Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
AWS Partners

AWS Partners Vendor Cyber Rating & Cyber Score

amazon.com

AWS Partners and AWS Marketplace sellers are uniquely positioned to help businesses take full advantage of Amazon Web Services (AWS) and accelerate your journey to the cloud. AWS has millions of active customers and over 100,000 Partners globally. More than 90% of Fortune 100 companies and the majority of Fortune 500 companies use AWS Partner solutions and services. Whether you are a fast growing startup, small-medium or large enterprise, or leading government agency, AWS Partners have deep technical expertise and the experience to support virtually every use case, industry, and workload. For businesses actively searching for software on AWS that you can test, buy, and deploy, AWS Marketplace is a digital catalog with thousands of


AWS Partners A.I CyberSecurity Scoring

AWS Partners
Company Information
Website:https://aws.amazon.com/partners/work-with-partners/
Employees number:None
Number of followers:48,207
NAICS:5415
Industry Type:IT Services and IT Consulting
Homepage:amazon.com
AWS Partners Risk Score (AI oriented)
Between 600 and 649
logo
AWS PartnersIT Services and IT Consulting
Updated:
02/04/2026
629/1000
Poor
Caa
AaaAaABaaBaBCaaCaC
Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
Insurance prefers TPRM score to calculate premium
AWS Partners Global Score (TPRM)
xxxx
logo
AWS PartnersIT Services and IT Consulting
•••
Score locked
Instant access to detailed risk factors
Vulnerabilities
Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
Findings

AWS Partners
AWS PartnersPoor
Current Score
629Caa (POOR)
01000
4 incidents
-35.25 avg impact
Incident timeline with MITRE ATT&CK tactics, techniques, and mitigations.
JUNE 2026
637Before Incident
MAY 2026
632Before Incident
APRIL 2026
634Before Incident
Vulnerability
02 Apr 2026AWS Partners
GitHub, Stripe and AWS: Thousands of API credentials exposed on public websites

Thousands of API Credentials Exposed Across 10,000 Websites, Researchers Warn

629After Incident
CRITICAL-5
AWSGITSTR1775163155
Thousands of API Credentials Exposed Across 10,000 Websites, Researchers Warn A recent analysis of 10 million websites has revealed nearly 2,000 exposed API credentials across 10,000 webpages, posing a significant security risk to organizations. Conducted by researchers from Stanford University, the University of California, Davis, and TU Delft, the study used the tool TruffleHog to scan for sensitive credentials embedded in public-facing web content. The findings, detailed in a preprint paper, identified 1,748 valid credentials for major services, including AWS, GitHub, and Stripe. These credentials belonging to multinational corporations, critical infrastructure providers, and government agencies grant programmatic access to cloud platforms, payment systems, and firmware repositories. Among the most concerning discoveries was a global bank exposing cloud credentials on its website, potentially allowing access to core infrastructure. Another case involved firmware repository credentials for drones and remote-controlled devices, raising concerns about malicious updates. The majority of exposed credentials were found in JavaScript files, with AWS credentials accounting for over 16% of verified exposures. Researchers emphasized that this overlooked attack vector credentials embedded in webpages rather than code repositories presents a direct threat to sensitive systems. The study underscores the need for organizations to monitor and secure publicly accessible web assets to prevent unauthorized access.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Data Exposure
IMPACT
Data Compromised: API credentials for cloud platforms, payment systems, and firmware repositoriesSystems Affected: Cloud platforms, payment systems, firmware repositories, drones, remote-controlled devicesOperational Impact: Potential unauthorized access to core infrastructure and sensitive systemsBrand Reputation Impact: Potential reputational damage due to exposed credentialsPayment Information Risk: Potential risk to payment systems
DATA BREACH
Type Of Data Compromised: API credentialsNumber Of Records Exposed: 1,748 valid credentialsSensitivity Of Data: High (cloud platforms, payment systems, firmware repositories)JavaScript files
MARCH 2026
675Before Incident
FEBRUARY 2026
673Before Incident
JANUARY 2026
745Before Incident
Breach
30 Jan 2026AWS Partners
DigitalOcean, OVH and AWS: Moltbot Operators Leak Control Panels via Exposed mDNS Traffic

