Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Cisco » CISSYN1774305072

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (CISSYN1774305072)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-3
Company Score Before Incident334 / 1000
Company Score After Incident331 / 1000
Company LinkView Cisco Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERCISSYN1774305072
Type of Cyber IncidentVulnerability
ATTACK VECTORStored XSS (Zimbra), Deserialization of Untrusted Data (SharePoint)
DATA EXPOSEDCredentials, Session tokens, 2FA backup...
INCIDENT DATE21/01/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Cisco's Vulnerability 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 Cisco 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 Cisco breach identified under incident ID CISSYN1774305072.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Cisco's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/cisco, the number of followers: 7281720, the industry type: Software Development and the number of employees: 95370 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 334 and after the incident was 331 with a difference of -3 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 Cisco and their customers.

On 19 March 2026, State Hydrographic Service of Ukraine disclosed Cyberespionage and Remote Code Execution issues under the banner "CISA Warns of Actively Exploited Zimbra and SharePoint Vulnerabilities".

The U.S.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Synacor Zimbra Collaboration Suite (ZCS), Microsoft Office SharePoint and Cisco Firewall, and exposing Credentials, Session tokens and 2FA backup codes.

In response, and began remediation that includes Patching (Zimbra versions 10.0.18/10.1.13, SharePoint updates), Network segmentation and Enhanced monitoring.

The case underscores how Ongoing, teams are taking away lessons such as Need for timely patching of webmail and collaboration software, risks of XSS flaws in email systems, and the importance of monitoring edge devices for zero-day exploits, and recommending next steps like Apply patches for Zimbra (versions 10.0.18/10.1.13) and SharePoint (CVE-2026-20963) immediately, Monitor for unusual DNS/HTTPS exfiltration traffic and Segment networks to limit lateral movement, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering CISA emergency directive for federal agencies to patch by March 23, 2026 (SharePoint) and April 1, 2026 (Zimbra).

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 Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating cVE-2025-66376 (Zimbra XSS), CVE-2026-20963 (SharePoint RCE) actively exploited, Phishing: Spearphishing Link (T1566.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating socially engineered internship inquiry email from compromised account, and Drive-by Compromise (T1189) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating obfuscated JavaScript in email executes in vulnerable Zimbra webmail. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating cVE-2025-66376 XSS flaw executes JavaScript in Zimbra webmail session and JavaScript (T1059.007) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating obfuscated JavaScript embedded in email HTML body. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating malware harvests browser-saved passwords, 2FA backup codes, Steal Web Session Cookie (T1539) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating session tokens harvested via XSS exploit, and Brute Force: Password Guessing (T1110.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating credentials harvested may enable further brute force attempts. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Email Collection: Remote Email Collection (T1114.002) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating 90 days of email data harvested via Zimbra exploit and Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating browser-saved passwords, session tokens collected. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltrated via DNS and HTTPS in Operation GhostMail and Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol: DNS (T1048.003) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating dNS used for data exfiltration in Zimbra attack. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating hTTPS used for data exfiltration in Operation GhostMail and Non-Application Layer Protocol (T1095) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating dNS exfiltration suggests use of non-standard protocols. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating obfuscated JavaScript embedded in email HTML body and Hide Artifacts: Hidden Window (T1564.003) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating xSS exploit executes without user interaction beyond email open. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation of Remote Services (T1210) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating sharePoint RCE (CVE-2026-20963) enables remote exploitation. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Defacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating xSS flaw could enable defacement of Zimbra webmail UI and Endpoint Denial of Service: Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating cisco firewall zero-day (CVE-2026-20131) used in ransomware attacks. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Exploit Public-Facing Application (90%)
Phishing: Spearphishing Link (80%)
Drive-by Compromise (70%)
Execution
Exploitation for Client Execution (90%)
JavaScript (80%)
Credential Access
Credentials from Password Stores (90%)
Steal Web Session Cookie (90%)
Brute Force: Password Guessing (50%)
Collection
Email Collection: Remote Email Collection (90%)
Data from Local System (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol: DNS (80%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (80%)
Non-Application Layer Protocol (70%)
Defense Evasion
Obfuscated Files or Information (80%)
Hide Artifacts: Hidden Window (60%)
Lateral Movement
Exploitation of Remote Services (70%)
Impact
Defacement: Internal Defacement (50%)
Endpoint Denial of Service: Application or System Exploitation (60%)

Sources & References