The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Hooked: A Real-World Study on QR Code Phishing
Abstract
The usage of quick response (QR) codes was limited in the pre-era of the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the widespread and frequent application since then, this opened up an attractive phishing opportunity for malicious actors. They trick users into scanning the codes and redirecting them to malicious websites. In order to explore whether phishing with QR codes is another successful attack vector, we conducted a real-world phishing campaign with two different QR code variants at a research campus. The first version was rather plain, whereas the second version was more professionally designed and included the possibility to win a voucher. After the study was completed, a qualitative survey on phishing and QR codes was conducted to verify the results of the phishing campaign. Both, the phishing campaign and the survey, show that a professional design receives more attention. They also illustrate that QR codes are used more frequently by curious users because of their easy functionality. Although the results confirm that technical-savvy users are more aware of the risks, they also underpin the malicious potential for non-technical-savvy users and suggest further work regarding countermeasures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Metadata
- Authors
- Geisler, M., & Pöhn, D.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- arXiv
- 2407.16230
- Type
- Preprint
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hooked: A Real-World Study on QR Code Phishing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2407.16230
- The paper
- Geisler, M., & Pöhn, D. (2024). Hooked: A Real-World Study on QR Code Phishing. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2407.16230
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
