Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Canopy Cancer Care » MANCAN1768238831

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (MANCAN1768238831)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-151
Company Score Before Incident761 / 1000
Company Score After Incident610 / 1000
Company LinkView Canopy Cancer Care Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERMANCAN1768238831
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORNA
DATA EXPOSEDYes
INCIDENT DATE17/07/2025
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Canopy Cancer Care'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 Canopy Cancer Care 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 Canopy Cancer Care breach identified under incident ID MANCAN1768238831.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Canopy Cancer Care's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/canopy-cancer-care, the number of followers: 801, the industry type: Hospitals and Health Care and the number of employees: 46 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 761 and after the incident was 610 with a difference of -151 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 Canopy Cancer Care and their customers.

On 18 July 2025, Canopy Health disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Canopy Health Cyberattack".

Canopy Health, the largest private medical oncology provider in New Zealand, identified that an unknown person temporarily obtained unauthorized access to a part of its systems used by its administration team.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Administration server, and exposing Yes.

In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Incident contained, and stakeholders are being briefed through Public disclosure on website, injunction obtained to prevent publication of accessed information.

The case underscores how Ongoing, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering 50% of affected patients contacted (as of later update).

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 moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access to a part of its systems used by its administration team and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating vulnerabilities in the healthcare sector. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified OS Credential Dumping (T1003) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating access to an administrative server. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating some data may have been copied from administrative server. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating data may have been copied and Exfiltration Over Web Service (T1567) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating healthcare organizations becoming prime targets for cybercriminals. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Disabling Security Tools (T1089) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating incident was contained, forensic review conducted and Execution Guardrails (T1480) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating urgent injunction from the New Zealand High Court to block use/publication. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating data may have been copied and Defacement (T1491) with lower confidence (20%), supported by evidence indicating legal actions such as injunctions to prevent data leaks. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Valid Accounts (60%)
Exploit Public-Facing Application (40%)
Credential Access
OS Credential Dumping (50%)
Collection
Data from Local System (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (60%)
Exfiltration Over Web Service (50%)
Defense Evasion
Disabling Security Tools (40%)
Execution Guardrails (30%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Defacement (20%)

Sources & References