Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Cisco Talos

Cisco Talos Vendor Cyber Rating & Cyber Score

talosintelligence.com

Cisco Talos is one of the world's most trusted cybersecurity threat intelligence teams, made up of expert researchers, analysts, incident responders, and engineers. We defend Cisco customers and raise awareness of evolving threats within the cybersecurity community, partnering with industry and government organizations worldwide. Through our cloud-based security services, customers see our intelligence in action within Cisco products. This includes the indicators of compromise we track, the context we create, and detections built directly into Cisco security products. This provides clear, consistent, and automated protection against evolving threats; strengthening defenses for every customer we serve. Our job is your defense.


Cisco Talos A.I CyberSecurity Scoring

Cisco Talos
Company Information
Website:https://talosintelligence.com/
Employees number:230
Number of followers:25,926
NAICS:541514
Industry Type:Computer and Network Security
Homepage:talosintelligence.com
Cisco Talos Risk Score (AI oriented)
Between 650 and 699
logo
Cisco TalosComputer and Network Security
Updated:
20/04/2026
683/1000
Weak
B
AaaAaABaaBaBCaaCaC
Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
Insurance prefers TPRM score to calculate premium
Cisco Talos Global Score (TPRM)
xxxx
logo
Cisco TalosComputer and Network Security
•••
Score locked
Instant access to detailed risk factors
Vulnerabilities
Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
Findings

Cisco Talos
Cisco TalosWeak
Current Score
683B (WEAK)
01000
6 incidents
-12.5 avg impact
Incident timeline with MITRE ATT&CK tactics, techniques, and mitigations.
JUNE 2026
686Before Incident
MAY 2026
684Before Incident
APRIL 2026
702Before Incident
Cyber Attack
03 Apr 2026Cisco Talos
Cisco Talos Intelligence: Qilin Ransomware Uses Malicious DLL to Disable Nearly All EDR Solutions

Qilin Ransomware Group Deploys EDR-Blinding Attack Chain

682After Incident
CRITICAL-20
CIS1775204907
Qilin Ransomware Group Deploys EDR-Blinding Attack Chain The Qilin ransomware group has introduced a highly advanced, multi-stage infection chain capable of disabling over 300 endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions before executing its ransomware payload. Discovered by Cisco Talos Intelligence, the attack leverages a malicious DLL file to execute entirely in memory, minimizing forensic traces and evading traditional antivirus defenses. The attack begins with DLL side-loading, where a legitimate Windows application loads a rogue msimg32.dll instead of the authentic system library. The malicious DLL maintains normal system activity by forwarding legitimate requests to the real library while triggering its hidden payload during initialization. The malware then suppresses security event logging, neutralizes user-mode hooks, and uses structured and vectored exception handling to obscure execution from behavioral scanners. A syscall-scanning technique further bypasses EDR monitoring. Before deploying its final payload, the malware checks the system’s language settings, crashing if post-Soviet language packs are detected a tactic likely used by Russian-affiliated operators to avoid domestic law enforcement scrutiny. The payload is decrypted and mapped directly into memory using shared memory views, ensuring it never touches the hard drive in an unencrypted state. Once active, the malware escalates privileges and loads two kernel-level drivers: rwdrv.sys (a renamed legitimate driver) and hlpdrv.sys (a custom malicious driver). These drivers grant direct memory access and terminate protected EDR processes, respectively. By abusing a signed driver, the malware bypasses Windows Driver Signature Enforcement and systematically unregisters over 300 EDR monitoring callbacks, effectively blinding security tools at the kernel level. To conceal its activity, the malware temporarily disables Windows Code Integrity enforcement, allowing unrestricted kernel modifications before restoring integrity checks to reduce forensic evidence. The attack marks a significant evolution in ransomware tactics, shifting from evasion to the active dismantling of security defenses before payload execution.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Ransomware
MOTIVATION
Financial gain (ransomware)
IMPACT
Operational Impact: Disabling of over 300 EDR solutions, potential system compromise
DATA BREACH
Data Encryption: Ransomware payload encrypted in memory
MARCH 2026
702Before Incident
FEBRUARY 2026
700Before Incident
JANUARY 2026
700Before Incident
DECEMBER 2025
703Before Incident
Vulnerability
15 Dec 2025Cisco Talos
Ivanti, SonicWall and Cisco: Vulnerability exploitation surges often precede disclosure, offering possible early warnings

Exploitation Surges Preceding Vulnerability Disclosures (Dec 2025 - Mar 2026)

