps improve spear phishing campaigns, a type of fraudulent email that targets a particular organization or employee who works there, as opposed to the indiscriminate, “scatter” approach of regular phishing.

While, traditionally, spear phishing requires a lot of research, AI can scrape data from a variety of sources, such as social media, forums, and other web pages, to automate a lot of this manual effort. This then allows cybercriminals to carry out the reconnaissance required for successful attacks faster and more effectively, increasing their frequency and, subsequently, their rate of success. 

AI and Business Email Compromise (BEC) Attacks

A business email compromise (BEC) is a type of targeted email attack that involves cybercriminals gaining access to or spoofing (i.e., copying) a legitimate email account to manipulate those who trust its owner into sharing sensitive data or executing fraudulent transactions. BEC attacks can be highly effective and, therefore, damaging to healthcare companies, but they typically require extensive research on the target organization to be carried out successfully. However, as with spear phishing, AI tools can drastically reduce the time it takes to identify potential targets and pinpoint possible attack vectors. 

For a start, cybercriminals can use AI to undertake reconnaissance tasks in a fraction of the time required previously. This includes identifying target companies and employees whose email addresses they’d like to compromise, generating lists of vendors that do business with said organization, and even researching specific individuals who are likely to interact with the target.  

Once a target is acquired, malicious actors can use AI tools in a number of terrifying ways to create more convincing messaging. By analyzing existing emails, AI solutions can quickly mimic the writing style of the owner of the compromised account, giving them a better chance of fooling the people they interact with. 

By the same token, they can use information gleaned from past emails to better contextualize fraudulent messages, i.e., adding particular information to make subsequent requests more plausible. For example, requesting data or login credentials in relation to a new project or recently launched initiative. 

Taking this a step further, cybercriminals could supplement a BEC attack with audio or video deepfakes created by AI to further convince victims of their legitimacy. Scammers can use audio deepfakes to leave voicemails or, if being especially brazen, conduct entire phone conversations to make their identity theft especially compelling.

Meanwhile, scammers can create video deepfakes that relay special instructions, such as transferring money, and attach them to emails. Believing the request came from a legitimate source, there’s a chance employees will comply with the request, boosting the efficacy of the BEC attack in the process. Furthermore, the less familiar an employee is with attacks of this kind, the more likely they are to fall victim to them.   

In short, AI models make it easier to carry out BEC attacks, which makes it all the more likely for cybercriminals to attempt them.

AI and Malware 

Malware refers to any kind of malicious software (hence, “mal(icous) (soft)ware”), such as viruses, Trojan horses, spyware, and ransomware, all of which can be enhanced by AI in several ways.

Most notable is AI’s effect on polymorphic malware, which has the ability to constantly evolve to bypass email security measures, making malicious attachments harder to detect. Malware, as with any piece of software, carries a unique digital signature that can be used to identify it and confirm its legitimacy. Anti-malware solutions traditionally use these digital signatures to flag instances of malware, but the signature of polymorphic malware changes as it evolves, allowing it to slip past email security measures. 

While polymorphic malware isn’t new, and previously relied on pre-programmed techniques such as encryption and code obfuscation, AI technology has made it far more sophisticated and difficult to detect. Now, AI-powered polymorphic malware can evolve in real-time, adapting in response to the defense measures it encounters. 

AI can also be used to discover Zero Day exploits, i.e., previously unknown security flaws, within email and network systems in less time. Malicious actors can employ AI-driven scanning tools to uncover vulnerabilities unknown to the software vendor at the time of its release and exploit them before they have the opportunity to release a patch.

How To Mitigate AI-Based Email Security Threats

While AI can be used to increase the effectiveness of email attacks, fortunately, the fundamentals of mitigating email threats remains the same; organizations must be more vigilant and diligent in following email security best practices and staying on top of the latest threats and tools used by cybercriminals. 

Let’s explore some of the key strategies for best mitigating AI-based email threats and better safeguarding the ePHI within your organization.

  • Educate Your Employees: ensure your employees are aware of how AI can enhance existing email threats. More importantly, demonstrate what this looks like in a real-world setting, showing examples of AI-generated phishing and BEC emails compared to traditional messages, what a convincing deepfake looks and sounds like, instances of polymorphic malware, and so on.

