Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Clackamas Community College » CLA1768259339

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (CLA1768259339)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-79
Company Score Before Incident419 / 1000
Company Score After Incident340 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERCLA1768259339
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORNA
DATA EXPOSEDPersonally identifiable information (PII) including...
INCIDENT DATE11/01/2026
STATUSOngoing (Legal Investigation by Lynch Carpenter, LLP)

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Clackamas Community College'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 Clackamas Community College 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 Clackamas Community College breach identified under incident ID CLA1768259339.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Clackamas Community College's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/clackamas-community-college, the number of followers: 22961, the industry type: Higher Education and the number of employees: 901 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 419 and after the incident was 340 with a difference of -79 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 Clackamas Community College and their customers.

On 12 January 2026, Clackamas Community College disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Clackamas Community College Data Breach".

An unauthorized person gained access to Clackamas Community College’s network and may have acquired records containing personally identifiable information (PII) of thirty-three thousand individuals.

The disruption is felt across the environment, and exposing Personally identifiable information (PII) including names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, student record information, government identification numbers, tax identification numbers, medical information, passport numbers, and financial account information, with nearly 33,000 records at risk.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Public disclosure via press release.

The case underscores how Ongoing (Legal Investigation by Lynch Carpenter, LLP), with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Individuals impacted may be entitled to compensation; advised to contact Lynch Carpenter, LLP for case review.

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 actor accessed the college’s network and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating no details on methods used by the attacker. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified OS Credential Dumping (T1003) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating social Security numbers, government IDs, and financial details compromised and Unsecured Credentials (T1552) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating highly sensitive PII accessed, implying credential exposure. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating records containing PII of 33,000 individuals may have been acquired and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating student records, medical info, and financial account details exposed. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized actor may have acquired records containing PII and Transfer Data to Cloud Account (T1537) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating no details on exfiltration method, but cloud storage is plausible. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating no evidence of data destruction, but PII exposure implies risk and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating potential for identity theft and financial fraud due to breach. 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 (50%)
Credential Access
OS Credential Dumping (70%)
Unsecured Credentials (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Data from Information Repositories (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (70%)
Transfer Data to Cloud Account (50%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (40%)

Sources & References