CHECKLINK AI
Back to Learn
Research Trends

What APWG's Q1 2025 Phishing Trends Mean for Link Safety

A practical reading of APWG's Q1 2025 phishing report for businesses, founders, agencies, and security-aware users.

Updated 2026-07-06 - 8 min - Business owners, founders, agencies, and security-aware users

The volume is large enough to change habits

APWG reported 1,003,924 phishing attacks in the first quarter of 2025, the largest quarterly number it had observed since late 2023. The important lesson is not panic; it is process. When phishing operates at that scale, every business that sends links should make link clarity part of customer trust.

For users, the practical habit is simple: inspect the destination before a high-impact click. For businesses, it means reducing confusing redirects, publishing official destinations, and creating a review path for suspicious reports.

QR codes are now part of the link-risk surface

APWG highlighted criminals sending millions of daily emails containing QR codes that lead to phishing sites and malware. QR codes are effective because people often scan first and inspect later, especially on mobile.

A QR code should be treated as a hidden link until the destination is visible. If a campaign uses dynamic QR codes, shorteners, or tracking redirects, the business should document the expected destination before customers are asked to act.

Financial pressure makes verification more important

APWG reported that online payment and financial or banking sectors together represented 30.9% of attacks in Q1 2025. That does not mean every banking or invoice link is malicious, but it does mean sensitive links deserve a higher verification bar.

When a link asks for a login, account change, transfer, invoice action, or support follow-up, verify the destination through an official channel rather than relying on the message alone.

BEC is a workflow problem, not only a link problem

APWG also reported that wire-transfer BEC attacks increased by 33% compared with the previous quarter. Business Email Compromise often works through urgency, impersonation, reply-to changes, vendor detail changes, or free webmail accounts used in business-looking messages.

A good defense combines message review, header context, known-contact verification, and a policy that employees can pause suspicious requests without being punished for slowing down.

How CheckLink helps

CheckLink turns these trends into practical actions: scan suspicious links, inspect QR destinations, parse email headers locally, review BEC-style requests, and request manual review when money, credentials, customers, or brand trust are involved.

CheckLink provides risk signals and review workflows. It does not claim that a scanner result guarantees a site is safe or unsafe.

Checklist

Scan suspicious links
Inspect QR destinations before opening
Verify sensitive requests through known channels
Review reply-to and sender context
Use manual review when impact is high

FAQ

Does APWG's attack count mean every suspicious link is malicious?

No. It shows the scale of the problem. Individual links still need context, signal review, and cautious interpretation.

What should businesses do first?

Start by publishing clear official destinations, reviewing campaign links before launch, and giving customers a way to report suspicious links.

Related guides

Related glossary terms

Further reading

Use CheckLink before the next click

CheckLink provides risk signals and review paths. It does not guarantee that a website is risk-free.