Topic starter
27/06/2026 1:14 pm
TL;DR: AI-generated phishing, business email compromise, and lateral phishing are evolving faster than legacy email security models can reliably detect or remediate, according to Abnormal AI's webinar preview on evaluating email security in 2025. The practical issue is not whether AI is present, but whether controls can prove real-time response under modern threat conditions.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Abnormal AI: “Beyond the Quadrant: How to Evaluate Email Security in 2025”.
Key questions
Q: How should security teams evaluate AI-driven email protection tools?
A: They should evaluate whether the tool can detect adaptive phishing, correlate email risk with identity signals, and trigger response actions fast enough to matter.
A: Business email compromise succeeds when attackers combine social engineering with session persistence, OAuth consent abuse, or push fatigue against MFA.
Practitioner guidance
- Test remediation speed against live phishing scenarios Measure how quickly suspicious messages are quarantined, recalled, or suppressed after delivery, and compare that speed with how fast a user can click or forward them.
- Validate sender trust controls for internal impersonation Check whether internal senders, delegated mail access, and reply-chain abuse are covered by policy, especially where lateral phishing can use a legitimate mailbox.
- Stress-test detection against AI-generated variants Use multiple message variants with different tone, structure, and urgency to see whether the platform detects the behaviour pattern or only known wording.
Bottom line: AI-generated phishing and BEC are challenging the assumptions built into legacy email security, especially where controls rely on static pattern matching.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 3 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group
27/06/2026 2:30 pm
Email security is now an identity assurance problem, not just a content-filtering problem. AI-driven phishing and lateral phishing exploit the fact that authenticated delivery does not equal trustworthy intent. The control question has shifted from whether the message passed through email infrastructure to whether the organisation can verify sender behaviour, context, and downstream action quickly enough. Practitioners should treat email as a governed identity channel, not a simple security appliance input.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Should organisations prioritise AI detection claims or response speed when buying email security?
A: Response speed should be the primary decision point because detection without containment still leaves users exposed. AI claims are only meaningful if they translate into faster blocking, quarantine, or message suppression under realistic attack conditions. Buyers should demand proof that response happens at message speed, not analyst speed.
👉 Read our full editorial: AI-driven email threats are outpacing legacy detection models
This post was modified 3 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group