We recently rolled out new email reporting features, taking deliverability depth and analysis to new levels. If you’re a current LuxSci customer and haven’t checked them out, now’s the time. If you’re new to LuxSci, learn more below, and don’t hesitate to reach out for more info – or a demo.
LuxSci secure communications solutions have always featured rich reporting on email deliverability, including volumes and percentages for emails:
in queue
opened
clicked
failed
secured
With our latest release, we made these powerful statistics easier to consume and analyze with an improved user interface for more efficiency and greater ease-of-use. Users can simply select the type of report they’d like and customize it using a range of filtering selections. This is great for diving deeper into your email performance to make adjustments on-the-fly, and to spot trends or opportunities for better engagement that you may have missed before.
New UI – Email Deliverability Statistics
Get more granular, ID trends in real time with Split Reporting
As part of this release, we are pleased to introduce our Split Reporting feature, which empowers users to drill down on email deliverability statistics across a range of parameters, including:
subject
from address
recipient domains
marketing ID or campaign
custom field
For example, users can analyze email deliverability statistics by subject to determine which ones are performing best, by use case to track results by campaign, or to track performance by recipient email domains. With split reporting, users also can analyze email volumes across queued, delivered, opened, failed and clicked parameters, and determine click-through rates (CTR) to measure effectiveness and ROI of campaigns.
New Feature Example – Split Reporting by Recipient Domain
If you’d like to learn more, reach out and connect with us today!
Secure email is not the same as “email with encryption turned on.” True secure email requires enforced automated encryption, a signed BAA, access controls, audit logs, and documented processes — not just a feature toggle.
Standard email platforms like Gmail and Microsoft 365 rely on opportunistic TLS by default, which can silently fall back to unencrypted delivery if the recipient’s server doesn’t support encryption.
HIPAA’s encryption safe harbor means a misdirected but properly encrypted email is a non-event. The same email sent unencrypted is a presumed breach unless a risk assessment shows otherwise.
A signed Business Associate Agreement (BAA) with your email provider is non-negotiable — without one, you cannot legally send or store PHI through that provider.
The proposed 2025 HIPAA Security Rule update, planned for finalization in 2027, would make encryption of ePHI in transit and at rest a mandatory requirement rather than “addressable,” raising the stakes for organizations still relying on opportunistic TLS.
Best for: Healthcare IT Directors, Compliance Officers, Privacy Officers, and Marketing Managers at provider, payer, and supplier organizations that handle protected health information (PHI).
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)
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
Feature
Standard Email
Secure Email (HIPAA-Compliant)
Encryption in Transit
Opportunistic TLS — attempted but not enforced
Enforced TLS — connection fails if encryption unavailable, can include delivery via secure portal option
Encryption at Rest
Not guaranteed; provider-dependent
Required — server-side encryption of stored messages
End-to-End Encryption
Not available
Supported via S/MIME and/or PGP
Digital Signatures
Not available
Included — verifies sender identity and message integrity
Authentication (SPF / DKIM / DMARC)
Optional, rarely enforced
Required — spoofing and impersonation protection
Business Associate Agreement (BAA)
Not provided on standard plans
Required — must be signed before sending PHI
Audit Logs
Basic or none
Full audit trail — required under HIPAA Security Rule
Access Controls
Basic password only
Role-based access, MFA, admin controls
Misdirected Email
Reportable HIPAA breach
Non-reportable if properly encrypted (safe harbor)
HIPAA Compliant by Default
No
Yes
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.
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:
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.
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.
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.
Most healthcare organizations view email as a utility, a necessary tool for sending messages between staff, communicating with patients, sending out newsletters, connecting workflows, and so on. Historically, IT teams focused on keeping it running, security teams worried about phishing, and compliance teams made sure sensitive emails were encrypted.
Today, however, that view is rapidly becoming outdated.
Email has evolved into one of healthcare’s most critical digital infrastructure components, and also one of it’s biggest security threats. It’s a core channel for patient engagement, care coordination, revenue cycle operations, digital marketing, remote monitoring, and increasingly, AI-powered communications. The organizations that recognize this shift are building communications platforms designed for security, performance, automation, and growth. With the new HIPAA Security Rule requiring email encryption on the horizon, those companies that don’t may find themselves constrained by systems that were never intended to support modern healthcare.
Email Is No Longer Just a Messaging Tool
Healthcare organizations now depend on email to support dozens of mission-critical workflows every day.