Moltbot Framework Exposes 1,400+ Instances via mDNS Misconfigurations

672After Incident
CRITICAL-73
AWSDIGOVH1769784401
Moltbot Framework Exposes 1,400+ Instances via mDNS Misconfigurations Security researchers have uncovered a widespread exposure of 1,487 Moltbot instances globally, leaking sensitive operational metadata and messaging platform credentials through misconfigured multicast DNS (mDNS) broadcasts. The open-source framework, designed for autonomous agent orchestration, inadvertently disclosed system-level details including hostnames, filesystem paths, service ports, and identity artifacts to any device on the same network segment. ### Key Findings - Exposed Data: Full machine hostnames, Clawdbot Control panel ports (18789), SSH ports, internal IPs, and messaging platform credentials (Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp) containing registration secrets and identity keys. - Geographic Spread: Instances were found across 53 countries, with the highest concentration in the U.S. Major hosting providers included DigitalOcean, AWS, and OVH. - Accessible Control Panels: 88 instances had publicly exposed web interfaces, with 66 leaking both mDNS and web access simultaneously. - Credential Leakage: Open directory listings revealed operational logs, cryptographic material, and runtime caches, enabling full agent impersonation without exploiting vulnerabilities. - Network Reconnaissance: mDNS broadcasts, intended for local service discovery, acted as pre-authentication metadata leaks, exposing systems in workplace Wi-Fi, co-working spaces, and university networks. ### Deployment Failures & Attack Surface The exposure stems from poor deployment hygiene rather than software flaws. Many instances self-announced internal structures via mDNS, providing attackers with reconnaissance data without active probing. A dedicated honeypot with 25 open ports suggested early attacker interest, while 635 accessible web control interfaces further expanded the attack surface. The combination of service advertisements, open directories, and credential leaks creates pre-authentication compromise risks, allowing adversaries to bypass authentication, hijack agent identities, or conduct phishing and lateral movement attacks. The findings highlight systemic misconfigurations in Moltbot deployments, where operators often overlook mDNS implications and basic access controls.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Misconfiguration
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Hostnames, filesystem paths, service ports, messaging platform credentials (Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp), operational logs, cryptographic material, runtime cachesSystems Affected: 1,487 Moltbot instancesOperational Impact: Pre-authentication compromise risks, agent identity hijacking, phishing, lateral movement attacksIdentity Theft Risk: High (identity artifacts and credentials exposed)
DATA BREACH
Type Of Data Compromised: Operational metadata, messaging platform credentials, cryptographic material, runtime cachesNumber Of Records Exposed: 1,487 instancesSensitivity Of Data: High (identity artifacts, credentials, internal IPs, service ports)File Types Exposed: Logs, cryptographic material, runtime cachesPersonally Identifiable Information: Hostnames, identity artifacts, messaging platform credentials
DECEMBER 2025
761Before Incident
Cyber Attack
29 Dec 2025AWS Partners
LinkedIn and AWS: FIN6 exploits HR workflows to breach corporate defenses

FIN6 Skeleton Spider Campaign Targeting HR Professionals via Fake Job Applications

745After Incident
LOW-16
LINAWS1766995316
FIN6 Exploits Cloud Infrastructure in Sophisticated HR-Targeted Phishing Campaign The financially motivated cybercrime group FIN6 (also known as Skeleton Spider) is leveraging fake job applications and trusted cloud services to target human resources (HR) professionals in a highly evasive social engineering campaign. Researchers at DomainTools uncovered the operation, which combines professional networking platforms like LinkedIn and Indeed with malware-hosted cloud infrastructure to bypass traditional security defenses. ### How the Attack Works 1. Initial Contact – Attackers pose as job seekers on professional platforms, engaging recruiters to build rapport before sending phishing emails with malicious links. 2. Fake Resume Sites – Domains mimicking real applicant names (e.g., bobbyweisman[.]com, ryanberardi[.]com) are registered via GoDaddy’s anonymous services and hosted on AWS EC2 or S3, blending into legitimate cloud traffic. 3. Sophisticated Evasion – The sites employ traffic filtering to distinguish targets from security researchers, checking IP reputation, geolocation, OS, and browser fingerprints. Only residential Windows users bypass CAPTCHA walls to receive malicious ZIP files containing the More_eggs backdoor. 4. Malware DeploymentMore_eggs, a modular JavaScript backdoor, operates in memory to evade detection, enabling credential theft, command execution, and follow-on attacks, including ransomware deployment. ### Why HR is a Prime Target HR teams frequently interact with external contacts and handle unsolicited communications, making them vulnerable to social engineering. The campaign exploits this trust, using realistic job lures to bypass email filters and endpoint security. FIN6’s shift from point-of-sale (POS) breaches to enterprise ransomware underscores its evolution toward higher-value targets. ### Cloud Abuse & Detection Challenges Attackers favor AWS and other cloud platforms due to: - Low-cost setup (free-tier abuse or compromised billing accounts). - Trusted IP ranges that evade enterprise network filters. - Scalability for hosting malicious infrastructure. The campaign highlights gaps in perimeter-based security, as traditional defenses struggle to detect threats embedded in legitimate cloud services. Security teams are advised to monitor for unusual traffic patterns and suspicious file types linked to cloud-hosted malware. ### AWS Response & Broader Implications An AWS spokesperson stated the company enforces terms prohibiting illegal use and acts swiftly on abuse reports. However, the incident raises questions about balancing cloud accessibility with security controls, particularly as threat actors increasingly exploit trusted infrastructure. FIN6’s operation demonstrates how low-complexity phishing, when paired with cloud evasion techniques, can outmaneuver even advanced detection tools—reinforcing the need for holistic security strategies that address both technical and human vulnerabilities.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Phishing/Social Engineering, Malware Delivery
MOTIVATION
Financial gain, credential theft, follow-on attacks (e.g., ransomware deployment)
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Credentials, sensitive employee data, system accessSystems Affected: HR systems, corporate networksOperational Impact: Potential disruption of HR operations, follow-on attacks (e.g., ransomware)Brand Reputation Impact: Potential reputational damage due to compromised HR processesIdentity Theft Risk: High (credential theft, PII exposure)
DATA BREACH
Type Of Data Compromised: Credentials, personally identifiable information (PII), sensitive employee dataSensitivity Of Data: High (PII, credentials, HR data)Data Exfiltration: Possible (More_eggs malware enables follow-on attacks)File Types Exposed: Malicious ZIP files containing JavaScript-based malware (More_eggs)Personally Identifiable Information: Yes (credentials, HR data)
NOVEMBER 2025
761Before Incident
OCTOBER 2025
761Before Incident
SEPTEMBER 2025
761Before Incident
Cyber Attack
18 Sep 2025AWS Partners
Salesforce

