conducting-social-engineering-penetration-test
Design and execute a social engineering penetration test including phishing, vishing, smishing, and physical pretexting campaigns to measure human security resilience and identify training gaps.
Best use case
conducting-social-engineering-penetration-test is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Design and execute a social engineering penetration test including phishing, vishing, smishing, and physical pretexting campaigns to measure human security resilience and identify training gaps.
Teams using conducting-social-engineering-penetration-test should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/conducting-social-engineering-penetration-test/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How conducting-social-engineering-penetration-test Compares
| Feature / Agent | conducting-social-engineering-penetration-test | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Design and execute a social engineering penetration test including phishing, vishing, smishing, and physical pretexting campaigns to measure human security resilience and identify training gaps.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
Related Guides
SKILL.md Source
# Conducting Social Engineering Penetration Test
## Overview
Social engineering penetration testing assesses an organization's human attack surface through controlled simulation of real-world deception techniques. According to Verizon DBIR 2024, the human element is involved in approximately 68% of all breaches, with phishing remaining the dominant initial access vector. This skill covers phishing, vishing (voice phishing), smishing (SMS phishing), and physical pretexting campaigns using tools like GoPhish, the Social Engineer Toolkit (SET), and Evilginx.
## When to Use
- When conducting security assessments that involve conducting social engineering penetration test
- When following incident response procedures for related security events
- When performing scheduled security testing or auditing activities
- When validating security controls through hands-on testing
## Prerequisites
- Written authorization from senior management (CISO/CTO)
- Legal review confirming compliance with local laws (CFAA, GDPR, etc.)
- Defined scope: target employee groups, attack types, exclusions
- GoPhish server, domain for phishing infrastructure, VPS
- OSINT tools: Maltego, theHarvester, LinkedIn scraping tools
- Coordination with HR and Legal for employee notification post-test
## Phase 1 — OSINT and Target Profiling
### Employee Reconnaissance
```bash
# Email harvesting
theHarvester -d targetcorp.com -b all -l 500 -f harvester_results
# LinkedIn OSINT (manual + tools)
# Gather: names, roles, departments, email format
# Identify: new hires, IT admins, finance team, executives
# Email format discovery
# Check: first.last@, flast@, firstl@
# Verify with: hunter.io, phonebook.cz, email-checker.net
# Social media OSINT
# Twitter/X: employees posting about work tools/frustrations
# Facebook: corporate event photos, office layout
# GitHub: employee repos with corporate email addresses
# Domain intelligence
dig targetcorp.com MX +short
dig targetcorp.com TXT +short
# Check for SPF, DKIM, DMARC records
# Weak DMARC = easier email spoofing
# Check breach databases (authorized)
# HaveIBeenPwned API for corporate emails
# Identify employees with compromised credentials
```
### Target Selection Matrix
| Group | Count | Pretext | Attack Vector |
|-------|-------|---------|--------------|
| Finance | 15 | Invoice approval | Phishing (credential harvest) |
| IT Help Desk | 8 | Password reset | Vishing |
| Executives | 5 | Board meeting update | Spear phishing |
| New Hires (< 90 days) | 12 | HR onboarding form | Phishing (payload) |
| All Employees | 200 | IT security update | Broad phishing |
## Phase 2 — Phishing Campaign
### Infrastructure Setup
```bash
# Register lookalike domain
# targetcorp.com -> targetc0rp.com, targetcorp-secure.com, targetcorp.net
# Set up GoPhish server
sudo apt install gophish
# Edit config.json for admin and phishing server ports
gophish
# Configure sending profile in GoPhish
# SMTP server: mail.attackdomain.com
# From: it-security@targetcorp-secure.com
# Headers: proper DKIM/SPF for attack domain
# Create landing page (credential harvesting)
# Clone legitimate login page (Office 365, Okta, etc.)
# GoPhish: Import Site -> https://login.microsoftonline.com
# Enable: Capture Credentials, Capture Passwords
# Redirect to real site after capture
# Set up Evilginx for MFA bypass (authorized testing only)
evilginx2
: config domain attackdomain.com
: config ipv4 <server_ip>
: phishlets hostname o365 login.targetcorp-secure.com
: phishlets enable o365
: lures create o365
: lures get-url 0
```
### GoPhish Campaign Configuration
```json
{
"campaign": {
"name": "IT Security Update - Q1 2025",
"template": {
"name": "Mandatory Security Training",
"subject": "Action Required: Complete Security Awareness Training by Friday",
"html": "<html>...[branded email with urgency]...</html>",
"from": "IT Security Team <security@targetcorp-secure.com>"
},
"landing_page": "Office 365 Login Clone",
"sending_profile": "Phishing SMTP",
"groups": ["All Employees - Batch 1"],
"launch_date": "2025-03-10T09:00:00Z",
"send_by_date": "2025-03-10T12:00:00Z"
}
}
```
### Phishing Email Templates by Pretext
**Template 1 — IT Security Update:**
```
Subject: [Action Required] Mandatory Password Reset - Security Incident
From: IT Security <security@targetcorp-secure.com>
Dear {FirstName},
Our security team has detected unauthorized access attempts on our systems.