Patients receive appointment reminders, registration instructions, imaging results, billing notifications, Explanation of Benefits (EOBs), prescription updates, preventive care reminders, patient education, and post-discharge follow-up. Marketing teams deliver personalized wellness campaigns and service line promotions. Clinical systems generate transactional notifications. Revenue cycle teams rely on secure digital communications to accelerate payments and reduce paper costs.
For many organizations, mission-critical patient communications flow through email every month.
When viewed collectively, email is more than a simple communications channel. It has become operational infrastructure with high levels of security needed and increasing compliance requirements.
The Stakes Continue to Rise
As healthcare becomes more digital, every communication carries greater business and clinical importance.
A delayed billing email may postpone payment. A failed appointment reminder can increase no-show rates. An undelivered care management message may impact patient outcomes. A misconfigured security policy can expose protected health information (PHI). Poor deliverability can undermine expensive patient engagement initiatives before they ever reach the inbox.
These are no longer isolated IT issues. Email can affect revenue, patient satisfaction, operational efficiency, compliance, and organizational reputation.
Today’s healthcare leaders require email infrastructure to provide the same reliability and visibility they demand from electronic health records, identity management systems, and other core infrastructure.
AI Is Raising the Bar Even Higher
There’s little doubt that artificial intelligence (AI) promises to transform patient communications.
Healthcare organizations everywhere are exploring AI-generated patient education, personalized outreach, intelligent scheduling, multilingual communications, and automated follow-up programs.
But AI also increases the importance of the underlying communications infrastructure.
Generating more personalized emails means little if organizations cannot:
Automatically protect PHI.
Apply consistent security policies.
Maintain complete audit trails.
Deliver messages reliably.
Integrate with EHRs, RCM and CRM platforms, and customer data platforms.
Demonstrate compliance during an audits.
In many ways, AI amplifies both the opportunities and the risks. Your email platform can help determine whether AI initiatives succeed or create new compliance and operational challenges.
Infrastructure Matters More Than Features
Healthcare buyers have traditionally evaluated email platforms based on individual features such as encryption, spam filtering, or secure portals.
Those capabilities remain important, but they no longer tell the whole story.
Today’s healthcare organizations should be evaluating communications platforms the same way they evaluate any mission-critical infrastructure.
Questions increasingly include:
Can it support both transactional and marketing communications?
Does it automatically enforce security policies without relying on user decisions?
Can it integrate with EHRs, CRM systems, CDPs, and business applications?
Will it scale during peak communication periods?
Does it provide detailed audit logging and reporting?
Can it adapt as regulatory expectations evolve?
Does it maintain high deliverability at enterprise scale?
Does it support single-tenant dedicated infrastructure for high performance and increased security?
These infrastructure characteristics often determine long-term success far more than any single feature comparison.
Email and the Future Of Secure Healthcare Communications
Healthcare is steadily moving toward a world where nearly every patient interaction is digital, personalized, and data-driven.
Healthcare leaders often ask whether they need a more secure email solution. That may be the wrong question.
The better question is whether their communications infrastructure is ready for where healthcare is headed over the next decade.
If you want talk about the future of your healthcare email infrastructure, reach out today and schedule a 30-minute assessment call with our experts.
Secure email sending is a priority for organizations that communicate sensitive data externally. One of the most common ways to send secure emails is with SMTP TLS. TLS stands for Transport Layer Security and is the successor of SSL (Secure Socket Layer). TLS is one of the standard ways that computers on the internet transmit information over an encrypted channel. In general, when one computer connects to another computer and uses TLS, the following happens:
Computer A connects to Computer B (no security)
Computer B says “Hello” (no security)
Computer A says, “Let’s talk securely over TLS” (no security)
Computers A and B agree on how to do this (secure)
The rest of the conversation is encrypted (secure)
In particular:
The conversation is encrypted
Computer A can verify the identity of Computer B (by examining its SSL certificate, which is required for this dialog)
The conversation cannot be eavesdropped upon (without Computer A knowing)
A third party cannot modify the conversation
Third parties cannot inject other information into the conversation.
TLS and SSL help make the internet a more secure place. One popular way to use TLS is to secure SMTP to protect the transmission of email messages between servers.
Secure SMTP Email Delivery with TLS
The mechanism and language by which one email server transmits email messages to another email server is called Simple Mail Transport Protocol, or SMTP. For a long time, email servers have had the option of using TLS to transparently encrypt the message transmission from one server to another.
