Go Phish: Circuit Split in Policy Interpretation for Social Engineering Fraud Losses Creates Ambiguity for Insurers and Insureds

Gabriella Scott

No dmx67_v1, LawArchive from Center for Open Science

Abstract: This Comment examines the circuit split over whether social engineering fraud losses are covered under computer fraud insurance provisions. It argues that recent decisions expanding coverage improperly blur the distinction between computer hacking and employee manipulation. The Comment contends that social engineering fraud presents a distinct risk that should be addressed through separate insurance coverage and concludes that a stricter interpretation of computer fraud provisions would promote greater clarity and uniformity for insurers and insureds. [This abstract was written by Microsoft Copilot, a generative artificial intelligence.]

Date: 2026-09-28
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/6ab6ad24416290b0e058656d/

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:lawarc:dmx67_v1

DOI: 10.31228/osf.io/dmx67_v1

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in LawArchive from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().