698After Incident
CRITICAL-5
IVASONCIS1776702475
GreyNoise Report: Exploitation Surges Often Precede Vulnerability Disclosures by Weeks A recent report from threat intelligence firm GreyNoise reveals that hackers frequently begin exploiting software vulnerabilities before vendors publicly disclose them sometimes weeks in advance. Analyzing attack patterns between mid-December 2025 and late March 2026, GreyNoise found that nearly half of all scanning and exploitation surges targeting specific products were followed by vulnerability disclosures within three weeks. The median time between a surge in malicious activity and a vendor’s disclosure was 11 days, offering organizations a potential early warning to patch or harden systems. Of the 42 scanning events observed, 57% led to disclosures, while 56% of brute-force attempts and 42% of remote-code-execution (RCE) probes also preceded public CVEs. The report highlights distinct patterns in attacker behavior: - Scanning activity was widely dispersed, with many IP addresses conducting a few sessions each likely broad reconnaissance. - Later-stage attacks (brute-force and RCE) were more concentrated, with fewer IPs generating high session volumes, suggesting targeted exploitation. - High-severity flaws generated the most probing activity, with some exploitation detected up to 39 days before disclosure. Notable examples include: - A Cisco vulnerability exploited in five surges over 18 days before disclosure, with IP activity dropping but session counts rising a shift from reconnaissance to focused attacks. - Juniper, SonicWall, and Ivanti flaws also saw early exploitation, with one Ivanti flaw targeted 36 days prior to disclosure. GreyNoise’s findings underscore that exploitation surges can serve as an early indicator of undisclosed vulnerabilities, particularly for critical infrastructure vendors. The data suggests that organizations monitoring such activity may gain a critical window to mitigate risks before patches are available.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Zero-day exploitationReconnaissanceBrute-force attackRemote Code Execution (RCE)
MOTIVATION
Exploitation of undisclosed vulnerabilitiesData exfiltrationTargeted attacks
NOVEMBER 2025
707Before Incident
OCTOBER 2025
706Before Incident
SEPTEMBER 2025
705Before Incident
AUGUST 2025
704Before Incident
JULY 2025
702Before Incident
JUNE 2025
701Before Incident
Vulnerability
16 Jun 2025Cisco Talos
Sitecore

Exploitation of CVE-2025-53690 in Sitecore Deployments via ViewState Deserialization

696After Incident
CRITICAL-5
SIT0155601090425
A zero-day vulnerability (CVE-2025-53690) in Sitecore’s Experience Manager (XM), Experience Platform (XP), and Experience Commerce (XC) was exploited by threat actors using a leaked sample ASP.NET machine key. Attackers leveraged ViewState deserialization to achieve remote code execution on exposed on-premises deployments. Post-exploitation, they deployed malware (including DWAGENT RAT), exfiltrated sensitive Sitecore configurations, stole credentials and tokens, performed Active Directory reconnaissance, and escalated privileges to domain administrator level. The attack targeted multi-instance environments with customer-managed static keys, risking lateral movement across networks. While Mandiant disrupted the attack before full execution, the breach exposed backend dependencies, user data, and network architectures, enabling potential follow-on attacks like data theft, ransomware, or system takeover. Sitecore confirmed affected customers were notified, but unpatched systems remain at risk of full infrastructure compromise and operational disruption if exploited further.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Vulnerability ExploitationRemote Code Execution (RCE)Credential TheftLateral MovementData Exfiltration
IMPACT
Sitecore Configuration FilesSystem/Network/User InformationActive Directory DataCredentials/TokensSitecore XM/XP/XC/Managed Cloud (Internet-Facing)Domain ControllersOther Network Hosts (via RDP)Unauthorized Remote AccessLateral MovementPrivilege Escalation to Domain AdminHigh (Credential Theft)Token Impersonation
DATA BREACH
Configuration FilesSystem/Network/User InformationActive Directory DataCredentialsTokensSensitivity Of Data: High (Backend Application Dependencies, AD Recon, Admin Credentials)Data Exfiltration: Yes (via __VIEWSTATE Responses and Archived Files)Sitecore Config FilesProcess/Service/Network Connection ListsUser Account DataTCP/IP Configurations
AUGUST 2024
753Before Incident
Breach
01 Aug 2024Cisco Talos
Taiwanese government-affiliated research institute