When available, using TLS with SMTP ensures the message contents are secured during transmission between the servers. Unfortunately, not all servers support TLS! Many email providers, especially free or public ones, have historically not supported TLS. Thankfully, the trend is shifting. LuxSci found that most providers now support TLS- approximately 85% of domains tested as of July 2022.
Using TLS requires that the server administrators:
purchase SSL certificates
configure the email servers to use them (and keep these configurations updated)
allocate additional computational resources on the email servers involved.
For TLS transmission to be used, the destination email server must offer support for TLS, and the sending computer or server must be configured to use TLS connections when possible.
The sending computer or server could be configured for:
No TLS: never use it.
Opportunistic TLS: use it if available; if not, send it insecurely.
Forced TLS: use TLS or do not deliver the email at all.
How Secure is Email Delivery over SMTP TLS?
TLS protects the transmission of the email message contents. It does nothing to protect the security of the message before it is sent or after it arrives at its destination. For that, other encryption mechanisms may be used, such as PGP, S/MIME, or storage in a secure portal.
For sending sensitive information to customers, transmission security is the minimum standard for compliance with healthcare and financial regulations. TLS is appropriate to meet most compliance requirements and offers an excellent alternative to more robust and less user-friendly encryption methods (like PGP and S/MIME).
There are different versions of TLS- 1.0 and 1.1 use older ciphers and are not as secure, while TLS 1.2 and 1.3 use newer ciphers and are more secure. When an email is sent, the level of TLS used is as secure as can be negotiated between the sending and receiving servers. If they both support strong encryption (like AES 256), then that will be used. If not, a weaker grade of encryption may be used. The sending and receiving servers can choose the types of encryption they will support. If there is no overlap in what they support, then TLS will fail (this is rare).
What About Replies to Secure Messages?
Let’s say you send a message to someone that is securely delivered to their inbox over TLS. Then, that person replies to you. Will that reply be secure? This may be important if you are communicating sensitive information. The reply will use TLS only if:
The recipient’s servers support TLS for outbound email (there is no way to test this externally).
The mail servers (where the “From” or “Reply” email address is hosted) support TLS for inbound email.
Both servers support overlapping TLS ciphers and protocols and can agree on a mutually acceptable means of encryption.
Unless familiar with the providers in question, it cannot be assumed that replies will use TLS. So, what should you do? Ultimately, it depends on what compliance standards you must meet, the level of risk you are willing to accept, and the types of communications you send. There are two general approaches to this question:
Conservative. If replies must be secure in all cases, assuming TLS will be used is unreasonable. In this case, a more secure method should be used to encrypt the messages in transit and store them upon arrival. The recipient must log in to a secure portal to view the message and reply securely. Alternatively, PGP or S/MIME could be used for additional security.
Aggressive. In some compliance situations like HIPAA, healthcare providers must ensure that ePHI is sent securely to patients. However, patients are not beholden to HIPAA and can send their information insecurely to anyone they want. If the patient’s reply is insecure, that could be okay. For these reasons, and because using TLS for email security is so easy, many do not worry about the security of email replies. However, this should be a risk factor you consider in an internal security audit. Consider nuanced policies that allow you to send less sensitive messages with TLS while sending more sensitive messages with higher security.
What are the Weaknesses of SMTP TLS?
As discussed, SMTP TLS has been around for a long time and has recently seen a great deal of adoption. However, it has some deficiencies compared to other types of email security:
There is no mandatory support for TLS in the email system.
A receiver’s support of the SMTP TLS option can be trivially removed by an active man-in-the-middle because TLS certificates are not actively verified.
Encryption is not used if any aspect of the TLS negotiation is undecipherable/garbled. It is very easy for a man-in-the-middle to inject garbage into the TLS handshake (which is done in clear text) and have the connection downgraded to plain text (opportunistic TLS) or have the connection fail (forced TLS).
Even when SMTP TLS is offered and accepted, the certificate presented during the TLS handshake is usually not checked to see if it is for the expected domain and unexpired. Most MTAs offer self-signed certificates as a pro forma. Thus, in many cases, one has an encrypted channel to an unauthenticated MTA, which can only prevent passive eavesdropping.
