analyzing-email-headers-for-phishing-investigation skill
Parse and analyze email headers (Received chain, Return-Path, Message-ID)
Is the analyzing-email-headers-for-phishing-investigation skill safe?
Clean: nothing in its files matched our rules. We read 4 files in the folder on 2026-09-28.
No findings.
Install the analyzing-email-headers-for-phishing-investigation skill
A skill is a folder. Copy it into your agent's skills folder and the agent loads it when the task matches its description.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills.git /tmp/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills cp -r /tmp/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills/skills/analyzing-email-headers-for-phishing-investigation ~/.claude/skills/analyzing-email-headers-for-phishing-investigation
In the Claude apps, zip the folder and upload it from the Skills settings. The folder on GitHub
The instructions your agent would load
SKILL.md as published, without the frontmatter. Read it on GitHub
Analyzing Email Headers for Phishing Investigation
When to Use
- When investigating a suspected phishing email to determine its true origin
- For verifying sender authenticity and detecting email spoofing
- During incident response when a user has clicked a phishing link
- When tracing the delivery path and relay servers of a suspicious email
- For validating SPF, DKIM, and DMARC alignment to identify forgery
Prerequisites
- Raw email headers from the suspicious message (EML or MSG format)
- Understanding of SMTP protocol and email header fields
- Access to DNS lookup tools (dig, nslookup) for SPF/DKIM/DMARC verification
- Email header analysis tools (MHA, emailheaders.net concepts)
- Python with email parsing libraries for automated analysis
- Access to threat intelligence platforms for IP/domain reputation
Workflow
Step 1: Extract Raw Email Headers
# Export from Outlook: Open email > File > Properties > Internet Headers
# Export from Gmail: Open email > Three dots > Show original
# Export from Thunderbird: View > Message Source
# If working with EML file from forensic image
cp /mnt/evidence/Users/suspect/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Outlook/phishing_email.eml \
/cases/case-2024-001/email/
# If working with PST file, extract individual messages
pip install pypff
python3 << 'PYEOF'
import pypff
pst = pypff.file()
pst.open("/cases/case-2024-001/email/outlook.pst")
root = pst.get_root_folder()
def extract_messages(folder, path=""):
for i in range(folder.get_number_of_sub_messages()):
msg = folder.get_sub_message(i)
headers = msg.get_transport_headers()
subject = msg.get_subject()
if headers:
filename = f"/cases/case-2024-001/email/msg_{i}_{subject[:30]}.txt"
with open(filename, 'w') as f:
f.write(headers)
for i in range(folder.get_number_of_sub_folders()):
extract_messages(folder.get_sub_folder(i))
extract_messages(root)
PYEOFStep 2: Parse the Email Header Chain
# Parse headers using Python email library
python3 << 'PYEOF'
import email
from email import policy
with open('/cases/case-2024-001/email/phishing_email.eml', 'r') as f:
msg = email.message_from_file(f, policy=policy.default)
print("=== KEY HEADER FIELDS ===")
print(f"From: {msg['From']}")
print(f"To: {msg['To']}")
print(f"Subject: {msg['Subject']}")
print(f"Date: {msg['Date']}")
print(f"Message-ID: {msg['Message-ID']}")
print(f"Reply-To: {msg['Reply-To']}")
print(f"Return-Path: {msg['Return-Path']}")
print(f"X-Mailer: {msg['X-Mailer']}")
print(f"X-Originating-IP: {msg['X-Originating-IP']}")
print("\n=== RECEIVED HEADERS (bottom-up = chronological) ===")
received_headers = msg.get_all('Received')
if received_headers:
for i, header in enumerate(reversed(received_headers)):
print(f"\nHop {i+1}: {header.strip()}")
print("\n=== AUTHENTICATION RESULTS ===")
auth_results = msg.get_all('Authentication-Results')
if auth_results:
for result in auth_results:
print(result)
print(f"\nARC-Authentication-Results: {msg.get('ARC-Authentication-Results', 'Not present')}")
print(f"Received-SPF: {msg.get('Received-SPF'Step 3: Validate SPF, DKIM, and DMARC Records
# Extract the envelope sender domain
SENDER_DOMAIN="example-corp.com"
# Check SPF record
dig TXT $SENDER_DOMAIN +short | grep "v=spf1"
# Example: "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com include:sendgrid.net ~all"
# Check DKIM record (selector from DKIM-Signature header, e.g., "s=selector1")
DKIM_SELECTOR="selector1"
