Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsBlogPro
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Authors
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges
  • Chrome Extension
  • Skill Manager

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

ProTermsPrivacyRefunds
Back to skills

Conducting Social Engineering Pretext Call

ASecurity

Plan and execute authorized vishing (voice phishing) pretext calls to

65 stars
0 votes
0 copies
0 views
Added 6/12/2026
ai-agentsrustgobashawstestingsecurity

Works with

cli

Security Analysis

A100/100

Pro scans all 8 files and shows the line behind each finding

Scanned 6/12/2026

$npx -y skills add 26zl/cybersec-toolkit --skill conducting-social-engineering-pretext-call --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Conducting Social Engineering Pretext Call?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Conducting Social Engineering Pretext Call
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/26zl-conducting-social-engineering-pretext-call/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/26zl-conducting-social-engineering-pretext-call)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
Files
SKILL.md
---
name: conducting-social-engineering-pretext-call
description: Plan and execute authorized vishing (voice phishing) pretext calls to
  assess employee susceptibility to social engineering and evaluate security awareness
  controls.
domain: cybersecurity
subdomain: red-teaming
tags:
- social-engineering
- vishing
- pretext-call
- security-awareness
- red-team
- phishing
- human-risk
version: '1.0'
author: mahipal
license: Apache-2.0
atlas_techniques:
- AML.T0088
- AML.T0052
nist_ai_rmf:
- GOVERN-6.2
- MAP-5.2
d3fend_techniques:
- File Metadata Consistency Validation
- Application Protocol Command Analysis
- Identifier Analysis
- Content Format Conversion
- Message Analysis
nist_csf:
- ID.RA-01
- GV.OV-02
- DE.AE-07
mitre_attack:
- T1598.004
- T1566.004
- T1589
- T1591
- T1598
---

# Conducting Social Engineering Pretext Call

## Overview

A pretext call (vishing) is a social engineering technique where an attacker impersonates a trusted authority figure over the phone to manipulate targets into divulging sensitive information, performing actions, or granting access. In red team engagements, pretext calls test the human element of security controls, measuring employee adherence to verification procedures and security awareness training effectiveness. MITRE ATT&CK maps this to T1566.004 (Phishing for Information: Voice) and T1598 (Phishing for Information).


## When to Use

- When conducting security assessments that involve conducting social engineering pretext call
- 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 specifying social engineering scope and boundaries
- List of approved target employees (usually provided by client)
- OSINT research on targets and organization
- Spoofed caller ID capability (authorized for testing)
- Call recording equipment (with legal consent as required)
- Pretext scenarios approved by client

## MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

| Technique ID | Name | Tactic |
|---|---|---|
| T1566.004 | Phishing: Voice | Initial Access |
| T1598 | Phishing for Information | Reconnaissance |
| T1598.003 | Phishing for Information: Spearphishing Voice | Reconnaissance |
| T1589 | Gather Victim Identity Information | Reconnaissance |
| T1591 | Gather Victim Org Information | Reconnaissance |

## Phase 1: OSINT and Target Research

```bash
# LinkedIn employee enumeration
theHarvester -d targetcorp.com -b linkedin -l 200

# Company org chart and employee roles
# Review LinkedIn, corporate website "About Us" / "Team" pages

# Technology stack identification
# Check job postings for technology references (VPN vendor, email, helpdesk tool)

# Phone system identification
# Call main line, note IVR options, department names, extension patterns
```

Key intelligence to gather:
- Internal helpdesk phone number and procedures
- IT department names and staff
- VPN/remote access vendor (Cisco AnyConnect, Fortinet, Pulse Secure)
- Corporate email format (first.last, flast, etc.)
- Recent events (mergers, office moves, system upgrades)
- Employee names, titles, departments

## Phase 2: Pretext Development

### Common Pretext Scenarios

**IT Helpdesk Impersonation (Most Effective):**
> "Hi, this is [name] from the IT Service Desk. We're migrating everyone to the new VPN client this week, and I see your account hasn't been updated yet. I need to verify your current credentials to ensure the migration goes smoothly. Can you confirm your username and current password?"

**Vendor/Contractor:**
> "Hi, I'm [name] from [known vendor]. We're doing an emergency patch deployment for [product] and I need remote access to your system. Could you help me connect via TeamViewer?"

**Executive Assistant (Authority):**
> "This is [name] calling on behalf of [CFO name]. [He/She] needs an urgent wire transfer processed for a deal that's closing today. I'll email you the details, but we need this done in the next hour."

**Building/Facilities:**
> "Hi, this is [name] from facilities management. We're updating the badge access system this weekend. I need to confirm your employee ID and current badge number so your access isn't interrupted."

### Pretext Checklist

- [ ] Is the pretext believable for this organization?
- [ ] Does it create appropriate urgency without being threatening?
- [ ] Does it align with OSINT findings (real dept names, real systems)?
- [ ] Does it have a plausible reason for requesting information?
- [ ] Is there a fallback if the target pushes back?
- [ ] Has the client approved this specific pretext?