ShinyHunters Exploits Compromised Drift OAuth Tokens to Steal 1.5B Salesforce Records

714After Incident
CRITICAL-47
SAL5732257091825
The ShinyHunters extortion group exploited compromised Drift OAuth tokens linked to Salesloft to steal over 1.5 billion Salesforce records from 760 companies. Attackers used social engineering and malicious OAuth apps to infiltrate Salesforce environments, exfiltrating massive CRM data—including 250M Account records, 579M Contact records, 171M Opportunity records, 60M User records, and 459M Case records. The breach originated from a GitHub repository compromise at Salesloft, where attackers used TruffleHog to extract secrets, including OAuth tokens for Drift and Drift Email, enabling unauthorized access to Salesforce-integrated systems.The stolen Case data was further mined for AWS keys, Snowflake tokens, and other credentials, facilitating deeper intrusions into victim networks. High-profile targets allegedly include Google, Cloudflare, Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler, Tenable, CyberArk, and others. The attackers demanded ransom payments to prevent data leaks, while also searching for additional secrets to expand their campaign. The FBI issued an advisory on the threat actors (UNC6040/6395), warning of ongoing risks. Salesforce advised customers to enforce MFA, least-privilege access, and stricter OAuth app management to mitigate exposure.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Data BreachExtortionUnauthorized AccessCredential Theft
MOTIVATION
Financial Gain (Extortion)Data Theft for ResaleReputation DamageFurther Intrusion (Credential Harvesting)
IMPACT
Salesforce Account: 250 million recordsSalesforce Contact: 579 million recordsSalesforce Opportunity: 171 million recordsSalesforce User: 60 million recordsSalesforce Case: 459 million recordsTotal: 1.5 billion recordsSalesforce CRMDrift AI Chat/Email ServicesSalesloft PlatformGitHub Repository (Salesloft)Connected Applications (AWS, Snowflake, etc.)Unauthorized Data AccessExtortion ThreatsPotential Further Intrusions via Stolen CredentialsReputation Damage for Affected CompaniesHigh (Public Disclosure of Breach)Loss of Customer TrustPotential Regulatory ScrutinyHigh (PII in Contact/Account Records)Credential Stuffing Risk
DATA BREACH
CRM Data (Salesforce Objects)Account RecordsContact Records (PII)Opportunity RecordsUser RecordsCase Records (Support Tickets)AWS KeysSnowflake TokensOther CredentialsNumber Of Records Exposed: 1.5 billionHigh (PII, Business-Critical CRM Data, Credentials)Confirmed (Massive Scale)Evidence: Shared File Listing Salesloft’s Breached Source Code FoldersSalesforce Database RecordsSource Code (Salesloft GitHub)Configuration FilesAPI Keys/SecretsContact Records (Names, Email Addresses, Phone Numbers, etc.)User Records (Employee/Client Data)
AUGUST 2025
761Before Incident
JULY 2025
761Before Incident

Frequently Asked Questions

?
What is the current A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score for AWS Partners ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in May 2026 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in April 2026 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in March 2026 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in February 2026 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in January 2026 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in December 2025 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in November 2025 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in October 2025 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in September 2025 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in August 2025 ?
?
What was AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in July 2025 ?
?
What is the average per-incident point impact on AWS Partners's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score over the past 12 months ?
?
Where can I access detailed records of all cyber incidents associated with AWS Partners ?
?
Where can I find a summary of the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
?
Where can I view AWS Partners's profile page on Rankiteo ?
?
How accurate is the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?