Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (SEKCRRK3GGRECIB1767799956)
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 CiberC LATAM'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 CiberC LATAM 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 CiberC LATAM breach identified under incident ID SEKCRRK3GGRECIB1767799956.
The analysis begins with a detailed overview of CiberC LATAM's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/ciberc-latam, the number of followers: 21298, the industry type: Telecommunications and the number of employees: 184 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 754 and after the incident was 688 with a difference of -66 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 CiberC LATAM and their customers.
Pickett & Associates recently reported "Massive Corporate Data Breach via Stolen Credentials", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.
A lone hacker, believed to be an Iranian national operating under the names Zestix and Sentap, breached approximately 50 major companies worldwide by exploiting stolen credentials obtained via infostealers.
The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting File-sharing platforms (ShareFile, Nextcloud, OwnCloud), and exposing Massive amounts of corporate data, including medical records, military blueprints, and internal documents.
Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.
The case underscores how Ongoing (research by Hudson Rock), teams are taking away lessons such as Basic security measures like Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) and regular password changes could have prevented the breach. Stolen credentials remain a significant threat if not properly secured, and recommending next steps like Enforce Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) on all corporate systems, Regularly update and rotate passwords and Monitor for stolen credentials in dark web forums.
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 (95%), supported by evidence indicating exploited weak security practices—specifically, the absence of multi-factor authentication (MFA) and Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (T1078.004) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access to corporate file-sharing platforms like ShareFile, Nextcloud, and OwnCloud. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating infostealer malware—including RedLine, Lumma, and Vidar—to harvest passwords from unsuspecting individuals and Credentials from Web Browsers (T1555.003) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating silently extract saved browser credentials. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating infostealers...distributed through malicious downloads or cracked software. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating stolen data spans highly sensitive materials such as aircraft safety manuals, utility infrastructure maps and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating infiltrate corporate systems via file-sharing platforms like ShareFile, Nextcloud, and OwnCloud. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (85%), supported by evidence indicating stolen data is now being auctioned on dark web forums and Exfiltration Over Web Service (T1567) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating auctioned on dark web forums. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Subvert Trust Controls: Install Root Certificate (T1553.004) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating infostealers like RedLine, Lumma, and Vidar often evade detection and Valid Accounts (T1078) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating used to infiltrate corporate systems without triggering alarms. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating no indication of whether affected organizations have secured their systems post-breach and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating stolen data auctioned on dark web forums. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.
Sources & References
- CiberC LATAM Rankiteo Cyber Incident Details: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/ciberc-latam/incident/SEKCRRK3GGRECIB1767799956
- CiberC LATAM CyberSecurity Rating page: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/ciberc-latam
- CiberC LATAM Rankiteo Cyber Incident Blog Article: https://blog.rankiteo.com/sekcrrk3ggrecib1767799956-breach-january-2026/
- CiberC LATAM CyberSecurity Score History: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/ciberc-latam/history
- CiberC LATAM CyberSecurity Incident Source: https://hackread.com/lone-hacker-infostealers-global-companies-data/
- 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