As a precautionary measure, all employees must reset their passwords immediately.
Please click below to reset your password within the next 24 hours:
[Reset Password Now] -> {phishing_url}
Failure to comply may result in temporary account suspension.
Thank you,
IT Security Team
```
**Template 2 — Finance Invoice:**
```
Subject: Invoice #INV-2025-4821 - Approval Required
From: Accounts Payable <ap@targetcorp-secure.com>
Hi {FirstName},
Please review and approve the attached invoice from our vendor.
Amount: $47,250.00 | Due: March 15, 2025
[View Invoice] -> {phishing_url}
Best regards,
Accounts Payable
```
## Phase 3 — Vishing Campaign
### Call Script Template
```
Pretext: IT Help Desk calling about suspicious login
Caller: "Hi, this is [Name] from the IT Help Desk. Am I speaking with [Target Name]?"
[Wait for confirmation]
Caller: "We've detected some unusual login activity on your account from an
unrecognized location. For your protection, I need to verify your identity
before we can investigate further."
Caller: "Can you confirm your employee ID and the email address associated
with your account?"
[Record responses]
Caller: "Thank you. I'm going to send you a verification link to confirm
it's really you. Can you click on it and enter your credentials so we can
secure your account?"
[Send phishing link via email/SMS during call]
Caller: "Great, I can see you've been verified. Your account is now secured.
If you notice any further issues, please call the help desk at [real number]."
```
### Vishing Metrics to Track
| Metric | Description |
|--------|-------------|
| Call answered | Target picked up the phone |
| Engaged | Target continued conversation past initial question |
| Information disclosed | Target provided credentials, employee ID, or PII |
| Link clicked | Target clicked the verification link |
| Credentials entered | Target entered credentials on phishing page |
| Reported | Target reported the call to security |
## Phase 4 — Physical Social Engineering
### Physical Pretexting Scenarios
```
Scenario 1: Delivery Person
- Arrive with package labeled for executive
- Request access to deliver personally
- Attempt to tailgate through secure doors
- Drop USB drives in common areas
Scenario 2: IT Vendor
- Arrive with vendor badge (printed)
- Claim scheduled maintenance on network closet
- Attempt to access server rooms
- Install rogue wireless AP if access gained
Scenario 3: New Employee
- Arrive claiming first day orientation
- Request temporary badge
- Attempt to access restricted areas
- Photograph sensitive screens/documents
Evidence Collection:
- Body camera (if legally permitted and authorized)
- Photographs of accessed areas
- WiFi probe from rogue AP
- Notes on which doors/checkpoints bypassed
```
## Phase 5 — Metrics and Analysis
### Campaign Results Dashboard
```
Phishing Campaign Results:
├── Emails Sent: 200
├── Emails Delivered: 195 (97.5%)
├── Emails Opened: 142 (72.8%)
├── Links Clicked: 68 (34.9%)
├── Credentials Submitted: 31 (15.9%)
├── MFA Bypassed: 8 (4.1%) [Evilginx]
├── Reported to SOC: 12 (6.2%)
└── No Action: 53 (27.2%)
Vishing Campaign Results:
├── Calls Made: 23
├── Calls Answered: 18 (78.3%)
├── Engaged in Conversation: 15 (65.2%)
├── Information Disclosed: 9 (39.1%)
├── Credentials Provided: 4 (17.4%)
└── Reported to Security: 2 (8.7%)
Physical Assessment:
├── Tailgating Successful: 3/5 attempts
├── USB Drives Plugged In: 2/10 dropped
├── Restricted Areas Accessed: 2/4 attempted
└── Challenged by Employee: 1 time
```
### Risk Scoring
| Attack Vector | Success Rate | Risk Level | Priority |
|--------------|-------------|------------|----------|
| Phishing (credential harvest) | 15.9% | High | P1 |
| Vishing (info disclosure) | 39.1% | Critical | P1 |
| Physical tailgating | 60% | High | P2 |
| USB drop | 20% | Medium | P3 |
| Spear phishing (exec) | 40% | Critical | P1 |
## Phase 6 — Reporting and Recommendations
### Remediation Priorities
| Priority | Recommendation | Timeline |
|----------|---------------|----------|
| P1 | Deploy phishing-resistant MFA (FIDO2/WebAuthn) | 30 days |
| P1 | Implement targeted security awareness training | 14 days |
| P1 | Deploy email gateway with URL rewriting | 30 days |
| P2 | Strengthen physical access controls (mantraps, visitor badges) | 60 days |
| P2 | Implement security champion program per department | 30 days |
| P3 | Deploy USB device control policy | 30 days |
| P3 | Establish phishing reporting button in email client | 14 days |
## Tools Reference
| Tool | Purpose |
|------|---------|
| GoPhish | Phishing campaign management platform |