The Latest Updates to Secure SMTP TLS
Some solutions help remedy these issues—for example, SMTP Strict Transport Security. SMTP STS enables recipient servers to publish information about their SMTP TLS support in their DNS. This prevents man-in-the-middle downgrades to plain text delivery, ensures more robust TLS protocols are used, and can enable certificate validation.
In addition, users can adopt TLS 1.3. NIST recommends that government agencies develop migration plans to support TLS 1.3 by January 1, 2024. LuxSci supports both SMTP MTA-STS and TLS 1.3.
How Secure SMTP TLS Email Works with LuxSci
Inbound TLS
LuxSci’s inbound email servers support TLS for encrypted inbound email delivery from any sending email provider that also supports that. For selected organizations, LuxSci also locks down its servers to only accept email from them if delivered over TLS.
Outbound Opportunistic TLS
LuxSci’s outbound email servers will always use TLS with any server that claims to support it and with whom we can talk TLS v1.0+ using a strong cipher. The message will not be sent securely if the TLS connection to such a server fails (due to misconfiguration or no security protocols in common). Outbound opportunistic TLS encryption is automatic for all LuxSci customers, even those without SecureLine.
Forced TLS
When Forced TLS is enabled, the message is either dropped or sent with an alternate form of encryption if the recipient’s server does not support TLS. This ensures that messages will never be sent insecurely. Forced TLS is also in place for all LuxSci customers sending to banks and organizations that have requested that we globally enforce TLS to their servers.
Support for strong encryption
LuxSci’s servers will use the strongest encryption supported by the recipient’s email server. LuxSci servers will never employ an encryption cipher that uses less than 128 bits (they will fail to deliver rather than deliver via an excessively weak encryption cipher), and they will never use SSL v2 or SSL v3.
Does LuxSci Have Any Other Special TLS Features?
When using LuxSci SecureLine for outbound email encryption:
SMTP MTA STS: LuxSci’s domains support SMTP MTA STS, and LuxSci’s SecureLine encryption system leverages STS information about recipient domains to improve connection security.
Try TLS: Account administrators can have secure messages “try TLS first” and deliver that way. If TLS is unavailable, the messages would fall back and use more secure options likePGP, S/MIME, or Escrow. Email security iseasy, seamless, and automatic when communicating internally or with others who support TLS.
TLS Exclusive: This is a special LuxSci-exclusive TLS sending feature. TLS Exclusive is just like Forced TLS, except that messages that can’t connect over TLS are just dropped. This is ideal for low-importance emails that must still be compliant, like email marketing messages in healthcare. In such cases, the ease of use of TLS is more important than receiving the message.
TLS Only Forwarding: Account administrators can restrict any server-side email forwarding settings in their accounts from allowing forwarding to any email addresses that do not support TLS for email delivery.
Encryption Escalation: Often, TLS is suitable for most messages, but some messages need to be encrypted using something stronger. LuxSci allows users to escalate the encryption from TLS to Escrow with a click (in WebMail) or by entering particular text in the subject line (for messages sent from email programs like Outlook).
Domain Monitoring: When TLS delivery is enabled for SecureLine accounts, messages will never be insecurely sent to domains that purport to be TLS-enabled, i.e., TLS delivery is enforced and no longer “opportunistic.” The system monitors these domains and updates their TLS-compliance status daily.
Double Encryption: Messages sent using SecureLine and PGP or S/MIME will still use Opportunistic TLS whenever possible for message delivery. In these cases, messages are often “double encrypted.” First, they are encrypted with PGP or S/MIME and may be encrypted again during transport using TLS.
No Weak TLS: Unlike many organizations, LuxSci’s TLS support for SMTP and other servers only supports those protocol levels (e.g., TLS v1.0+) and ciphers recommended by NIST for government communications and which are required for HIPAA. So, all communications with LuxSci servers will be over a compliant implementation of TLS.
For customers who can use TLS to meet security or compliance requirements, it enables seamless security and “use of email as usual.” SecureLine with Forced TLS enables clients to take advantage of this level of security whenever possible while automatically falling back to other methods when TLS is unavailable.
Of course, using Forced TLS as the sole method of encryption is optional; if your compliance needs are more substantial, you can turn off TLS-Only delivery or restrict it so that it is used only with specific recipients.
If your email use cases are complicated, LuxSci’s flexibility enables the secure sending of emails to any recipient, regardless of their email service provider’s support for TLS. Contact the LuxSci sales team to learn more about our secure SMTP TLS email sending.