APT41 Compromise of Taiwanese Government-Affiliated Research Institute

688After Incident
CRITICAL-65
CIS005080624
APT41, a China-linked cyber threat group, compromised a Taiwanese government-affiliated research institute employing sophisticated tools like ShadowPad and Cobalt Strike. The attack involved exploiting vulnerabilities in Microsoft Office to initiate payload delivery, followed by document exfiltration, persistent access through web shells, and sophisticated evasion techniques. The institute suffered a breach of security systems resulting in the leakage of sensitive documents, possibly impacting governmental operations and data security. This incident has emphasized the need for robust cybersecurity measures within institutions that are integral to national infrastructure.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Cyber Espionage
MOTIVATION
Cyber Espionage
IMPACT
Sensitive DocumentsSecurity SystemsOperational Impact: Possible impact on governmental operations and data security
DATA BREACH
Type Of Data Compromised: Sensitive DocumentsSensitivity Of Data: HighData Exfiltration: Yes
JUNE 2023
752Before Incident
Vulnerability
16 Jun 2023Cisco Talos
Cisco

Active Exploitation of Cisco ASA and Firepower Firewall Vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-20333, CVE-2025-20362)

751After Incident
CRITICAL-1
CIS5692656111325
CISA issued an emergency directive ordering US federal agencies to urgently patch two actively exploited zero-day vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-20333 and CVE-2025-20362) in Cisco Adaptive Security Appliances (ASA) and Firepower firewalls. The flaws—enabling remote code execution (RCE) and privilege escalation—were linked to a state-sponsored threat actor (same group behind the 2023–2024 ArcaneDoor campaign). The attacker deployed custom malware to disable logging, prevent forensic analysis, and install a persistent backdoor by modifying the ROMMON bootloader. Despite repeated warnings, over 32,000 unpatched internet-facing devices remained exposed as of October 2025, risking full system compromise, lateral movement across networks, and potential data exfiltration. CISA mandated immediate firmware updates or decommissioning of legacy devices, emphasizing that even non-public-facing appliances were at risk. The vulnerabilities’ exploitation could grant attackers unrestricted access to critical infrastructure, enabling espionage, disruption of government services, or further attacks on interconnected systems. The directive also expanded to include three additional actively exploited flaws in the KEV catalog, underscoring the escalating threat to federal networks.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Vulnerability ExploitationZero-Day AttackState-Sponsored Cyber Espionage
MOTIVATION
EspionagePersistenceData Exfiltration
IMPACT
Systems Affected: ~32,000 unpatched internet-facing Cisco ASA/Firepower appliances (down from ~48,000)Potential disruption of federal agency networksRisk of persistent backdoor accessPotential reputational damage to US federal agenciesErosion of public trust in cybersecurity posture
DATA BREACH
Data Exfiltration: Potential (via custom backdoor)
JUNE 2017
753Before Incident
Vulnerability
16 Jun 2017Cisco Talos
Cisco

Exploitation of CVE-2025-20352 in Cisco Networking Devices via 'Operation Zero Disco'

751After Incident
CRITICAL-2
CIS4802448101725
Threat actors exploited a zero-day remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability (CVE-2025-20352) in older, unpatched Cisco networking devices (9400, 9300, and legacy 3750G series) to deploy a Linux rootkit named Operation Zero Disco. The rootkit grants persistent access, allows log manipulation, bypasses authentication (AAA/VTY ACLs), and enables lateral movement across VLANs via ARP spoofing. Attackers also attempted to exploit CVE-2017-3881, a 7-year-old flaw in Cisco’s Cluster Management Protocol. The malware installs fileless hooks into the IOSd process, disappearing after reboots, and leaves no reliable detection method—requiring low-level firmware/ROM analysis for confirmation. While newer switches have partial ASLR protections, sustained targeting could still compromise them. The attack risks unauthorized network control, data exfiltration, and lateral expansion within corporate or critical infrastructure environments. No public reports confirm data theft, but the rootkit’s capabilities enable stealthy, long-term persistence for future exploits. Trend Micro warns that compromised devices may serve as launchpads for broader attacks, though no direct financial, reputational, or operational damages (e.g., outages, data leaks) were explicitly documented in the article.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
unauthorized accessremote code execution (RCE)rootkit deploymentlateral movementpersistence
IMPACT
Cisco 9400 series switchesCisco 9300 series switchesCisco 3750G series switches (legacy)persistent unauthorized accessbypassed logging and AAA/VTY ACLslateral movement across VLANspotential for ARP spoofing and firewall rule bypasspotential erosion of trust in Cisco device security

Frequently Asked Questions

?
What is the current A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score for Cisco Talos ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in May 2026 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in April 2026 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in March 2026 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in February 2026 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in January 2026 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in December 2025 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in November 2025 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in October 2025 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in September 2025 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in August 2025 ?
?
What was Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in July 2025 ?
?
What is the average per-incident point impact on Cisco Talos's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score over the past 12 months ?
?
Where can I access detailed records of all cyber incidents associated with Cisco Talos ?
?
Where can I find a summary of the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
?
Where can I view Cisco Talos's profile page on Rankiteo ?
?
How accurate is the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?