Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation » ANA1770280566

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (ANA1770280566)

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 Incident807 / 1000
Company Score After Incident803 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERANA1770280566
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORSpear-phishing emails, Zero-click vulnerability exploitation
DATA EXPOSEDGovernment and military communications, sensitive...
INCIDENT DATE27/01/2026
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation's Cyber Attack 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 Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation 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 Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation breach identified under incident ID ANA1770280566.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/analytical-center-for-the-government-of-the-russian-federation, the number of followers: 0, the industry type: Public Policy Offices and the number of employees: 47 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 807 and after the incident was 803 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 Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation and their customers.

On 28 January 2026, a cybersecurity incident called "APT28 Exploits Zero-Click Microsoft Office Flaw in European Espionage Campaign" came to light.

In late January 2026, Russian state-backed hacking group APT28 (Fancy Bear) launched a targeted cyberespionage campaign against government and military organizations in Poland, Greece, and Ukraine, focusing on maritime and transport agencies.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Microsoft Office and Microsoft Outlook, and exposing Government and military communications, sensitive documents.

In response, and began remediation that includes Patch CVE-2026-21509, monitor for unusual filen.io traffic or NotDoor-related Outlook rules.

The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as The campaign underscored APT28’s ability to blend malicious activity with legitimate traffic, complicating detection. Organizations must prioritize patching zero-day vulnerabilities and monitoring for unusual traffic patterns, and recommending next steps like Patch CVE-2026-21509 immediately, Monitor for unusual filen.io traffic and Check for NotDoor-related Outlook rules.

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 Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment (T1566.001) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including spear-phishing emails disguised as official communications, and attachments...mimicked legitimate government documents and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting a newly discovered zero-click vulnerability (CVE-2026-21509) in Microsoft Office. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including zero-click vulnerability (CVE-2026-21509) in Microsoft Office’s OLE handling, and malware execution without user interaction and Command and Scripting Interpreter: Visual Basic (T1059.005) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating multi-stage infection chain via Microsoft Office exploit. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Registry Run Keys / Startup Folder (T1547.001) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating simpleLoader ensured persistence. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Masquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (T1036.005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including pNG-embedded malware (BeardShell) disguised as an image, and attachments mimicked legitimate government documents, Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), with evidence including webDAV connection to fetch the payload, and covenant C2 communicated via filen.io, and Hide Artifacts: Hidden Window (T1564.003) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating notDoor backdoor created hidden email forwarding rules. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Email Collection: Remote Email Collection (T1114.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating notDoor backdoor targeted Microsoft Outlook, created hidden email forwarding rules. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Email Collection: Remote Email Collection (T1114.002) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating notDoor backdoor forwarded emails containing keywords like secret or report and Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating exfiltrated government and military communications, sensitive documents. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating covenant C2 framework communicated via filen.io (legitimate cloud service) and Ingress Tool Transfer (T1105) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating webDAV connection to fetch the payload. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including notDoor backdoor exfiltrated emails via hidden forwarding rules, and covenant C2 via filen.io and Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (T1567.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating covenant C2 communicated via filen.io (legitimate cloud service). These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment (90%)
Exploit Public-Facing Application (80%)
Execution
Exploitation for Client Execution (90%)
Command and Scripting Interpreter: Visual Basic (70%)
Persistence
Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Registry Run Keys / Startup Folder (60%)
Defense Evasion
Masquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (80%)
Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (70%)
Hide Artifacts: Hidden Window (60%)
Credential Access
Email Collection: Remote Email Collection (80%)
Collection
Email Collection: Remote Email Collection (90%)
Data from Local System (80%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (90%)
Ingress Tool Transfer (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (80%)

Sources & References