dig TXT ${DKIM_SELECTOR}._domainkey.${SENDER_DOMAIN} +short
# Check DMARC record
dig TXT _dmarc.${SENDER_DOMAIN} +short
# Example: "v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc@example-corp.com; pct=100"
# Verify the sending IP against SPF
# Extract IP from first Received header
SENDING_IP="203.0.113.45"
# Manual SPF check using python
python3 << 'PYEOF'
import spf # pip install pyspf
result, explanation = spf.check2(
i='203.0.113.45',
s='sender@example-corp.com',
h='mail.example-corp.com'
)
print(f"SPF Result: {result}")
print(f"Explanation: {explanation}")
# Results: pass, fail, softfail, neutral, none, temperror, permerror
PYEOF
# Check if sending IP is in known malicious IP lists
# Query AbuseIPDB or VirusTotal
curl -s "https://api.abuseipdb.com/api/v2/check?ipAddress=${SENDING_IP}" \
-H "Key: YOUR_API_KEY" -H "Accept: application/json" | python3 -m json.toolStep 4: Analyze Sender Domain and Infrastructure
# WHOIS lookup on sender domain
whois $SENDER_DOMAIN | grep -iE '(registrar|creation|expiration|registrant|nameserver)'
# Check domain age (recently registered domains are suspicious)
# DNS record investigation
dig A $SENDER_DOMAIN +short
dig MX $SENDER_DOMAIN +short
dig NS $SENDER_DOMAIN +short
# Reverse DNS on sending IP
dig -x $SENDING_IP +short
# Check for lookalike/typosquatting domains
# Compare with legitimate domain using visual similarity
python3 << 'PYEOF'
import Levenshtein # pip install python-Levenshtein
legitimate = "microsoft.com"
suspicious = "micr0soft.com"
distance = Levenshtein.distance(legitimate, suspicious)
ratio = Levenshtein.ratio(legitimate, suspicious)
print(f"Edit distance: {distance}")
print(f"Similarity ratio: {ratio:.2%}")
if ratio > 0.8:
print("WARNING: Likely typosquatting/lookalike domain!")
PYEOF
# Check domain reputation on VirusTotal
curl -s "https://www.virustotal.com/api/v3/domains/${SENDER_DOMAIN}" \
-H "x-apikey: YOUR_VT_API_KEY" | python3 -m json.tool
# Check if the Reply-To differs from From (common phishing indicator)
python3 -c "
import email
with open('/cases/case-2024-001/email/phishing_email.eml') as f:
msg = email.mStep 5: Examine Email Body and Attachments
# Extract URLs from email body
python3 << 'PYEOF'
import email
import re
from email import policy
with open('/cases/case-2024-001/email/phishing_email.eml', 'r') as f:
msg = email.message_from_file(f, policy=policy.default)
body = msg.get_body(preferencelist=('html', 'plain'))
if body:
content = body.get_content()
urls = re.findall(r'https?://[^\s<>"\']+', content)
print("=== URLs FOUND IN EMAIL BODY ===")
for url in set(urls):
print(f" {url}")
# Check for URL obfuscation (display text != href)
href_pattern = re.findall(r'<a[^>]*href=["\']([^"\']+)["\'][^>]*>(.*?)</a>', content, re.DOTALL)
print("\n=== HYPERLINK ANALYSIS ===")
for href, text in href_pattern:
display_url = re.findall(r'https?://[^\s<]+', text)
if display_url and display_url[0] != href:
print(f" MISMATCH: Display='{display_url[0]}' -> Actual='{href}'")
# Extract and hash attachments
print("\n=== ATTACHMENTS ===")
for part in msg.walk():
if part.get_content_disposition() == 'attachment':
filename = part.get_filename()
content = part.get_payload(decode=True)
import hashlib
sha256 = hashlib.sha256(content).hKey Concepts
Tools & Systems
Common Scenarios
Scenario 1: CEO Fraud / Business Email Compromise The email claims to be from the CEO but Reply-To points to a Gmail address, SPF fails because the sending IP is not authorized for the spoofed domain, DKIM is missing, and the From domain is a lookalike (ceo-company.com vs company.com).
Scenario 2: Credential Harvesting Phishing Email contains a link that displays "login.microsoft.com" but href points to a lookalike domain, the attachment is an HTML file containing a fake login page with credential exfiltration JavaScript, the sending domain was registered 3 days ago.
Scenario 3: Malware Delivery via Attachment Email with an Office document attachment containing macros, the sender domain passes SPF but the account was compromised, DKIM signature is valid (sent from legitimate infrastructure), attachment SHA-256 matches known malware on VirusTotal.
Scenario 4: Spear Phishing with Legitimate Service Attacker uses a legitimate email marketing service to send phishing, SPF and DKIM pass because the service is authorized, the phishing is in the content not the infrastructure, requires URL and content analysis rather than header authentication checks.
