Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Australian Medical Council » AUS1781591338

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (AUS1781591338)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-103
Company Score Before Incident763 / 1000
Company Score After Incident660 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERAUS1781591338
Type of Cyber IncidentRansomware
ATTACK VECTORNA
DATA EXPOSEDBusiness processes, blank forms, correspondence
INCIDENT DATE11/06/2026
STATUSOngoing (ACSC investigation)

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Australian Medical Council's Ransomware 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 Australian Medical Council 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 Australian Medical Council breach identified under incident ID AUS1781591338.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Australian Medical Council's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/australian-medical-council, the number of followers: 13715, the industry type: Non-profit Organizations and the number of employees: 244 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 763 and after the incident was 660 with a difference of -103 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 Australian Medical Council and their customers.

On 12 June 2024, Australian Medical Council (AMC) disclosed Ransomware issues under the banner "ThreeAM Ransomware Group Falsely Claims Australian Medical Council as Victim".

On 12 June, the ThreeAM ransomware group listed the Australian Medical Council (AMC) as one of a dozen victims on its darknet leak site.

The disruption is felt across the environment, and exposing Business processes, blank forms, correspondence.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Public denial of breach and clarification of data ownership.

The case underscores how Ongoing (ACSC investigation), teams are taking away lessons such as Ransomware groups may misrepresent breaches or exaggerate the significance of stolen data. Organizations should verify claims and communicate transparently with stakeholders, and recommending next steps like Enhance monitoring for false breach claims, maintain clear communication with regulatory bodies, and ensure robust incident response plans to address misinformation, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering AMC clarified that it does not hold patient data and is not responsible for the leaked information.

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 lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating threeAM ransomware group listed AMC as victim on darknet leak site and Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment (T1566.001) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating no details on initial access vector; common ransomware tactic. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating double-extortion tactics imply access to internal systems. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating leaked dataset includes business processes, blank forms, correspondence. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration confirmed; leaked on darknet leak site. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating threeAM employs double-extortion tactics, including data encryption and Defacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating false breach claims may aim to damage reputation. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion (T1497) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware groups often evade detection; no specific evidence here. 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 (40%)
Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment (30%)
Credential Access
Valid Accounts (50%)
Collection
Data from Local System (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (60%)
Defacement: Internal Defacement (40%)
Defense Evasion
Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion (30%)

Sources & References