Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Carolina Beach Mural Project » CARPEN1770839843

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (CARPEN1770839843)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-22
Company Score Before Incident784 / 1000
Company Score After Incident762 / 1000
Company LinkView Carolina Beach Mural Project Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERCARPEN1770839843
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORNA
DATA EXPOSEDNA
INCIDENT DATE11/02/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Carolina Beach Mural Project'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 Carolina Beach Mural Project 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 Carolina Beach Mural Project breach identified under incident ID CARPEN1770839843.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Carolina Beach Mural Project's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/carolina-beach-mural-project, the number of followers: 0, the industry type: Non-profit Organization Management and the number of employees: 1 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 784 and after the incident was 762 with a difference of -22 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 Carolina Beach Mural Project and their customers.

Carolina Beach recently reported "Carolina Beach Cyberattacks Resulting in Nearly $500,000 Loss", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

Carolina Beach officials disclosed that the town fell victim to two cyberattacks in December 2025, resulting in the theft of $487,994.80 in public funds.

The disruption is felt across the environment, plus an estimated financial loss of $487,994.80.

In response, and began remediation that includes Stricter password policies, enhanced staff training, improved encryption protocols, while recovery efforts such as Working to recover stolen funds continue.

The case underscores how Ongoing, and recommending next steps like Stricter password policies, enhanced staff training, improved encryption protocols, removal of public access terminals.

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 moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including scammers impersonating a water authority vendor, and fake request to update banking details and Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), with evidence including theft of $487,994.80 in public funds, and attack methods remain undisclosed. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating stricter password policies implemented post-incident and Unsecured Credentials (T1552) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating public access terminal removed due to privacy and security concerns. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Remote Services (T1021) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating linked to an ongoing international probe in another state. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including theft of $487,994.80 in public funds, and funds transferred to fraudulent account. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating attack methods remain undisclosed and Financial Theft (T1657) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including theft of $487,994.80 in public funds, and motivation such as Financial Gain. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), with evidence including attack methods remain undisclosed, and linked to international probe and Hide Artifacts (T1564) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating details on the attack methods remain undisclosed. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Phishing (80%)
Valid Accounts (70%)
Credential Access
Brute Force (50%)
Unsecured Credentials (60%)
Lateral Movement
Remote Services (50%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (30%)
Financial Theft (90%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts (70%)
Hide Artifacts (50%)

Sources & References