How not to send an email asking for personal information

Published February 10, 2022 on Chandler Swift's Blog Source

May-July 2017: Equifax is hacked. September 7, 2017: Equifax discloses the breach. July 24?, 2019: I make a claim against the settlement fund, since my information was involved in the breach. January 27, 2022: I receive an email from the Equifax Breach Settlement Administrator telling me how I can claim the credit monitoring I selected. January 30, 2022: I spend several hours trying unsuccessfully to decide if the email is legitimate or not.

As a professional in a computer-related field, I spend a lot of time fielding computer-related questions, and trying to help friends and family understand how to safely use technology. It’s a constant struggle—there are a lot of scams out there, and new ones popping up all the time. I have a few pieces of fairly general advice I tend to hand out for people looking to see if an email they’ve received is legitimate or not, summarized here:

  • Check if the domain is known to be trusted1. For example, a password reset email from may be safe, but an email from is almost certainly out to get you.
  • Check if the links lead where you expect. If I have an email with the FROM header2 as, but all the links lead to http://555.867.530.900/… (a personal favorite “IP address”—big scare quotes here—that Pearson gave as part of an internal phishing awareness training; spot the Tommy Tutone reference!), then it’s a malicious link.
  • If you see something you’re not suspecting, or your gut tells you something is suspicious, it probably is. Make sure to validate anything you’re being sent, usually by looking it up on the website that the email claims to be from. (“Call the number on the back of your card” is a good example of this.) Or check in with an expert! I encourage my friends and family to forward me anything they’re unsure about, if they want a second opinion on if it’s legit or not.
  • And, of course, have caution proportionate to the risk. I’m less concerned about losing my Spotify password than I am my bank’s password, and it would be a red flag if a link claiming to be from Spotify started asking me about my bank info.

The email I received telling me how to claim my credit monitoring is…terrible. It violates every single principle in the list above, to such a comical degree that I felt compelled to write it up. If you need to send out an email, just do the opposite of what they did, and you’ll probably be good! Let’s see how they violate every single point I’ve laid out above:

Check if the domain is known to be trusted.

An email from Equifax should come from or a subdomain. Well, I guess this isn’t from Equifax, it’s from some law firm or something. Okay, a quick Google search says equifaxbreachsettlement is right. (And, as a person who loves using the view-source button, I can also verify that SPF, DMARC, and DKIM all pass, but this took me a while to remember how to do (it’s just in the headers), and wouldn’t be something I’d expect most people to check.)

	dkim=pass header.s=smtp header.b=SqYR676H;
	dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine);
	spf=pass ( domain of "" designates as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="" is the type of domain I’d register if I were trying to phish Equifax customers. I can’t get, of course, but I can tack some other words onto the end, and call that my site. My current leading contender is, which is available for <$9 at the time of writing, but any number of others would be equally convincing.

  <td>Visit the Experian IdentityWorks Website:=20
  <a href=3D"

Oh, and that’s just the text of the link—the actual link doesn’t lead there. They’ve obscured the actual link behind a tracking redirect, so even the location I already thought was suspicious isn’t what I see. Nice.

If something is suspicious…

Well, it kinda ticks all the boxes: “claim your free ______”, “time limited”, “click here”, “enter all your personal information, including DOB and SSN”…

Validate information on the website the email claims to be from.

In this case, the email is from, so their website should have some note that they’re currently sending out these emails, and that you’ll be able to claim your credit monitoring at in the email they’ll send. But mentions…exactly zero times. Not once! The closest they come is in the FAQ, where they say

I received an email regarding free, three-bureau (Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion) credit monitoring from Experian for four years. Is this email legitimate?

If you made a valid claim for Credit Monitoring Services, you will receive an email from the Equifax Data Breach Settlement Administrator (from the email address by February 25, 2022 providing you with information on how to activate your credit monitoring. The Settlement Administrator will provide you with an activation code and link to the Experian website where you can enroll and activate your Credit Monitoring Services.

But none of that would prevent an enterprising scammer from realizing that these are emails going out, and sending out their own emails using the same template, that link to another service. (As mentioned above, is available for $9, and looks no less trustworthy than!)

Well, if doesn’t give me any information, let’s see if Experian links there? Not that I can find. They do have a product called “Experian IdentityWorks™” but that entire registration flow happens on the domain, as I’d have expected.

How about a quick web search? Well, all the results for “experian id works” and a few other related search queries either just return links to the page, or to similarly named pages on the domain that seems to be a clone of, or reviews/articles talking about Experian’s credit monitoring program (again, named IdentityWorks, but all on the domain, bolstering my suspicion that this could just be a domain impersonating Experian).

search results for “experian id works”

Hm. Let’s try the command line, and make sure that Experian is actually the one to have registered the domain:

