Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Bennett Jones » BEN1776206341

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (BEN1776206341)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-17
Company Score Before Incident757 / 1000
Company Score After Incident740 / 1000
Company LinkView Bennett Jones Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERBEN1776206341
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORPhishing
DATA EXPOSEDSensitive client data
INCIDENT DATE31/12/2024
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Bennett Jones'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 Bennett Jones 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 Bennett Jones breach identified under incident ID BEN1776206341.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Bennett Jones's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/bennett-jones, the number of followers: 32506, the industry type: Law Practice and the number of employees: 1153 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 757 and after the incident was 740 with a difference of -17 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 Bennett Jones and their customers.

Jones Day recently reported "Cyberattack on Law Firm Exposing Sensitive Client Data", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

A cyberattack on a law firm, attributed to a hacker group targeting legal practices, exposed sensitive data belonging to 10 of its clients.

The disruption is felt across the environment, and exposing Sensitive client data.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

Overall, the incident is a reminder of why proactive monitoring and strong governance matter.

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 (T1566) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including attack vector such as Phishing, and hacker group targeting legal practices. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating phishing often precedes credential harvesting and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating sensitive client data exposed (high-value target). Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating sensitive client data belonging to 10 clients exposed. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data breach involving sensitive client data. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating no details on data integrity post-breach and Data Manipulation (T1565) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating aI hallucinations mentioned as risk vector. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Phishing (90%)
Credential Access
Brute Force (50%)
Credentials from Password Stores (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (70%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Data Manipulation (40%)

Sources & References