## Phase 3: Call Execution

### Call Structure

1. **Introduction** (10 seconds): State name, department, reason for calling
2. **Building rapport** (30 seconds): Reference something real (recent event, shared context)
3. **Authority establishment** (20 seconds): Reference manager name, ticket number, urgency
4. **Information request** (30 seconds): Ask for the target information naturally
5. **Handling objections**: If challenged, respond calmly with prepared answers
6. **Closing** (10 seconds): Thank them, leave no suspicion

### Objection Handling

| Objection | Response |
|---|---|
| "Can I call you back?" | "Of course, call the main helpdesk line and ask for [name]. But this needs to be done by EOD." |
| "I need to verify this" | "Absolutely, I appreciate your diligence. You can check with [manager name]." |
| "I was told never to give passwords" | "You're right, and normally we wouldn't ask. This is a special case because [reason]. I can have my manager call you." |
| "What's your employee ID?" | Pivot: "It's [made-up ID]. Listen, I have 50 more people to call today. Can we just get this done?" |
| "I'll email IT instead" | "Sure, but the system migration happens tonight. If it's not done by then..." |

## Phase 4: Data Collection and Metrics

Track the following for each call:

| Metric | Description |
|---|---|
| Target Name | Employee called |
| Department | Target's department |
| Date/Time | When call was made |
| Duration | Length of call |
| Pretext Used | Which scenario |
| Information Obtained | What was disclosed |
| Credential Disclosed | Yes/No (and type) |
| Verification Attempted | Did target try to verify caller? |
| Reported to Security | Did target report the call? |
| Social Engineering Score | 1-5 susceptibility rating |

## Phase 5: Reporting

### Success Metrics

| Metric | Target | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Credential Disclosure Rate | <10% | XX% |
| Sensitive Info Disclosure Rate | <20% | XX% |
| Verification Rate | >80% | XX% |
| Security Reporting Rate | >50% | XX% |

## Ethical and Legal Considerations

1. **Always obtain written authorization** before conducting vishing tests
2. **Never use threatening language** or create genuine fear
3. **Document consent** and legal requirements for call recording
4. **Protect disclosed credentials** - immediately report to client
5. **Debrief targets** after the engagement if client approves
6. **Never publicly identify** specific employees who failed
7. **Comply with telecommunications laws** in your jurisdiction

## References

- Verizon DBIR 2025: 74% of breaches involve human element
- MITRE ATT&CK T1598: https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1598/
- Social Engineering Penetration Testing by Gavin Watson (Syngress)
- The Art of Deception by Kevin Mitnick (Wiley)
- NIST SP 800-50: Building an Information Technology Security Awareness and Training Program

Attribution

26zl26zl
View sourceSee grades on GitHubMore from 26zl →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Ship a skill? Prove it's safe.

Free 120-pattern security scan, letter grade, and an embeddable README badge.

Submit a skill

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Ship a skill? Prove it's safe.

Free 120-pattern security scan, letter grade, and an embeddable README badge.

Submit a skill

Related Skills

Caveman

Terse caveman voice: answer first, fluff gone, every technical fact kept. Use for /caveman, "caveman mode", "talk like caveman", "be brief", "less tokens". Stays on until "stop caveman" or "normal mode".

1100021 votes

Hyperplan

Adversarial multi-agent planning skill. Self-orchestrates 5 hostile category members (unspecified-low, unspecified-high, deep, ultrabrain, artistry) via team-mode for ruthless cross-critique debate, distills only the defensible insights, then MANDATORILY hands the distilled insight bundle to the `plan` agent for executable plan formalization. Use when planning needs maximum rigor and surfacing of weak assumptions, blind spots, and over-engineering. Triggers: 'hyperplan', 'hpp', '/hyperplan', ...

698621 votes

Writing Skills

Create and manage Claude Code skills in HASH repository following Anthropic best practices. Use when creating new skills, modifying skill-rules.json, understanding trigger patterns, working with hooks, debugging skill activation, or implementing progressive disclosure. Covers skill structure, YAML frontmatter, trigger types (keywords, intent patterns), UserPromptSubmit hook, and the 500-line rule. Includes validation and debugging with SKILL_DEBUG. Examples include rust-error-stack, cargo-dep...

3931 votes

Mcp Code Execution

Routes multi-tool workflows through MCP servers for large datasets and pipelines. Use when Bash tool overhead is limiting throughput on data-heavy tasks.

3421 votes

catchup

Recovers the conversation and failed tool calls of a previous Codex, Amp, Claude Code, Antigravity, Cline, Copilot CLI, Cursor, DeepSeek Harness, Grok Build, Kimi, OpenCode, Pi Agent, or ZCode session. Use when the user says "catch up", "what did the last session do", "get me up to speed", "I switched agents", asks to recover/summarize a previous session before continuing, or asks to diagnose or report a catchup failure. Do NOT use for the current conversation, git history, or any non-agent log.

741 votes
View all in ai-agents →