LuxSci, a leader in secure healthcare communications and HIPAA compliant email, is pleased to announce the appointment of Angel Marie Mazariegos as the company’s new Head of Finance. With over 25 years of experience in financial management, accounting, and human resources, Angel will play a central role in advancing LuxSci’s operational excellence and supporting the company’s rapid growth in 2026 and beyond.
Angel brings a wealth of expertise to LuxSci, having held senior leadership positions at organizations focused on financial services, language and access services for healthcare, and human resources. In these roles, Angel has led multi-department Finance and HR teams, spearheading critical initiatives, including ERP implementations, streamlined employee onboarding, and financial process optimization.
In her role at LuxSci, Angel will oversee all aspects of the company’s finance operations, including budgeting, forecasting and reporting. Additionally, Angel will manage the company’s HR function, ensuring that LuxSci continues to foster a strong, people-driven culture based on its Secure, Trust, Responsible and Smart company values.
“Angel’s blend of financial and HR leadership makes her an invaluable addition to the LuxSci executive team and a real asset for our people,” said Mark Leonard, CEO of LuxSci. “We look forward to working with Angel to build the high-performing teams that will be critical to our future growth and serving the evolving needs of our customers.”
Angel holds dual MBA degrees in Accounting and Human Resource Management from Cappella University, as well as dual BS degrees in Business Administration (Accounting and CIS Business Systems) from California State University, Los Angeles.
“I am honored to join the LuxSci team at such an exciting time for the company,” said Mazariegos. “I look forward to working with the team and helping build on LuxSci’s reputation for excellence and reliability in secure healthcare communications.”
It’s hard to understate the benefits of using protected health information (PHI) in your patient engagement efforts. By effectively leveraging PHI, you can create highly-targeted and personalized email marketing campaigns, which have greater potential to connect with your patients and customers – and drive your desired outcomes.
However, before diving in, it’s essential to be aware of HIPAA’s complex compliance requirements and how they govern healthcare organizations’ marketing communications. Chief among these considerations is the concept of PHI identifiers and the role they play in classifying and protecting sensitive patient data. With this in mind, let’s explore HIPAA’s 18 PHI identifiers
What is a PHI Identifier?
Before we detail the 18 different PHI identifiers, it’s crucial to first distinguish between what counts as PHI and what, in reality, is personally identifiable information (PII).
PHI (as well as its digital equivalent or electronic protected health information (ePHI)), is defined as “individually identifiable protected health information” and specifically refers to three classes of data:
An individual’s past, present, or future physical or mental health or condition.
The past, present, or future provisioning of health care to an individual.
The past, present, or future payment-related information for the provisioning of health care to an individual.
In short, for an individual’s PII to be classed as protected health information it must be related to a health condition, their healthcare provision, or the payment of that provision. So, a patient’s email address in isolation, for example, isn’t necessarily PHI. However when combined with any information about their healthcare – such as in a patient engagement email campaign – it would constitute PHI.
Put another way, as HIPAA is designed to enforce standards and best practices in the healthcare industry, it’s concerned with protecting health-related information. While the protection of general PII is of the utmost importance, that’s a significantly larger remit – and, consequently, one that’s shared by a variety of data privacy regulations covering different industries and regions (PCI-DSS, GDPR, etc.).
What are the 18 PHI Identifiers?
With the above background in mind, we now have a clearer understanding of what is classed as PHI and, as a result, what data needs to be de-identified. The HIPAA Privacy Rule provides two methods for the de-identification of PHI: the Expert Determination and Safe Harbour methods.
Expert Determination requires a statistical or scientific expert to assess the PHI and conclude that the risk of it being able to identify a particular patient is very low. Safe Harbour, meanwhile, involves systematically removing or securing specific data types to mitigate the risk of patient identification. It’s from the Safe Harbour method that we get the following 18 PHI identifiers:
Patient Names
Geographical Elements: street address, city, and all other subdivisions lower than the state.
Dates Related to Patient’s ID or Health History: eD.O.B, D.O.D, admission and discharge dates, etc.
Telephone Numbers
Fax Numbers
Email Addresses
Social Security Numbers
Medical Record Numbers
Health Insurance Beneficiary Numbers
Account Numbers
Certificate or License Numbers: as these can confirm an individual’s professional qualifications or credentials, and when combined with PHI, are exploitable by malicious actors.
