Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Amazon Web Services (AWS) » AMA1781685326

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (AMA1781685326)

The details regarding individual company incidents & reports gives you full view from every side.

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-4
Company Score Before Incident817 / 1000
Company Score After Incident813 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERAMA1781685326
Type of Cyber IncidentVulnerability
ATTACK VECTORServer-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
DATA EXPOSED106 million records (names, addresses,...
INCIDENT DATE21/03/2019
STATUSClosed (conviction in 2022, resentencing in 2025)

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Amazon Web Services (AWS)'s Vulnerability and lateral movement inside company's environment.
  • Overview of affected data sets, including SSNs and PHI, and why they materially increase incident severity.
  • How Rankiteo’s incident engine converts technical details into a normalized incident score.
  • How this cyber incident impacts Amazon Web Services (AWS) Rankiteo cyber scoring and cyber rating.
  • Rankiteo’s MITRE ATT&CK correlation analysis for this incident, with associated confidence level.

Full Incident Analysis Transcript

In this Rankiteo incident briefing, we review the Amazon Web Services (AWS) breach identified under incident ID AMA1781685326.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Amazon Web Services (AWS)'s information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/amazon-web-services, the number of followers: 10888264, the industry type: IT Services and IT Consulting and the number of employees: 148035 employees

After the initial compromise, the video explains how Rankiteo's incident engine converts technical details into a normalized incident score. The incident score before the incident was 817 and after the incident was 813 with a difference of -4 which is could be a good indicator of the severity and impact of the incident.

In the next step of the video, we will analyze in more details the incident and the impact it had on Amazon Web Services (AWS) and their customers.

On 29 July 2019, Capital One disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Capital One Breach: One of the Largest Financial Data Exposures in U.S. History".

In 2019, Capital One suffered one of the most significant financial data breaches in U.S.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting AWS cloud infrastructure, data storage buckets, and exposing 106 million records (names, addresses, phone numbers, emails, dates of birth, self-reported income, Social Security numbers, bank account numbers, credit scores, limits, balances, payment histories), with nearly 106 million records at risk, plus an estimated financial loss of $270 million (fines and settlements).

In response, teams activated the incident response plan, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Patched vulnerability, revoked compromised credentials, and began remediation that includes Overhaul of cloud security protocols, enhanced monitoring, and stakeholders are being briefed through Public disclosure on July 29, 2019.

The case underscores how Closed (conviction in 2022, resentencing in 2025), teams are taking away lessons such as Critical cloud security lapses (misconfigured firewall, inadequate audits, delayed detection). Importance of risk assessment before cloud migration, and recommending next steps like Improve cloud security protocols, enhance internal audits, implement real-time monitoring for unauthorized access, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Yes (public disclosure, class-action settlement details).

Finally, we try to match the incident with the MITRE ATT&CK framework to see if there is any correlation between the incident and the MITRE ATT&CK framework.

The MITRE ATT&CK framework is a knowledge base of techniques and sub-techniques that are used to describe the tactics and procedures of cyber adversaries. It is a powerful tool for understanding the threat landscape and for developing effective defense strategies.

MITRE ATT&CK® Correlation Analysis

Rankiteo's analysis has identified several MITRE ATT&CK tactics and techniques associated with this incident, each with varying levels of confidence based on available evidence. Under the Initial Access tactic, the analysis identified Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting a misconfigured web application firewall in Capital One’s cloud infrastructure and External Remote Services (T1133) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating used server-side request forgery (SSRF) attack to extract temporary AWS credentials. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating sSRF attack exploited misconfigured firewall to execute unauthorized requests. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Steal Application Access Token (T1528) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating extracted temporary AWS credentials via SSRF attack. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating accessed hundreds of Capital One’s data storage buckets. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating compromised 106 million records including SSNs, bank account details, credit scores. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating exfiltrated data between March 22–23, 2019. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating misconfigured firewall enabled SSRF attack to bypass security controls. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating no evidence of data destruction, but breach exposed sensitive data and Defacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001) with lower confidence (20%), supported by evidence indicating no evidence of defacement, but unauthorized access occurred. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Exploit Public-Facing Application (90%)
External Remote Services (80%)
Execution
Exploitation for Client Execution (70%)
Credential Access
Steal Application Access Token (90%)
Discovery
File and Directory Discovery (80%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Defense Evasion
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (70%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Defacement: Internal Defacement (20%)

Sources & References