Exploiting Human Trust Still Beats Hacking Code (And How Zero Trust Helps)

When we talk about social engineering, it’s tempting to think of it as something new.  

But when I spoke with threat researcher Tim Kromphardt on The Segment podcast, he described something much simpler about how these attacks actually work.

Humans follow routines.

Tim compared it to walking through a field. Over time, people naturally follow the same path because it’s the easiest route. Our brains do the same thing with everyday tasks at work. We process requests, respond to emails, and follow familiar business processes without thinking too deeply about each step.

Threat actors know this, and they use the exact same process that trusted people use.  

That insight reveals something important about modern cybercrime. The most effective attacks don’t break systems but instead follow the same communication paths that legitimate business already uses.

This is exactly why social engineering remains so effective, even as security tools become more advanced.

It also explains why Zero Trust is so important. If attackers can exploit human trust to gain access, organizations must assume that access will occasionally be granted.  

The real goal of security architecture, then, isn’t just preventing the breach but limiting what happens next.

Social engineering still works because humans are predictable

Cybersecurity often frames attacks as technical problems. Networks have vulnerabilities that allow attackers to inject malware and exploit security gaps.

But according to Tim, the most successful breaches begin with something far simpler: social engineering. It’s because people rely on patterns and routines to process information quickly.

“We have ways of simplifying things that come at us all the time,” Tim said. “Your brain follows the same path because it’s the easiest way and saves time and energy.”

Attackers take advantage of this.  

Instead of inventing entirely new tricks, they mimic legitimate processes. They send phishing emails that look like purchase requests. PDF attachments resemble supplier invoices. Calls appear to come from IT support but aren’t from a legitimate source.

These attacks don’t break systems. They follow the same path legitimate communication does. That’s why they succeed.

“Threat actors come in and use the exact same process that trusted people use,” Tim said. “They’re hoping you’ll just follow the routine.”

The core of the cybercriminal playbook comes down to exploiting trust already built into normal business operations.

Threat actors come in and use the exact same process that trusted people use.

The tactics haven’t changed, but the scale has

With all the hype around AI, many people assume attackers are constantly inventing new techniques.

Tim’s research suggests otherwise.

“The mechanism for getting someone to trust you hasn’t really changed,” he said. “There’s not some new, novel way to convince someone to give up their banking information.”

The tactics remain consistent:

• Impersonate trusted entities
• Build credibility
• Create urgency or familiarity
• Guide the victim through a routine action

What technology has changed is scale.

Automating attacks with AI allows bad actors to send millions of emails, test different lures, and refine their approach faster than ever. AI tools can generate variations of scam messages and automate parts of their infrastructure.

But the final step still relies on manipulating humans.

Even sophisticated scams ultimately converge on the same point. Attackers must convince someone to trust the attacker long enough to transfer money or credentials.

Tim describes this as a kind of funnel. “They can get creative with the lures,” he said. “But at the end of the day, they still have to get your information. So they still have to build trust or exploit trust that’s already there.”

Why more trust means more danger in cyberattacks

One of the most disturbing tactics Tim is seeing rise in popularity is known as pig butchering.

The name sounds bizarre, but the strategy is brutally effective. The attacker spends months building a relationship with the victim before asking for money.

“The idea is you’re fattening up the pig before slaughter,” Tim said. “They build trust for months before asking for a big investment.”

The attacker may pretend to have contacted the victim accidentally through a text message or social media. From there, the conversation grows gradually. Victims receive daily messages with casual conversation about everyday life. Attackers may even share photos or videos to validate the relationship even further.

Eventually, the attacker introduces an investment opportunity. At first, the victim invests small amounts and sees returns. The attacker may even allow them to withdraw small profits to reinforce credibility.

Then comes the real request.

They’ll say there’s a huge opportunity where the victim could double or triple their profit. “People end up investing their entire life savings,” Tim said.

In one case he studied, a technology executive lost seven million dollars. The scam succeeded not because of a technical exploit but because the attacker built trust.

Why smart people still fall for scams

When these stories surface, the first reaction is often disbelief. How could someone fall for that?

But Tim explained that the psychology behind these scams is more complex than it appears. People don’t make decisions in perfect conditions. They’re busy, distracted, and under pressure — or simply seeking genuine connection.

For Tim, this highlights something many security discussions overlook. Social engineering often works because attackers target human needs rather than technical weaknesses.

“A lot of people today are striving for more connection,” he said. “Social media has distanced people from traditional relationships.”

When someone appears friendly, relatable, or successful, trust forms quickly. And once trust forms, skepticism drops. This is exactly what attackers are counting on.

The hidden reality of modern scam operations

Another myth about cybercriminals is that they are highly sophisticated hackers.

Sometimes they are, but many fraud operations look more like corporate call centers. They have scripted conversations and defined workflows. Many even require performance metrics from scam workers.

Based on Tim’s research, these structured scam operations refine their scripts constantly. Sometimes the goal is simply gathering intelligence. Other times it’s identifying mule accounts or payment channels used to move stolen money.

But the underlying process remains remarkably consistent. Scammers want to convince someone to trust them and then monetize that trust.

Why security awareness alone isn’t enough

Security awareness training has become a standard part of corporate defense.

And while security awareness is critical, relying solely on user behavior creates an impossible burden.

As Tim pointed out, humans aren’t designed to operate with constant suspicion. “We can’t just assume people will always make the right decision or act perfectly,” he said. “Even well-trained employees can make mistakes.”

This is why Zero Trust thinking must extend beyond authentication and identity. Organizations must assume that human trust will occasionally be exploited.

The question becomes what happens next. Can an attacker move freely through the environment, or are their next moves contained?

We can’t just assume people will always make the right decision or act perfectly. Even well-trained employees can make mistakes.

Zero Trust must account for human behavior

This is where Zero Trust becomes essential.

It won’t prevent every scam, but it can limit the damage when trust inevitably gets abused.

If an attacker gains access to credentials, a compromised device, or a remote connection, a Zero Trust strategy built on a foundation of segmentation and visibility can prevent that foothold from turning into a full breach.

Zero Trust recognizes a simple truth: humans will always trust other humans.

Attackers know this, so defenders must design architectures that assume trust can fail.

Zero Trust helps solve the cybersecurity challenges ahead

Technology will continue evolving. AI will automate scams. Infrastructure will become more complex. Digital relationships will replace physical ones.

But the fundamental problem remains unchanged: cybercrime is still about manipulating trust.

The fact is that architectural resilience now matters most. Today’s cybercriminal playbook isn’t built around exploiting software but about exploiting us.  

That reality should reshape how organizations think about cybersecurity and should point them towards a Zero Trust security strategy as top priority.

Listen to the full episode of The Segment: A Zero Trust Leadership Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or our website.