Vehicle Identifiers: i.e., license plate and serial numbers
Device Identifiers and Serial Numbers: those belonging to smartphones, tablets, or medical devices, because they communicate with healthcare companies during provision and can be linked back to the patient
Digital Identifiers: namely website addresses used by healthcare companies that patients may visit (for healthcare education, event registration, etc.)
Internet Protocol (IP) Addresses: the digital location from where a patient’s device accesses the internet; this can be used to acquire subsequent PHI
Biometric Identifiers: e.g., fingerprints, voice samples, etc.
Full Face Photographs: in additional to other comparable images
Other Unique Numbers, Codes, or Characteristics: not covered by the prior 17 categories
As illustrated by the above list, HIPAA’s list of PHI identifiers is comprehensive, covering all aspects of an individual’s identity and digital footprint. In light of this, when handling patient data it’s crucial to use platforms and digital solutions that have been designed with the secure transmission and storage of PHI in mind.
Harness the Benefits of Using PHI for Better Patient Engagement
As the most experienced provider of HIPAA-compliant communications, LuxSci specializes in secure email, text, marketing and forms for healthcare providers, payers and suppliers. LuxSci’s Secure Healthcare Communications suite offers flexible encryption, customizable security policies, and automated features to ensure HIPAA compliance and the protection of PHI data.
Interested in discovering how LuxSci’s solutions can help you securely engage with your patients and customers?
HIPAA compliant email archive migration is the secure transfer of stored healthcare email communications from one system to another while maintaining encryption, audit trails, and regulatory compliance throughout the data movement process. Healthcare organizations undergo email archive migration when changing service providers, upgrading systems, or consolidating multiple email platforms into unified solutions. The migration process requires careful planning to ensure that years of patient communications remain protected during transfer and that all regulatory requirements are met without compromising data integrity or accessibility.
Data Integrity Preservation During System Transitions
Email archive migration projects must maintain complete fidelity of original message content, metadata, and attachment files throughout the transfer process. Hash verification algorithms create digital fingerprints of each archived email before migration begins, enabling healthcare organizations to confirm that every message transfers without corruption or alteration. Checksum validation procedures verify that attachment files, embedded images, and formatting elements remain intact during the migration process, preventing data loss that could compromise patient care or legal compliance.
Timestamp preservation ensures that original email dates, delivery confirmations, and read receipts transfer accurately to new archive systems. These temporal markers provide critical evidence for legal proceedings, regulatory audits, and clinical timeline reconstruction activities. Migration procedures must maintain original sender and recipient information, including any forwarding history or reply chains that document patient communication patterns over time.
Metadata retention includes preserving security classifications, retention tags, and compliance markers applied to archived emails in source systems. Custom fields, user-defined categories, and workflow status indicators must transfer to new archive platforms to maintain organizational knowledge and search capabilities. Healthcare organizations conducting HIPAA compliant email archive migration recognize that losing metadata can render archived communications significantly less valuable for clinical reference and legal discovery purposes.
Version control mechanisms track any changes made to archived emails during migration processes, creating audit trails that demonstrate data handling compliance. Backup verification confirms that original archive copies remain available throughout migration activities, providing recovery options if transfer processes encounter unexpected issues. Quality assurance testing validates that migrated archives maintain the same search functionality, access controls, and reporting capabilities as original systems.
Encryption protocols must protect archived patient communications during every phase of the migration process, from extraction through transport to final storage in destination systems. Source system encryption keys require careful management to ensure that archived emails can be decrypted for migration while preventing unauthorized access during the transfer process. Secure transfer channels using encrypted connections prevent interception of patient communications while data moves between systems.
Access control continuity ensures that only authorized personnel can view or handle archived patient communications during migration activities. Migration teams need appropriate background checks, HIPAA training, and signed confidentiality agreements before accessing healthcare email archives. Role-based permissions should limit migration staff access to only the specific archive segments they need to transfer, preventing unnecessary exposure of patient information.
Chain of custody documentation tracks every individual who handles archived patient communications during migration processes. Detailed logs record who accessed which archive segments, when transfers occurred, and what verification procedures were completed at each migration phase. These records provide evidence of proper handling for regulatory audits and demonstrate that archived patient communications remained protected throughout system transitions.
Temporary storage security protects archived emails that may require intermediate processing before final import into destination systems. Any temporary storage locations must maintain the same encryption standards as source and destination systems, with access controls preventing unauthorized viewing of patient information. Those managing HIPAA compliant email archive migration must ensure that temporary storage systems are properly secured and that all temporary copies are securely deleted after successful migration completion.
