Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (CRE1774967753)
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 CrewAI'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 CrewAI 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 CrewAI breach identified under incident ID CRE1774967753.
The analysis begins with a detailed overview of CrewAI's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/crewai-inc, the number of followers: 91705, the industry type: Software Development and the number of employees: 52 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 752 and after the incident was 750 with a difference of -2 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 CrewAI and their customers.
CrewAI recently reported "Critical Vulnerabilities in CrewAI Framework Enable Remote Code Execution and Data Theft", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.
Security researcher Yarden Porat of Cyata has uncovered four critical vulnerabilities in CrewAI, an open-source Python-based framework for multi-agent AI orchestration.
The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting CrewAI Framework, and exposing Sensitive files and Credentials.
In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Disabling the Code Interpreter tool, Restricting code execution flags and Applying input sanitization, and began remediation that includes Blocking vulnerable modules, Enforcing fail-closed configurations and Updating security documentation.
The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as The vulnerabilities highlight risks in AI agent frameworks, particularly when handling untrusted input, and recommending next steps like Disable the Code Interpreter tool, Restrict code execution flags and Apply input sanitization.
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 critical Vulnerabilities in CrewAI Framework Enable Remote Code Execution and Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating direct or indirect prompt injections, bypassing sandbox protections. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating execute arbitrary code, access sensitive files, and steal credentials and Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating remote code execution (RCE) risk caused by CrewAI failing to verify Docker. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating arbitrary C function calls if code execution is enabled in the agent’s configuration. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Unsecured Credentials (T1552) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating steal credentials from affected systems. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating arbitrary file read issue in the JSON loader tool. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating access sensitive files, and steal credentials from affected systems. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration via direct or indirect prompt injections and Transfer Data to Cloud Account (T1537) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating sSRF bug in RAG search tools, enabling attackers to access internal and cloud services. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol (T1071) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating sSRF bug in RAG search tools due to improper URL validation. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Defense Evasion (T1211) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating bypassing sandbox protections to execute code on the host machine and Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating falling back to an insecure sandbox if Docker is unavailable. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.
Sources & References
- CrewAI Rankiteo Cyber Incident Details: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/crewai-inc/incident/CRE1774967753
- CrewAI CyberSecurity Rating page: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/crewai-inc
- CrewAI Rankiteo Cyber Incident Blog Article: https://blog.rankiteo.com/cre1774967753-crewai-vulnerability-march-2026/
- CrewAI CyberSecurity Score History: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/crewai-inc/history
- CrewAI CyberSecurity Incident Source: https://www.securityweek.com/crewai-vulnerabilities-expose-devices-to-hacking/
- 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