% whois
Registry Domain ID: 5503875_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server:
Registrar URL:
Updated Date: 2021-08-30T16:21:45Z
Creation Date: 1996-10-28T05:00:00Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2022-10-27T04:00:00Z
Registrar: Network Solutions, LLC
Registrar IANA ID: 2
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
Registry Registrant ID: 
Registrant Name: Information Solutions, Experian
Registrant Organization: Experian Information Solutions, Inc.
Registrant Street: 475 ANTON BLVD
Registrant City: COSTA MESA
Registrant State/Province: CA
Registrant Postal Code: 92626-7037
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.7148307000
Registrant Phone Ext: 
Registrant Fax: 
Registrant Fax Ext: 
Registrant Email:
% whois
Domain Name:
Registry Domain ID: 1978500106_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server:
Registrar URL:
Updated Date: 2021-11-07T01:04:51Z
Creation Date: 2015-11-11T13:43:29Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2022-11-11T18:43:29Z
Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 299
Registrar Abuse Contact Email:
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.8887802723
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
Registry Registrant ID: 
Registrant Name: Domain Management
Registrant Organization:, Inc.
Registrant Street: 535 Anton Blvd, Suite 100
Registrant City: Costa Mesa
Registrant State/Province: CA
Registrant Postal Code: 92626
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.8003570821
Registrant Phone Ext: 
Registrant Fax: +1.8003570821
Registrant Fax Ext: 
Registrant Email:

So they’re not registered by the same organization…or even the same registrar! There’s no link on or to this site; it’s registered by and through a different organization than the base Experian domain; it’s on a domain that looks like it’s intended to be deceptive…there are a lot of reasons not to trust this domain at this point.

Have caution proportionate to the risk.

Well, it may be sketchy, but at least they ask for all my personal information, including my full name, email address, mailing address, date of birth, and some common security questions and answers!

Oh, and news organizations are somewhere between useless and actively harmful.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, I’m not the only one to be asking whether this is legitimate, so there are a decent number of answers out there.

Snopes has a decent answer, but they sort of hide any nuance behind an “is this email legit” question and a big green “Yes!” at the top, which doesn’t really encourage people to appreciate that it’s not necessarily a yes/no question; but that there’s a bit more subtlety behind it.

Another of the top links on a web search for “experianidworks”, at the time of writing, was, which has the following advice:

We’re clearing up some confusion over an email you may have received.

The email appears to concern a settlement over the 2017 Equifax data breach.

It offers you 4 free years of the credit monitoring service Experian Identity Works.

The body of the email contains a link to Experian’s site in which you have to provide a lot of personal information.

But don’t worry, it’s legit.

This is, in my opinion, exceptionally bad advice, given without qualification. (Remember, only a Sith deals in absolutes!) A more nuanced take might look something like

That link should lead to If it does, then it’s legit.

As usual, Reddit does a much better job. Here’s u/lunarchuck:

I received the email yesterday at my gmail address. Whois lookup on produces a registration address (535 Anton Blvd, Suite 100, Costa Mesa, CA, 92626, US) that appears to be associated with Experian per BBB. Googling the domain brings up a bunch of legitimate sources that link to it (universities, state governments).

Gmail headers show that the sending domain passes dkim and dmarc and the sending ip address passes SPF for that domain. And that domain is linked from the FTC site.

I think it’s legit. It would have to be one of the all-time greatest phishing/hacking scams to not be, especially since it’s been out there for at least 3 days.

That is, “Given this domain, here’s what I checked. It all checks out; here’s how to reproduce my results; and despite checking, I’m still not going to claim it’s absolutely safe, so you should still use appropriate caution”—exactly what I’d have wanted from any other analysis.

So it’s legit?

Yeah, I think so. Despite the total lack of effort of anyone involved to help reassure me that it’s legit, I’ve filled in my information and feel relatively comfortable having done so. Plus, in the time between when I received this email and did the original checking, and when I wrote the post, there’s a lot of new, better information out there.

The clincher, for me, which should have been plastered all over the place, is a link to the FTC’s Equifax settlement page, which mentions both as the email source and as the link’s target.

That said, for a settlement regarding poor security practice by a company that definitely should have known better, this is embarrassing! They fail every single heuristic I’d use to verify that this is legit. And, perhaps more importantly, they’re working against the community of security professionals who try to educate people on good security practice. Do better!

  1. One issue I’m glossing over here is that to a person who hasn’t spent a lot of time around computers, it’s certainly non-obvious which bits of a URL are important and which aren’t. I trust*, and* (or I would, if I didn’t happen to know that Google uses for account-related pages), but I definitely wouldn’t trust And watch out for the particularly devious ones like…! The thing that makes this especially difficult is that I can’t simply say to look at the beginning of the URL, because that’s just a subdomain. I can’t say to look at the end, because that’s not the host. I have to explain to look for the first slash after https://, and then look at whatever’s one (or two, in cases like * dot-separated chunk before that. Or suggest to read MDN’s “What is a URL?”3—or, perhaps, read any of the relevant RFCs (or better yet, the Living Spec on URLs)? Riiiiiight, I’m trying to save people the hassle of needing a degree in networking to not leak their bank password!

    This is one reason I’m generally not opposed to browsers drastically reducing the amount of information they display in the URL bar: It’s a pain for people who do want all that information, but for most people, the query string isn’t information they care about. ↩︎

  2. As a reminder, the FROM line in an email is just text, and I can set it to whatever I want (though this is getting better! SPF, DKIM, and DMARC are all strides in the right direction). Eric and I had a fun time in high school spoofing emails from school administration to our friends, which somehow didn’t turn out poorly for anyone involved. ↩︎

  3. Despite my tone in the rest of that paragraph, I’m a huge fan of that document. MDN does a surprisingly excellent job of explaining these concepts in an approachable way. Despite the technical nature of the topic, I think I would feel comfortable sending my mother this document if I thought she really needed to know a bit more about the nitty-gritty of URL structure than she currently does. ↩︎

I don't have a formal commenting system set up. If you have questions or comments about anything I've written, send me an email and I'd be delighted to hear what you have to say!