Compliance Verification and Regulatory Requirements
Business associate agreements must address archive migration activities when third-party vendors assist with data transfer processes. These agreements should specify security measures that migration vendors will maintain, audit requirements for transfer activities, and liability allocation when archive handling occurs outside healthcare organizations. Vendor assessment procedures verify that migration service providers have appropriate security certifications and experience with healthcare data handling requirements.
Audit trail preservation ensures that migration activities create comprehensive records of all actions taken with archived patient communications. Migration logs should capture extraction activities, transfer verification, import procedures, and final validation steps that confirm successful archive migration. These audit records become part of the archived email documentation that healthcare organizations must maintain for regulatory compliance periods.
Risk assessment procedures identify potential security vulnerabilities and compliance challenges specific to archive migration projects. Organizations planning HIPAA compliant email archive migration should evaluate encryption strength during transfers, access control effectiveness for migration teams, and backup procedures that protect against data loss during system transitions. Documentation of risk assessments provides evidence of due diligence and guides security measure implementation throughout migration projects.
Retention requirement compliance ensures that migrated archives maintain appropriate preservation periods and deletion schedules required by healthcare regulations. Migration procedures must transfer retention metadata that controls when archived emails can be deleted, ensuring that legal hold requirements and regulatory preservation mandates continue in destination systems. Healthcare organizations must verify that new archive platforms can enforce the same retention policies as previous systems without compromising compliance obligations.
Resource Management for HIPAA Compliant Email Archive Migration
Timeline development for archive migration projects must account for the volume of archived communications, system complexity, and validation requirements that ensure complete data transfer. Large healthcare organizations with decades of archived emails may require months of migration activity, while smaller practices might complete transfers in weeks. Project schedules should include buffer time for addressing unexpected technical issues and conducting thorough validation testing before decommissioning source systems.
Stakeholder coordination brings together clinical staff, IT personnel, compliance officers, and vendor representatives who must collaborate throughout migration processes. Communication plans ensure that all stakeholders understand their roles, receive timely updates about migration progress, and can provide input when decisions affect archived email accessibility or functionality. Change management procedures help staff adapt to new archive systems while maintaining productivity during transition periods.
Resource allocation includes dedicating sufficient technical personnel, computing infrastructure, and network bandwidth to support archive migration activities without disrupting patient care operations. Migration projects often require additional server capacity, enhanced network connections, and specialized software tools that can handle large volumes of archived healthcare communications. Budget planning should account for potential cost overruns when migration projects encounter unexpected complexity or require additional security measures.
Testing procedures validate that migrated archives function correctly before decommissioning source systems and declaring migration projects complete. Pilot migrations with limited archive segments help identify potential issues before processing entire email repositories. Successful HIPAA compliant email archive migration depends on user acceptance testing that confirms healthcare staff can search, access, and retrieve archived patient communications with the same ease and functionality as previous systems.
Post-Migration Validation and System Optimization
Search functionality verification ensures that migrated archives maintain the same discovery capabilities as source systems, enabling healthcare staff to locate patient communications efficiently. Index rebuilding activities may be necessary to restore full-text search capabilities across migrated archives, particularly when moving between different email platform technologies. Advanced search features, including date ranges, sender filtering, and content-based queries, must function properly to support clinical workflow and legal discovery activities.
Performance optimization addresses potential speed differences between source and destination archive systems that could affect user productivity. Database tuning, index optimization, and caching configuration help ensure that archived email retrieval operates at acceptable speeds for clinical staff accessing patient communication histories. Capacity planning confirms that destination systems can handle current archive volumes while accommodating future email storage growth.
User training programs prepare healthcare staff to use new archive systems effectively while maintaining compliance with patient privacy requirements. Training should cover any interface changes, new search capabilities, and modified procedures for accessing archived patient communications. Documentation updates ensure that policy manuals, standard operating procedures, and compliance guides reflect changes in archive access procedures resulting from migration activities.
Backup verification confirms that migrated archives are properly included in disaster recovery procedures and data protection protocols. Backup testing validates that archived patient communications can be restored successfully if destination systems experience failures or security incidents. Healthcare organizations completing HIPAA compliant email archive migration must verify that their backup procedures provide the same level of protection for migrated archives as they maintained for original archived communications