Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » CyberSmart » CYB1781282209

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (CYB1781282209)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-17
Company Score Before Incident750 / 1000
Company Score After Incident733 / 1000
Company LinkView CyberSmart Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERCYB1781282209
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORThird-party vendor compromise
DATA EXPOSEDNA
INCIDENT DATE11/06/2025
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of CyberSmart's Cyber Attack 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 CyberSmart 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 CyberSmart breach identified under incident ID CYB1781282209.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of CyberSmart's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/cybersmartuk, the number of followers: 14246, the industry type: Computer and Network Security and the number of employees: 74 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 750 and after the incident was 733 with a difference of -17 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 CyberSmart and their customers.

Multiple MSPs and their clients recently reported "Supply Chain Cyber Risks Surge for MSPs", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

A recent survey by CyberSmart highlights the growing threat of supply chain cyberattacks targeting managed service providers (MSPs) and their customers.

Impact assessments are still underway, so the full scope is not yet clear.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as MSPs’ privileged access makes them prime targets for supply chain attacks. Continuous risk visibility and shared responsibility are critical for defense, and recommending next steps like Clearer regulatory guidance for MSPs, Stronger liability protections and Tailored regulatory frameworks, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering MSPs should prepare for the UK’s Cyber Security and Resilience Bill (CSRB) and address skills gaps, unclear customer expectations, and liability concerns.

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 Supply Chain Compromise (T1195) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating 43% of MSPs and clients experienced a cyber incident linked to a third-party vendor and Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain (T1195.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating attack vector such as Third-party vendor compromise. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Remote Services (T1021) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating mSPs’ privileged access makes them prime targets, compromising multiple organizations. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Steal Application Access Token (T1528) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating mSPs’ privileged access implies potential token or credential theft. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating 55% of incidents involved the MSP directly, implying data exfiltration. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating 55% of MSPs do not monitor supply chain threats. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Supply Chain Compromise (90%)
Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain (80%)
Lateral Movement
Remote Services (70%)
Credential Access
Steal Application Access Token (60%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (50%)
Defense Evasion
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (40%)

Sources & References