Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Anonymous Hackers » TESANOCAREXC1773160646

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (TESANOCAREXC1773160646)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-31
Company Score Before Incident766 / 1000
Company Score After Incident735 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERTESANOCAREXC1773160646
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORSocial Media Coordination, Exploited Vulnerabilities, Router Compromises, SCADA System Attacks
DATA EXPOSEDPersonal Data, User Credentials, Payment...
INCIDENT DATE26/02/2026
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Anonymous Hackers'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 Anonymous Hackers 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 Anonymous Hackers breach identified under incident ID TESANOCAREXC1773160646.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Anonymous Hackers's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/anonymous-hackers-group, the number of followers: 529, the industry type: Technology, Information and Internet and the number of employees: 34 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 766 and after the incident was 735 with a difference of -31 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 Anonymous Hackers and their customers.

On 27 February 2026, Oil and Gas Organizations disclosed DDoS, Website Defacement and Data Breach issues under the banner "Geopolitical Escalation Triggers Surge in Hacktivist Cyberattacks".

A new analysis by Intel 471 reveals that U.S.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Home Routers, Military Systems and Telecommunications, and exposing Personal Data, User Credentials and Payment Details.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as The conflict demonstrates the integration of cyber operations into military strategy, with global supply chains and critical infrastructure remaining vulnerable. Proactive resilience strategies are essential amid evolving threats, and recommending next steps like Organizations should enhance monitoring, implement network segmentation, and prepare for disruptive cyber activities targeting banking, government, oil and gas, and telecommunications sectors.

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 moderate confidence (60%), with evidence including exploited vulnerabilities, and sCADA System Attacks, External Remote Services (T1133) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating compromised home routers linked to an Israeli fiber-optic provider, and Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating exposed user credentials and payment details. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating dDoS attacks targeting military and government entities and Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating exploited vulnerabilities in SCADA systems. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Account Manipulation (T1098) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating exposed user credentials and payment details. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating compromised military systems, including Iron Dome. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Endpoint Denial of Service: Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating dDoS attacks to disrupt communications and Masquerading (T1036) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating website defacements for propaganda. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating exposed user credentials and payment details and Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating compromised home routers and SCADA systems. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating data breach claims targeting military and government entities. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating personal data, user credentials, and payment details compromised. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol (T1071) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating coordination through social media and messaging platforms. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data breach claims, exposed user credentials and payment details. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware threats mentioned, Defacement (T1491) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating website defacements for propaganda and disruption, Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating dDoS attacks disrupting communications and services, and Data Destruction (T0881) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating disabled warning sirens and disrupted power infrastructure. 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 (60%)
External Remote Services (70%)
Valid Accounts (50%)
Execution
Endpoint Denial of Service (90%)
Exploitation for Client Execution (60%)
Persistence
Account Manipulation (50%)
Privilege Escalation
Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (60%)
Defense Evasion
Endpoint Denial of Service: Application or System Exploitation (80%)
Masquerading (50%)
Credential Access
Credentials from Password Stores (70%)
Brute Force (50%)
Discovery
File and Directory Discovery (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (40%)
Defacement (90%)
Endpoint Denial of Service (90%)
Data Destruction (50%)