    Additionally, conduct regular simulations, involving AI-enhanced phishing, BEC attacks, etc., as part of your employees’ cyber threat awareness training. This gives them first-hand experience in identifying AI-driven email threats, so they’re not caught off-guard when they encounter them in real life. You can schedule these simulations to occur every few months, so your organization remains up-to-date on the latest email threat intelligence.
     
  • Enforce Strong Email Authentication Protocols: ensure that all incoming emails are authenticated using the following:
    • Sender Policy Framework (SPF): verifies that emails are sent from a domain’s authorized servers, helping to prevent email spoofing. 
    • DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM): preserves the integrity of the message’s contents by adding a cryptographic signature, mitigating compromise during transit, e.g., stealthy or distributed data exfiltration. 
    • Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (DMARC): enforces email authentication policies, helping organizations detect and block unauthorized emails that fail SPF or DKIM checks.

By verifying sender legitimacy, preventing email spoofing, and blocking fraudulent messages, these authentication protocols are key defenses against AI-enhanced phishing and business email compromise (BEC) attacks.

  • Access Control: while AI increases the risk of PHI exposure and login credential compromise, the level of access that a compromised or negligent employee has to patient data is another problem entirely. Subsequently, data breaches can be mitigated by ensuring that employees only have access to the minimum amount of data required for their job roles, i.e. role-based access control (RBAC). This reduces the potential impact of a given data breach, as it lowers the chances that a malicious actor can extract large amounts of data from a sole employee.
  • Implement Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): MFA provides an extra layer of protection by requiring users to verify their identity in multiple ways. So, even in the event that a cybercriminal gets ahold of an employee’s login credentials, they still won’t have sufficient means to prove they are who they claim to be.
  • Establish Incident Response and Recovery Plans: unfortunately, by making them more scalable, sophisticated, and harder to detect, AI increases the inevitability of security breaches. This makes it more crucial than ever to develop and maintain a comprehensive incident response plan that includes strategies for responding to AI-enhanced email security threats.

    By establishing clear protocols regarding detection, reporting, containment, and recovery, your organization can effectively mitigate, or at least minimize, the impact of email-based cyber attacks enhanced by AI. Your incident response plan should be a key aspect of your employee cyber awareness training, so your workforce knows what to do in the event of a security incident. 

Get Your Copy of LuxSci’s 2025 Email Cyber Threat Readiness Report

To learn more about healthcare’s ever-evolving email threat landscape and how to best ensure the security and privacy of your sensitive data, download your copy of LuxSci’s 2025 Email Cyber Threat Readiness Report. 

You’ll discover:

  • The latest threats to email security in 2025, including AI-based attacks
  • The most effective strategies for strengthening your email security posture
  • The upcoming changes to the HIPAA Security Rule and how it will impact healthcare organizations.

Grab your copy of the report here and start increasing your company’s email cyber threat readiness today.

HIPAA Compliant Hosting Requirements

Integrating HIPAA Compliant Email with EHR Systems

With digital healthcare here to stay, today’s providers, payers and suppliers are making increasing use of Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems for more connected care – and better health outcomes.

However, while EHR systems help increase the speed and efficiency at which care can be delivered to patients, healthcare companies must still consider the security of electronic protected health information (ePHI) throughout the process, especially when it comes to communicating sensitive data with patients, customers, and other organizations. 

Fortunately, integrating an EHR system with a HIPAA compliant email service provider (ESP), like LuxSci, offers a secure way to engage with your patients, while leveraging – and protecting – the wealth of information within EHR systems to personalize communications.

In this post, we discuss the benefits of integrating EHR systems with a HIPAA compliant email platform, as well as several use cases made possible by bringing these two powerful solutions together.

What is an EHR System?

An EHR system is a platform used by healthcare companies to store and manage their patient’s digital data, including PHI. In providing a digital repository for a patient’s medical history, including diagnoses, prescribed medication, lab results, and other data related to their healthcare journey, EHR systems enable organizations to access, update, and share patient data more quickly and efficiently.

As EHR systems have steadily replaced paper-based records, namely, after the HITECH Act was enacted in 2009, which incentivized EHR adoption, healthcare companies are better able to access and share PHI across different environments, greatly enhancing the coordination and cooperation of providers, payers, and suppliers.

Why Should You Integrate EHR Systems with a HIPAA Compliant Email Platform?

