Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (CHABSTORA1777538345)
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 BST'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 BST 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 BST breach identified under incident ID CHABSTORA1777538345.
The analysis begins with a detailed overview of BST's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/bst, the number of followers: 3267, the industry type: Business Consulting and Services and the number of employees: 1010 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 756 and after the incident was 567 with a difference of -189 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 BST and their customers.
BST & Co. CPAs LLP recently reported "HIPAA Security Rule Compliance Gaps and Enforcement Trends (2024-2026)", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.
April 2026 marks 21 years since the HIPAA Security Rule’s compliance deadline, highlighting rising cyberthreats, regulatory scrutiny, and persistent compliance gaps in healthcare.
The disruption is felt across the environment, and exposing 192.7 million records (Change Healthcare), with nearly 192.7 million (Change Healthcare) records at risk, plus an estimated financial loss of $175,000 (BST & Co. CPAs LLP penalty) + $1.15M average ransom payments.
In response, teams activated the incident response plan.
The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as Compliance is an ongoing process requiring adaptability to evolving threats, technology, and regulatory expectations. Key gaps include inadequate security risk analysis, poor vendor oversight, and untested incident response plans. Encryption and workforce training are critical baseline expectations, and recommending next steps like Conduct comprehensive, enterprise-wide risk analyses and translate findings into actionable safeguards, Treat business associate risk as enterprise risk with rigorous due diligence and contractual controls and Ensure incident response plans, workforce training, and encryption practices are tested, documented, and defensible.
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%), supported by evidence indicating phishing accounted for 30% of incidents in 2025, Trusted Relationship (T1199) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating business associates responsible for 35% of healthcare incidents, and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating third-party access vulnerabilities in business associates. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution (T1204) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating human error and workforce behavior remain leading causes. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating third-party access via business associates. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating business associates with access to sensitive systems. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating untested incident response plans and lack of encryption and Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attacks with data encryption. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Adversary-in-the-Middle (T1557) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating phishing and social engineering attacks and Brute Force (T1110) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating lack of security risk analysis and weak controls. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery (T1087) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating third-party access to healthcare systems. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Remote Services (T1021) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating business associates with access to multiple systems. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating 192.7 million records exposed in Change Healthcare breach and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating patient records and PII compromised. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol (T1071) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attacks with data exfiltration. 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 in ransomware attacks and Transfer Data to Cloud Account (T1537) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating large-scale data breaches via third parties. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attacks with data encryption, Defacement (T1491) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating disrupted patient care and operational impact, and Service Stop (T1489) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating 12.7-day average restoration period. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.
Sources & References
- BST Rankiteo Cyber Incident Details: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/bst/incident/CHABSTORA1777538345
- BST CyberSecurity Rating page: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/bst
- BST Rankiteo Cyber Incident Blog Article: https://blog.rankiteo.com/chabstora1777538345-oracle-health-bst-co-cpas-llp-change-healthcare-breach-february-2024/
- BST CyberSecurity Score History: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/bst/history
- BST CyberSecurity Incident Source: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/hipaa-at-21-years-of-compliance-why-the-7124107/
- 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