Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (BEN1787034582)
The details regarding individual company incidents & reports gives you full view from every side.
Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis
Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis
- Timeline of Bendigo Bank's Breach 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 Bendigo Bank 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 Bendigo Bank breach identified under incident ID BEN1787034582.
The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Bendigo Bank's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/bendigobank, the number of followers: 59855, the industry type: Banking and the number of employees: 9185 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 770 and after the incident was 674 with a difference of -96 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 Bendigo Bank and their customers.
On 03 March 2023, Bendigo Bank (Alliance Bank business) disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Bendigo Bank Cyber Breach Exploiting Unaddressed Vulnerabilities".
Between 3 and 7 March 2023, a hacker exploited weak customer authentication controls in Bendigo Bank’s Alliance Bank business, accessing 257 customer accounts and executing 286 unauthorized transactions totaling $490,000, affecting 87 customers.
The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Alliance Bank business customer authentication systems, and exposing Customer account information, with nearly 257 accounts accessed records at risk, plus an estimated financial loss of $490,000 (unauthorized transactions).
In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Reimbursement of affected customers, and began remediation that includes Proposed $8 million pecuniary penalty, rectification program under licence conditions.
The case underscores how Completed (Deloitte root cause analysis finalized), teams are taking away lessons such as Persistent non-financial risk management weaknesses, including governance, accountability, and risk oversight deficiencies. Unaddressed vulnerabilities from prior assessments can lead to significant breaches and regulatory actions, and recommending next steps like Implement a comprehensive rectification program, independent assurance, enhanced governance and risk oversight, and cooperative engagement with regulators, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering APRA imposed formal licence conditions, $50 million operational risk capital add-on retained, potential impact on service levels or product settings.
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 Valid Accounts (T1078) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including exploited weak customer authentication controls, and accessing 257 customer accounts and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating vulnerabilities flagged during a 2020 penetration test that remained unaddressed. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating weak customer authentication controls exploited and Unsecured Credentials: Credentials in Files (T1552.006) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating unaddressed vulnerabilities from 2020 penetration test. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating executing 286 unauthorized transactions. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating accessing 257 customer accounts over multiple days. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized transactions executed using customer accounts. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating used legitimate customer accounts to evade detection and Disabling Security Tools (T1089) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating material deficiencies in governance and risk oversight. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating customer account information and transaction details compromised. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized transactions totaling $490,000 executed and Data from Cloud Storage (T1530) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating accessed 257 customer accounts in Alliance Bank business. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with lower confidence (20%), supported by evidence indicating no details on data encryption, but financial impact evident and Financial Theft (T1657) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating $490,000 in unauthorized transactions, financial gain motivation. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.
Sources & References
- Bendigo Bank Rankiteo Cyber Incident Details: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/bendigobank/incident/BEN1787034582
- Bendigo Bank CyberSecurity Rating page: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/bendigobank
- Bendigo Bank Rankiteo Cyber Incident Blog Article: https://blog.rankiteo.com/ben1787034582-bendigo-bank-breach-march-2023/
- Bendigo Bank CyberSecurity Score History: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/bendigobank/history
- Bendigo Bank CyberSecurity Incident Source: https://www.brokernews.com.au/news/breaking-news/bendigo-bank-hit-with-apra-licence-conditions-after-cyber-breach-admission-289822.aspx
- Rankiteo A.I CyberSecurity Rating methodology: https://www.rankiteo.com/Images/rankiteo_algo.pdf
- Rankiteo TPRM Scoring methodology: https://static.rankiteo.com/model/rankiteo_tprm_methodology.pdf