Let’s discuss the key benefits of integrating your EHR Systems with a HIPAA compliant email platform:

Secure ePHI Transmission

When the sensitive data in EHR systems is sent out to patients and other healthcare providers and organizations, it must be encrypted, as per HIPAA regulations to safeguard it from exposure. That way, even in the event of a security breach, it will be unreadable to malicious actors, preserving the privacy of patients and customers. In light of this, HIPAA compliant email delivery platforms emphasize strong encryption capabilities to ensure sensitive patient data is always encrypted during transmission.

LuxSci’s SecureLine encryption technology employs automatic, flexible encryption, which applies the appropriate encryption standard depending on the recipient’s email security posture and infrastructure, making sure emails are always encrypted in transit. 

HIPAA Compliant Patient Engagement Campaigns

Healthcare organizations are often reluctant to include the patient data stored in their EHR systems for fear of accidental exposure – and violating HIPAA regulations as a result. In addition to encryption, LuxSci provides other HIPAA-mandated security features, such as access control capabilities, to maintain precise control over who can access patient data, and audit logging, to track access to ePHI. Perhaps most importantly, LuxSci provides you with a Business Associate Agreement (BAA): a legal document, and key pre-requisite for HIPAA compliance, that clearly establishes its responsibilities in safeguarding the ePHI that originates in your EHR systems. 

With these security capabilities in place, healthcare providers can confidently incorporate patient and customer data from their EHR systems into their outreach efforts, using ePHI to personalize emails accordingly to maximize engagement and improve communications.

Automated Secure EHR-Driven Communication

EHR systems facilitate automated healthcare workflows, including for clinical or administrative events that require effective communications, such as appointment scheduling, a patient diagnosis, or test results becoming available, automatically triggering follow-up actions, including updating patient care plans, generating invoices, sending outbound emails. In addition to facilitating consistency and coordination between the various companies involved in a patient’s healthcare journey, it reduces the amount of required manual work, lowering each organization’s administrative overhead. 

LuxSci’s suite of HIPAA compliant, secure communications tools aid in the enhanced efficiency and productivity of EHR systems by streamlining digital communication across multiple channels. LuxSci Secure High Volume Email can automatically send personalized, HIPAA-compliant messages triggered by EHR events. Similarly, LuxSci Secure Text allows companies to notify patients via SMS, as per the situation or patient preferences. LuxSci’s Secure Forms, meanwhile, simplifies onboarding and consent processes by pre-filling web forms with EHR data, eliminating the need for manual input paperwork and manual entry.

Common Email and EHR Integration Use Cases

Integrating your EHR system with a HIPAA compliant email solution, like LuxSci, opens the door for a wide variety of enhanced patient engagement opportunities. Let’s explore some of the most valuable use cases for EHR integration below.

  • Appointment Confirmations and Reminders: companies can create EHR-driven workflows that send out an email confirmation as soon as an appointment is scheduled. Similarly, automated email reminders and text messages can be scheduled to go out a set number of days before the patient’s appointment, lowering the chance of a no-show.
  • Pre-Visit Instructions: when appropriate, tailored preparation instructions can be scheduled to be sent out by email before the appointment, according to the nature of the appointment and other relevant patient data.
  • Follow-Up Care Guidance: by the same token, an EHR event can be set up to send out personalized after-care advice, sourced from care plans or notes stored in the EHR system.
  • Test Results: an email or text can be triggered as soon as a patient’s lab results become available; this could be in the form of an alert to contact their provider to collect the results or a summary alongside a secure link to a portal for full access.
  • Preventive Screening Reminders: EHR data can be used to identify patients due for screenings, immunizations, or chronic care follow-ups.
  • Preventative Care: sending patients advice and recommendations relevant to their condition, based on ePHI stored in their healthcare provider’s EHR.
  • Early Detection Self-Assessments: EHR-driven emails can be used to send patients personalized risk assessments designed to detect early warning signs of conditions such as diabetes or cancer, based on ePHI like age, lifestyle factors, or family history.
  • Feedback Collection: healthcare organizations can schedule feedback to be collected from patients, e.g., surveys, questionnaires, etc, to measure patient satisfaction and identify key areas of improvement.  

Discover the Power of EHR Integration with LuxSci

Integrating HIPAA compliant communications solutions like LuxSci with EHR systems empowers healthcare companies to craft more timely, efficient and consistent digital healthcare communications and workflows. This personalized approach to patient and customer engagement enables efficient, effective and above all, compliant communications strategies that improve individual engagement, providing better health outcomes and a higher quality of life.

Want to learn more? Contact us today!