Output Format
Email Header Analysis Report:
Subject: "Urgent: Invoice Payment Required"
From: accounting@examp1e-corp.com (SPOOFED)
Reply-To: payments.urgent@gmail.com (MISMATCH)
Return-Path: <bounce@mail-server.xyz>
Date: 2024-01-15 09:23:45 UTC
Delivery Path (4 hops):
Hop 1: mail-server.xyz [203.0.113.45] -> relay1.isp.com
Hop 2: relay1.isp.com -> mx.target-company.com
Hop 3: mx.target-company.com -> internal-filter.target.com
Hop 4: internal-filter.target.com -> mailbox
Authentication:
SPF: FAIL (203.0.113.45 not authorized for examp1e-corp.com)
DKIM: NONE (no signature present)
DMARC: FAIL (p=none, no enforcement)
Indicators of Phishing:
- Lookalike domain (examp1e-corp.com vs example-corp.com, 96% similar)
- From/Reply-To mismatch
- Domain registered 2 days before email sent
- URL in body points to credential harvesting page
- Attachment: invoice.xlsm (SHA-256: a3f2...) - Known malware on VT
Risk Level: HIGHMore skills from mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
- Aabusing-dpapi-for-credential-accessExtract and decrypt Windows DPAPI-protected secrets (Credential Manager, browser logins/cookies, Wi-Fi credentials, KeePass keys) online or offline using SharpDPAPI, SharpChrome, Mimikatz, or Impacket's dpapi.py, including domain-wide decryption via the DPAPI backup key. Use during authorized red-team credential-access engagements after gaining a foothold or when triaging DPAPI blobs pulled from a host.
- Aabusing-shadow-credentials-for-privescTake over Active Directory accounts by writing attacker-controlled public keys to msDS-KeyCredentialLink (Shadow Credentials) with pyWhisker, Whisker, or Certipy, then authenticate via PKINIT to recover the target's NT hash without a password reset. Use when BloodHound shows GenericWrite/GenericAll/AddKeyCredentialLink over a target, as a stealthier alternative to ForceChangePassword, during authorized red-team engagements.
- Aachieving-cmmc-level-2-compliancePrepare a defense-contractor environment for CMMC Level 2 certification: scope CUI and FCI, implement the 110 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families, compute the SPRS score with the DoD Assessment Methodology, manage a compliant POA&M, and ready the organization for a C3PAO assessment. Use when an organization handles Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) under a DoD contract, when a contract carries DFARS clause 252.204-7012/7019/7020/7021, when preparing for or responding to a CMMC assessment, when computing or improving an SPRS score, when building a System Security Plan or POA&M for 800-171, or when scoping which systems are in the CUI boundary. Keywords: CMMC, CMMC Level 2, NIST 800-171, SP 800-171 Rev 2, CUI, FCI, SPRS, DFARS 7012, C3PAO, POA&M, System Security Plan, DoD Assessment Methodology, 110 controls, defense industrial base, DIB, FedRAMP equivalency.
- Aacquiring-disk-image-with-dd-and-dcflddCreate forensically sound bit-for-bit disk images with dd or dcfldd on a Linux forensic workstation, preserving evidence integrity through hash verification (MD5/SHA) during acquisition. Use when imaging a suspect drive, USB device, or memory card for investigation, preserving volatile disk evidence during incident response, or producing a verified copy for legal or law-enforcement proceedings before any destructive analysis.
- Aanalyzing-active-directory-acl-abuseDetect dangerous ACL misconfigurations in Active Directory using ldap3
- Aanalyzing-android-malware-with-apktoolPerform static analysis of Android APK malware using apktool for resource decompilation, jadx for Java source recovery, and androguard for manifest inspection, dangerous permission-combination detection, and identification of obfuscated code, dynamic code loading, and reflection-based API calls. Use to statically triage a suspicious APK without executing it or to build mobile malware detection rules.
- Danalyzing-api-gateway-access-logs'Parses API Gateway access logs (AWS API Gateway, Kong, Nginx) to detect
- Aanalyzing-apt-group-with-mitre-navigatorQuery ATT&CK data with attackcti, mitreattack-python, and stix2, then build MITRE ATT&CK Navigator layers and multi-layer heatmap overlays mapping one or more APT groups' TTPs for detection-gap analysis. Use to compare threat-actor technique coverage, find gaps in detection engineering, or produce Navigator visualizations for threat-intel reporting.
- Aanalyzing-azure-activity-logs-for-threats'Queries Azure Monitor activity logs and sign-in logs via azure-monitor-query
- Aanalyzing-bootkit-and-rootkit-samples'Analyzes bootkit and advanced rootkit malware infecting the Master
- Aanalyzing-browser-forensics-with-hindsightParse Chromium-based browser databases with Hindsight to extract and correlate browsing history, downloads, cookies, cached content, autofill data, saved passwords, and extensions from Chrome, Edge, Brave, Opera, and Vivaldi into a unified timeline (XLSX, JSON, or SQLite output). Use during incident response, insider-threat investigations, or criminal cases when you need to reconstruct a user's web activity from a browser profile.
- Aanalyzing-campaign-attribution-evidenceSystematically evaluate cyber-campaign evidence to attribute an operation to a threat actor, using the Diamond Model and Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) to weigh infrastructure overlaps, TTP consistency, malware code similarity, and timing/language artifacts into confidence-weighted attribution assessments. Use when an incident investigation needs a defensible attribution confidence level.