| Evilginx2 | MFA bypass via reverse proxy phishing |
| Social Engineer Toolkit (SET) | Social engineering attack framework |
| Maltego | OSINT and relationship mapping |
| theHarvester | Email and domain OSINT |
| King Phisher | Phishing campaign tool |
| Modlishka | Reverse proxy for credential interception |
## References
- GoPhish: https://getgophish.com/
- Evilginx2: https://github.com/kgretzky/evilginx2
- Social Engineer Toolkit: https://github.com/trustedsec/social-engineer-toolkit
- Verizon DBIR: https://www.verizon.com/business/resources/reports/dbir/
- NIST SP 800-61: Computer Security Incident Handling GuideRelated Skills
webapp-testing
Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using
testing-websocket-api-security
Tests WebSocket API implementations for security vulnerabilities including missing authentication on WebSocket upgrade, Cross-Site WebSocket Hijacking (CSWSH), injection attacks through WebSocket messages, insufficient input validation, denial-of-service via message flooding, and information leakage through WebSocket frames. The tester intercepts WebSocket handshakes and messages using Burp Suite, crafts malicious payloads, and tests for authorization bypass on WebSocket channels. Activates for requests involving WebSocket security testing, WS penetration testing, CSWSH attack, or real-time API security assessment.
testing-ransomware-recovery-procedures
Test and validate ransomware recovery procedures including backup restore operations, RTO/RPO target verification, recovery sequencing, and clean restore validation to ensure organizational resilience against destructive ransomware attacks.
testing-oauth2-implementation-flaws
Tests OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect implementations for security flaws including authorization code interception, redirect URI manipulation, CSRF in OAuth flows, token leakage, scope escalation, and PKCE bypass. The tester evaluates the authorization server, client application, and token handling for common misconfigurations that enable account takeover or unauthorized access. Activates for requests involving OAuth security testing, OIDC vulnerability assessment, OAuth2 redirect bypass, or authorization code flow testing.
testing-mobile-api-authentication
Tests authentication and authorization mechanisms in mobile application APIs to identify broken authentication, insecure token management, session fixation, privilege escalation, and IDOR vulnerabilities. Use when performing API security assessments against mobile app backends, testing JWT implementations, evaluating OAuth flows, or assessing session management. Activates for requests involving mobile API auth testing, token security assessment, OAuth mobile flow testing, or API authorization bypass.
testing-jwt-token-security
Assessing JSON Web Token implementations for cryptographic weaknesses, algorithm confusion attacks, and authorization bypass vulnerabilities during security engagements.
testing-handbook-generator
Generates comprehensive testing handbooks and guides for security testing strategies.
testing-for-xxe-injection-vulnerabilities
Discovering and exploiting XML External Entity injection vulnerabilities to read server files, perform SSRF, and exfiltrate data during authorized penetration tests.
testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities
Tests web applications for Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities by injecting JavaScript payloads into reflected, stored, and DOM-based contexts to demonstrate client-side code execution, session hijacking, and user impersonation. The tester identifies all injection points and output contexts, crafts context-appropriate payloads, and bypasses sanitization and CSP protections. Activates for requests involving XSS testing, cross-site scripting assessment, client-side injection testing, or JavaScript injection vulnerability testing.
testing-for-xss-vulnerabilities-with-burpsuite
Identifying and validating cross-site scripting vulnerabilities using Burp Suite's scanner, intruder, and repeater tools during authorized security assessments.
testing-for-xml-injection-vulnerabilities
Test web applications for XML injection vulnerabilities including XXE, XPath injection, and XML entity attacks to identify data exposure and server-side request forgery risks.
testing-for-sensitive-data-exposure
Identifying sensitive data exposure vulnerabilities including API key leakage, PII in responses, insecure storage, and unprotected data transmission during security assessments.